I BOUGHT A SET OF 210/A TIGERSAURUS AMPS AND A 198/A PRE-AMP IN 1981. I COULD USE SOME HELP FINDING THE ORIGINAL PLANS. MY FREINDS BROTHER LOST ONE AMP AND THE PLANS WHEN HE TRIED TO FIX IT. I HAVE BEEN BRAGGING TO MY 14 YR OLD SON HOW AWESOME THEY ARE.
PLEASE HELP THIS OLD MAN BE SOMEONE TO BRAGG ABOUT AGAIN. YOU GUYS KNOW WHAT I MEAN!
PLEASE HELP THIS OLD MAN BE SOMEONE TO BRAGG ABOUT AGAIN. YOU GUYS KNOW WHAT I MEAN!
Welcome JAW.
This one?
http://www.swtpc.com/mholley/RadioElectronics/Dec1973/RE_Dec1973.htm
Oh, and please turn off that all-caps key.
/Hugo
This one?
http://www.swtpc.com/mholley/RadioElectronics/Dec1973/RE_Dec1973.htm
Oh, and please turn off that all-caps key.
/Hugo
I don’t know about the Tiger amps. I just found the link. It would surprise me if they were still available as a kit.
RFID: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RFID
Has nothing to do with the post, it’s just my signature.
/Hugo
RFID: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RFID
Has nothing to do with the post, it’s just my signature.
/Hugo
AndrewT said:
There are at least two, for I too am a fan of the Frying Tigers. It seems that a lot of the tales of woe regarding these amps came about from their being kits and not being assembled and adjusted properly. Benjamin Poehland in his "Taming the Flaming Tyger: A Restoration Odyssey" said as much and implied that were these sold pre-assembled, they would've gained fame rather than infamy. My pair were originally assembled and adjusted by an electrical engineer and have run flawlessly for over three decades without self-immolating (knock on wood). With a couple of tweaks, the dangers of that are supposed to be reduced to the same level as every other design.
JAW, I have Benjamin Poehland's two part article on restoring Tigersaurii and making them a bit more stable and flame resistant. I can scan and email the article for you if you'd like to use it to fix up your amps. They'll definitely be worthy of bragging then as Poehland found that these amps were fairly underrated (by around 70-110 watts) and possessed less than half the spec'd distortion when refreshed. The funny thing is, I've been looking for where I had put these articles for a few months now and shortly after I saw this thread, I found them at the top of the first stack of papers I picked up to look for them. I could've sworn I had been through those papers thrice in my quest. Ah well.
Now, for the experts around here, I have a couple of questions regarding this amp that should be answerable by viewing the schematics posted by Netlist. Pehland hinted that a few of Dan Meyer's "inventions in circuit topology" found in the Tigersaurus may have been ripped off by other designers, particularly the GAS Ampzilla.
From the Ampzilla website:
Does not Dan Meyer's original design and construction article on the Tigersaurus use a full dual differential full complementary amplifier topology as was published by Radio-Electronics in the December 1973 issue at which the kit was made available then. The Tigersaurus then was just an upsized version of the Tiger .01 (numbered for its 0.01% distortion rating which was supposedly unusually good for the time) using what seems to be a full dual differential full complementary amplifier topology that he had described in the March 1973 issue.
Any thoughts on that one? Granted, if true it would not be the first time in audio someone has claimed and gained fame for inventing some design that they ripped off from someone else.
I do wonder.
- JP
Now that I was able to find my copy of Poehland's The Audio Amateur article and have had a chance to reread it, I must again forward my question regarding the comparisons between the Tigersaurus and the claims to innovation of the Ampzilla. The most relevant portion of the article comes here:
On top of that, one must also consider that the Tigersaurus was an upsized version of the Tiger .01 that used the same innovations. Also, many of those were beginning to be introduced in Meyer's earlier designs and associated articles such as the Plastic Tiger and Universal Tiger as far back as 1969.
So, anyone familiar with the Ampzilla and preferably the Tigersaurus as well care to comment? Is this a misinterpretation of design by Poehland, a case of intellectual convergence where Bongiorno happened to stumble across the same design innovations as Meyer several years after Meyer's published articles or is this a flat out case of design plagiarism? If either of the latter two, it would appear that the audio industry has cast fame unto the wrong individual or at least neglected someone with an equal share.
- JP
On top of that, one must also consider that the Tigersaurus was an upsized version of the Tiger .01 that used the same innovations. Also, many of those were beginning to be introduced in Meyer's earlier designs and associated articles such as the Plastic Tiger and Universal Tiger as far back as 1969.
So, anyone familiar with the Ampzilla and preferably the Tigersaurus as well care to comment? Is this a misinterpretation of design by Poehland, a case of intellectual convergence where Bongiorno happened to stumble across the same design innovations as Meyer several years after Meyer's published articles or is this a flat out case of design plagiarism? If either of the latter two, it would appear that the audio industry has cast fame unto the wrong individual or at least neglected someone with an equal share.
- JP
I seem to rember reading a review of the Tigerasorus in The Audio Amateur. This was 30 years and a lot of beer ago but
I seem to rember they were not impressed at all. I believe they
thought the test amp was so bad that it had to be defective,
returned it to the manufacturer and the manufactuer never
sent them a better amp to test. As I said that was a long time
ago and my memory isn't all that good.
I seem to rember they were not impressed at all. I believe they
thought the test amp was so bad that it had to be defective,
returned it to the manufacturer and the manufactuer never
sent them a better amp to test. As I said that was a long time
ago and my memory isn't all that good.
Are you remembering Walk Jung's review? Poehland mentions it and the complaints that "in Walt's hands Tigersaurus merely behaved badly, exhibiting parasitic oscillations, high background hum levels, and a buzzing power transformer." I can attest to that very last point with one of my Tigers (embarrassingly solved with a calibrated thunk on the top), but not the others excepting a bit higher sensitivity to ground loops than average (the aforementioned high background hum?). I kind of wonder who built the test units as the Tigersaurus was only available as a kit, ie no "manufacturer" in the common sense. Unfortunately, I haven't Jung's article, only Poehlands, but he indicates that the troubles mentioned above were due to how finicky the Tigers are in final adjustment (above the abilities of the amateur enthusiast and supposedly beyond the skills of the typical technician) and that without being spot on will exhibit those problems that when in tune will not be an issue.
- JP
- JP
The tiger amps had a number of issues. One the bias stack was too small, and two some kits were shipped with PECOR brand transistors and not Motorola's. according to the AA article.
My Dad built a tiger way back when and it had a serious issue with crossover distortion at low volumes.
This was a pretty advanced design for the time and many kit builders with limited skills tried to build one (I know, i did too in my younger years) and failed. Dan Meyer was way ahead of his time on this one!
Zc
My Dad built a tiger way back when and it had a serious issue with crossover distortion at low volumes.
This was a pretty advanced design for the time and many kit builders with limited skills tried to build one (I know, i did too in my younger years) and failed. Dan Meyer was way ahead of his time on this one!
Zc
The Tigersaurus didn't have near the problems as the tiger. When built correctly the Tiger worked fine. As an owner of a pair of still working and functioning correctly Tigersaurus amplifiers I feel they were ahead of their time. When up against the Ampzilla and or SAE2400 or 2400L the Tigersaurus will drive a low impedance load without going up in a puff of smoke and sound better doing it. My Tigersarus amplifiers still have their original transistors and that cannot be said for the countless Ampzilla's and SAE's that have gone up in a puff of magic smoke. Pretty they are not...functional they are.
It might be nice to compare apples to apples here. The thread is Tigersaurus and not Tiger.
Typical of Mr.James B. is the claim that he had a phone conversation with Daniel Meyer in which he went over circuit ideas such as the Quad diff input. I feel I know who copied who.
It might be nice to compare apples to apples here. The thread is Tigersaurus and not Tiger.
Typical of Mr.James B. is the claim that he had a phone conversation with Daniel Meyer in which he went over circuit ideas such as the Quad diff input. I feel I know who copied who.
"My Dad built a tiger way back when and it had a serious issue with crossover distortion at low volumes. "
Maybe he should have adjusted the bias.
The original article had you turn the bias off if you had no test equipment.
"some kits were shipped with PECOR brand transistors and not Motorola's. according to the AA article"
If I remeber correctly, Ben replaced those with Pecor, they didn't come with them.
Maybe he should have adjusted the bias.
The original article had you turn the bias off if you had no test equipment.
"some kits were shipped with PECOR brand transistors and not Motorola's. according to the AA article"
If I remeber correctly, Ben replaced those with Pecor, they didn't come with them.
Everything is in the articles.There are two. Ben Duncan did a very good job of restoring these amps.The only issue was parastatic oscillations, and I think the layout of the chassis may be the problem.Some of the output transistor wires are to close to the transformer.I think the amp deserves to bi built.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.