Need to build JC 2 preamp - Page 38 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Solid State

Solid State Talk all about solid state amplification.

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
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12th March 2013, 03:21 PM   #371
gk7 is offline gk7
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vienna, Austria
Quote:
Originally Posted by transistormarkj View Post
They changed the process for these fets, they are not low noise like they
used to be 40 years ago. To quote John Curl: "I found that Siliconix J110's , that I originally spec'd for the JC-2, over 35 years ago,
got VERY noisy in the late 70's, and remain so today, because they switched to ion implantation."
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th March 2013, 04:17 PM   #372
AndrewT is offline AndrewT  Scotland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Scottish Borders
Quote:
Originally Posted by pidigi View Post
Hi Andrew,

are you meaning that only the V (or at least BL) version of the 2SK170/2SJ74 is suitable for this application?

Do you maybe know about other possible replacements?

Thank you,

Paolo
the 246/103 is not a good replacement for the 170/74
I think the specified grade for the 170/74 is BL. GR is too low Idss and that limits the gain and transconductance.
__________________
regards Andrew T.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th March 2013, 04:26 PM   #373
pidigi is offline pidigi  Italy
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Trieste
Quote:
Originally Posted by gk7 View Post
...... Attached is the block diagram of the JC-2 / ML-1
thank you Georg!!! I was missing this schematic!

...and then another question arise: if I don't use the balance switch, should I use the resistor combination of the "zero" position?

Quote:
10k potentiometer with 20k before it (in the "low" gain position). You could use a potentiometer in the 20k - 30k range (without the the high / low switch).
ok, I see the point now.

Quote:
No they donīt perform better (I use 2SA1209 and 2SC2911 myself) but the 2SA1381/2SC3503 are more readily available (at Mouser for example).
perfect, I will stay with the 2SA1209 and 2SC2911 then!

Thanks!

Paolo
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th March 2013, 04:48 PM   #374
pidigi is offline pidigi  Italy
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Trieste
Hi Andrew,

then the right question should be: which is the most similar device respect to the original one, 212/75? Considering a 170 with the same Idss of a 246, from datasheet the first has a gm of 22 and the second of 9. The J212 datasheet (at least the one that is available now) says a gm of 12.
Where am I wrong (and sure I am )?


Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewT View Post
the 246/103 is not a good replacement for the 170/74
I think the specified grade for the 170/74 is BL. GR is too low Idss and that limits the gain and transconductance.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th March 2013, 08:46 AM   #375
AndrewT is offline AndrewT  Scotland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Scottish Borders
The highest Idss pair of 170/74 GR you can get.
__________________
regards Andrew T.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th March 2013, 10:55 AM   #376
gk7 is offline gk7
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vienna, Austria
I just had a look at FET Audio | Hi-End Audio Projects (Spencer is a member here),
an they still have 2SJ74 / 2SK170 matched in BL grade.
Spencer even has matched quads (quote: "Maximum match is 4 pcs K170 and 4 pcs J74 with same idss match together in one group.")
Matched quads is what I used with good results for my build.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th March 2013, 03:44 PM   #377
gk7 is offline gk7
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vienna, Austria
Quote:
Originally Posted by pidigi View Post
...and then another question arise: if I don't use the balance switch, should I use the resistor combination of the "zero" position?
...
If you combine all resistors in the feedback loop (at the "zero" position) you
get 21.3 kOhms. With the 2kOhms to ground this is 21 dB gain.
If this suits your needs depends on the voltage gain of your power amplifier.
Personally I have never needed to use the "high" position on my ML-1 ("low"
attenuates by approx. -10dB this results in a total gain of 11dB).
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th March 2013, 04:25 PM   #378
pidigi is offline pidigi  Italy
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Trieste
I don't need a lot of gain, I think that 10dB is plenty.
I am wondering now if it is better to use the "low" gain setting (attenuating the input) and a "zero position setting" (or "higher feedback setting") of the feedback or a zero attenuation and a "higher feedback setting"......

Am I worring too much?

Thank you Georg


Quote:
Originally Posted by gk7 View Post
If you combine all resistors in the feedback loop (at the "zero" position) you
get 21.3 kOhms. With the 2kOhms to ground this is 21 dB gain.
If this suits your needs depends on the voltage gain of your power amplifier.
Personally I have never needed to use the "high" position on my ML-1 ("low"
attenuates by approx. -10dB this results in a total gain of 11dB).
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th March 2013, 04:27 PM   #379
pidigi is offline pidigi  Italy
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Trieste
5.6mA is the highest Idss for a quad match I can reach. Is it too low or it is worth trying?

Thanks,

Paolo


Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewT View Post
The highest Idss pair of 170/74 GR you can get.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2013, 09:14 AM   #380
gk7 is offline gk7
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vienna, Austria
Quote:
Originally Posted by pidigi View Post
5.6mA is the highest Idss for a quad match I can reach. Is it too low or it is worth trying?
5.6mA seems rather low to me, this is 1/3 of the "V" parts I use. I would not
cheap out on these parts and order them form Spencer ("BL" grade), as long as
he still has 2SJ74 available, and ask for the highest Idss matched quads he
can offer (should be around 10mA or so).

Quote:
Originally Posted by pidigi View Post
I don't need a lot of gain, I think that 10dB is plenty.
I am wondering now if it is better to use the "low" gain setting (attenuating the input) and a "zero position setting" (or "higher feedback setting") of the feedback or a zero attenuation and a "higher feedback setting"...
I can confirm that the "-4dB" setting (this is 17dB gain from the line stage) is
stable; how much feedback you can apply to lower the gain without stability problems
I donīt know. (I would estimate that the gain has to be > 3 at least).
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What preamp should I build? OzMikeH Tubes / Valves 154 21st January 2009 11:07 AM
BDT Preamp build jkeny Tubes / Valves 13 5th November 2008 12:37 AM
Build Preamp Jpoole908 Solid State 1 8th June 2008 12:47 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:59 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright Đ1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2