|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
| Pass Labs This forum is dedicated to Pass Labs discussion. |
|
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.
Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto
|
Ok Forgive me if it is a little simplistic but my electrical theory is pretty non existant
![]() I built the regular stereo F5 (with protection taken out) a year or so ago. Its biased a little higher, 0.75V for a bit more power. The itch is now out for more power. After looking at the expense and massive weight it would be to build the Turbo version I'm concluding that building a second F5 may be a bit more cost effective. Here is the idea. Currently my pre-amp has balanced outputs. My thinking is that if I take my current stereo F5, and feed the +ve side of one balanced output channel to one channel and the -ve feed of that same balanced channel to the other channel I essentially would have a balanced mono F5. This should also mean that I would connect the one speaker to +ve and -ve side hot posts (red). This should also mean that it would essentially double the power of the F5 (25 -->50W) but will see the speaker at half the impedance. Now all I have to do is build a second stereo F5 and I have two balanced monoblock F5's. Does this make sense? Have I missed anything? Are there any downsides to this? |
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: ancient Batsch , behind Iron Curtain
|
good thinking
__________________
my Papa is smarter than your Nelson ! tnx to clean thread ; Cook Book ; PSM LS Cook Book ; Baby Diyaudio FORUM ; Mighty ZM's Bloggg;I'm dumb
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
|
And on the seventh day God rested, and built a balanced amp
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Scottish Borders
|
Have you read the F5x Thread?
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto
|
You mean the 78 page thread? Yeah sort of... last year
and then stopped.... But thats the thing I didn't want to start mucking around a built PCB and stacking components on top of each other and cascoding etc. Thats why the "lazy approach" take something thats already built and the layout is tested and see if a simple wiring change will suffice.
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Trondheim
|
a think what andrew ment is: it may sound easyer then it acctualy is
__________________
aleph P1.7 pre. F5 power amp. CDpro2(need DAC). Vivaldi8 speakers |
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
diyAudio Member
|
Dazed2,
You may be able to modify your existing F5 to a F5 Turbo v1 without building another case... From Article: Quote:
No need for cascoding or bridging. You will need to add extra mosfets and resistors attached to the output stage. Your just tapping off connections that are already in place. You will need to include the thermistors, but not the limiter. A bigger transformer will be necessary, but if you build a new amp, you'll need a bigger transfo, if yuo don't have one on hand. IMO, this is easier and faster than building a new case and all that goes with it. Hope this helps, Vince
__________________
I build, therefore I am. Last edited by vdi_nenna; 10th September 2012 at 07:52 PM. |
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
is choosing a less facetious title...
diyAudio Member
|
isnt this not balanced, but bridged?
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
expert in tautology
diyAudio Member
|
Yes, bridged.
The problem with bridged is that you may run out of output device current, and the unit will move over to class AB... so again you may want to add (parallel) output devices. increasing the B+ on the stock F5 was discussed extensively in the original thread, iirc. I think what was said is that increasing the B+ was problematic and maybe not a good idea because of reaching the voltage limit on the input Jfets (saturation) and also the current capability of the output devices vs. load impedance is reduced. (the max current remains the same, while the power requirement goes up as the voltage increases) If the F5 bias is made higher, the output devices are more in class A, dissipating more current and therefore power. Lower bias means less into Class A, more into AB. So for a given load Z, the amp will leave class A and go to AB sooner... it's ok to do this, but it's no longer "pure class A" and technically there is a minor glitch at the point where it leaves Class A and goes into AB or more precisely Class B for a short period of time and then comes back to Class A (on each alternating polarity of a given cycle). But bridging by using the balanced output of a preamp is perfectly ok, just keep in mind the issues. (if you had say a 16 ohm impedance speaker it is a non-issue). _-_-bear
__________________
_-_-bear http://www.bearlabs.com [...2SJ74 Toshiba bogus asian parts - beware! ] -- Btw, I don't actually know anything, FYI --
|
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Balanced F5 in a Small Footprint | lhquam | Pass Labs | 151 | Today 02:16 AM |
| F5 Cascoded - an alternative for my interest in the Balanced F5 | NYCOne | Pass Labs | 159 | 24th March 2011 05:23 AM |
| C240 one man's trash, another man's new project. | Wardsweb | Solid State | 5 | 8th March 2011 12:36 AM |
| Balanced F5 question | NYCOne | Pass Labs | 1153 | 23rd February 2011 06:42 PM |
| Balanced - Cascoded F5 | NYCOne | Pass Labs | 21 | 15th February 2011 02:45 PM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |