Creek 5350MK2 (5350-II 5350 Mark 2 5350-MK2) - circuit descr. arround Q12a wanted

Q12 and Q12A are drivers tranzistors,Q12A is pin out misprint

Thank you, but that there are a misprint I also know. But I don't believe to a faulty pin out. The driver stage must be a differential amp with Ube current source. I guess, that the drawing gate connection of Q12a isn't correct. Now the question is, where goes the gate wire of Q12a?

For better understanding the schematic I have perform a redrawing (PDF file at botton). Please ignore the device numbers except Q12a
 

Attachments

  • Creek 5350 redrawing.pdf
    24.8 KB · Views: 856
Last edited:

Thank you very much for this advice. I haven't respect the follow:

"For this circuit to work the Vth of the output devices should be lower than Vth of the drivers by a good margin. This is easily achieved if the output devices are low threshold D-MOSFETs (often called “Logic Level”) with Vth<2V and drivers are standard threshold D-MOSFETs with Vth in the area of 3.5-4V.
If all the FETs had the same Vth it would be necessary to provide an additional bias voltage for FET M4"
 
Hello Alex,
nice to hear from you.
Either I have this schematic from the forum here, or the Company Creek had send to me as a PDF attachement by asking for their download aera (I need it for repair and maintenance of some defective 5350 devices, some years ago). Only now I understand the topology more exactly, because so far I used instead the necessary logic level output MOSFETs normal IRF540.
Next time I will check your topologies about
http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Theory/N-channel D-MOSFET output stage with improved linearity.pdf
by simulation. As i know, this topologies are further developments from Bengt Ollson's idea, "Better Audio from non complements?" from Bengt Olsson (B. Olson), go to Electronics World + Wireless World, December 1994 page 988

About the weblink
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/soli...better-audio-non-complements-audio-power.html
I have create an overview about all me known topologies with only one kind of output power MOSFET resp. BjT - perhaps of interest for you. I don't know other place with such overview, because most topologies based to the so called "true complementary" output stages. I hate this through only perfection in theoretic world and schematic.

Currently I am looking for a power buffer alternative, which brings approximately the same low THD results like a Circlotron (see below) - for me presently the best known topology, but not good to implement in existing faulty amplifiers .
What do you think - is this possible by the topology of Fig 5? go to URL
http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Theory/N-channel D-MOSFET output stage with improved linearity.pdf

Thank you very much for your estimations
 

Attachments

  • Circl schema.pdf
    6.9 KB · Views: 657
  • Circl Frequency resp.pdf
    5.3 KB · Views: 335
  • Circl THD 10Vss 100KHz.pdf
    4.5 KB · Views: 323
Last edited:
Hello Alex,
nice to hear from you.
Either I have this schematic from the forum here, or the Company Creek had send to me as a PDF attachement by asking for their download aera (I need it for repair and maintenance of some defective 5350 devices, some years ago). Only now I understand the topology more exactly, because so far I used instead the necessary logic level output MOSFETs normal IRF540.
Next time I will check your topologies about
http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Theory/N-channel D-MOSFET output stage with improved linearity.pdf
by simulation. As i know, this topologies are further developments from Bengt Ollson's idea, "Better Audio from non complements?" from Bengt Olsson (B. Olson), go to Electronics World + Wireless World, December 1994 page 988

About the weblink
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/soli...better-audio-non-complements-audio-power.html
I have create an overview about all me known topologies with only one kind of output power MOSFET resp. BjT - perhaps of interest for you. I don't know other place with such overview, because most topologies based to the so called "true complementary" output stages. I hate this through only perfection in theoretic world and schematic.

My topology pre-dates Bengt Olsson's article (Creek 4240 uses my circuit and was in production in 1993 and the circuit itself was developed in 1992), and it is quite different in approach.

Currently I am looking for a power buffer alternative, which brings approximately the same low THD results like a Circlotron (see below) - for me presently the best known topology, but not good to implement in existing faulty amplifiers .
What do you think - is this possible by the topology of Fig 5? go to URL
http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Theory/N-channel D-MOSFET output stage with improved linearity.pdf

Thank you very much for your estimations

I think that with 1.5 A idle current the distortion of my circuit could be very low. In essence, 4th MOSFET adds a local NFB and reduces the distortion considerably in comparison to a plain follower. Circlotron has its own problems and I like the sound of my circuit (obviously). Here is a link to my simulation results showing the effect of the added MOSFET:

http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Theory/Comparision1.gif

Cheers

Alex
 
Thank you for your estimate and the diagrams for comparable.
But what about the topology of Fig. 5?
You write
"Fig 5 shows a couple of possible improvements to the circuit of Fig 4, to make it more symmetrical and better thermally compensated, however I have not tested these."
Do you have simulation results in the meantime, too? If yes, is there are additional improvement to observe against Fig. 4 ?
 
Thank you for your estimate and the diagrams for comparable.
But what about the topology of Fig. 5?
You write
"Fig 5 shows a couple of possible improvements to the circuit of Fig 4, to make it more symmetrical and better thermally compensated, however I have not tested these."
Do you have simulation results in the meantime, too? If yes, is there are additional improvement to observe against Fig. 4 ?

Hi

As I've said in the paper, I have not tested these variants. One of the reasons is that additional MOSFET (M5) in circuits from Fig5 requires an extensive protection under a fault condition and I prefer my circuits simple.

Alex
 
Hi, As I've said in the paper, I have not tested these variants. One of the reasons is that additional MOSFET (M5) in circuits from Fig5 requires an extensive protection under a fault condition and I prefer my circuits simple. Alex

Hi Alex,
thank you for this advice, I will try in the next time to make simulations for checking advantages and disadvantages.
I visit the website from Creek for looking about news regarded their amplifiers.
there are two models currently available: Evolution2 and Destiny

1) Creek Audio - Evolution 2 Integrated Amplifier (BjT-output devices)
2) Creek Audio - Destiny Integrated Amplifier
Concerning the last model I read follow - QUOTE:

"This circuitry continues to outperform alternatives and together with Creek's policy of continuous development, is now better than ever"

Are the topology from this new devices also from your pen?
 
I visit the website from Creek for looking about news regarded their amplifiers.
there are two models currently available: Evolution2 and Destiny

1) Creek Audio - Evolution 2 Integrated Amplifier (BjT-output devices)
2) Creek Audio - Destiny Integrated Amplifier
Concerning the last model I read follow - QUOTE:

"This circuitry continues to outperform alternatives and together with Creek's policy of continuous development, is now better than ever"

Are the topology from this new devices also from your pen?

Just look a bit further down on the same page:

Power-Amp

The Destiny power amplifier section uses an evolution of the unique MOS-FET output stage developed by Alex Nikitin for Creek in 1993. It follows in the path of the famous 5350SE, but uses mostly surface mounted components to reduce the size and increase the quality. Output power from this circuit has been increased to greater than 200W into 4 Ohms, which is substantially greater than the 5350SE.

I left Creek Audio 7 years ago, so I did not participate in the actual design of the Destiny. The Evolution, as far as I know, uses a different topology altogether.

Alex
 
Last edited:
Simulation results of N-channel MOSFET output stage with improved linearity

Simulation results of topologies from
http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Theory/N-channel D-MOSFET output stage with improved linearity.pdf

Alex Nikitin, London, October 2007
N-channel MOSFET output stage with improved linearity - simulation results -
modify to normal power MOSFET versions (instead logic level versions)
condition: 10Vss 1,1A idle current through the output power stage,
8 ohms load resistance (not complex)

1) schematic for damping factor over frequency a-b-c = Fig.5-Fig.4-Fig.2
2) AC-Analysis (damping factor over frequency) a-b-c = Fig.5-Fig.4-Fig.2
3) AC Analysis (normally frequency response) a-b-c = Fig.5-Fig.4-Fig.2
4) Fourier Analysis lin 10 KHz (THD) K2: 12,5/12,5/9,5mV K3: 5/5/2mV
5) Fourier Analysis log 10 KHz (THD) a-b-c = Fig.5-Fig.4-Fig.2
6) Fourier Analysis log 100 KHz (THD) a-b-c = Fig.5-Fig.4-Fig.2
7) Fourier Analysis lin 100 KHz (THD) (Fig.5+4: K2=102mV-Fig.2: K2=79mV K3: 31/14mV)
8) Transient Analysis 2MHz a-b-c = Fig.5-Fig.4-Fig.2
9) schematic a-b-c = Fig.5-Fig.4-Fig.2

Please note regarded "Fourier Analysis log": 10Vss = +20db, that means, the THD result you must reduce (if you read -80 db, you have -100 db).

For the aim of compare I will additional upload same diagrams about a circlotron and another of my own favorite driver topology
 

Attachments

  • C ...-IRF9540 BUF Olson III.ckt.pdf
    101.4 KB · Views: 560
Last edited:
Simulation results of topologies from
http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Theory/N-channel D-MOSFET output stage with improved linearity.pdf

Alex Nikitin, London, October 2007
N-channel MOSFET output stage with improved linearity - simulation results -
modify to normal power MOSFET versions (instead logic level versions)
condition: 10Vss 1,1A idle current through the output power stage,
8 ohms load resistance (not complex)

1) schematic for damping factor over frequency a-b-c = Fig.5-Fig.4-Fig.2
2) AC-Analysis (damping factor over frequency) a-b-c = Fig.5-Fig.4-Fig.2
3) AC Analysis (normally frequency response) a-b-c = Fig.5-Fig.4-Fig.2
4) Fourier Analysis lin 10 KHz (THD) K2: 12,5/12,5/9,5mV K3: 5/5/2mV
5) Fourier Analysis log 10 KHz (THD) a-b-c = Fig.5-Fig.4-Fig.2
6) Fourier Analysis log 100 KHz (THD) a-b-c = Fig.5-Fig.4-Fig.2
7) Fourier Analysis lin 100 KHz (THD) (Fig.5+4: K2=102mV-Fig.2: K2=79mV K3: 31/14mV)
8) Transient Analysis 2MHz a-b-c = Fig.5-Fig.4-Fig.2
9) schematic a-b-c = Fig.5-Fig.4-Fig.2

Please note regarded "Fourier Analysis log": 10Vss = +20db, that means, the THD result you must reduce (if you read -80 db, you have -100 db).

For the aim of compare I will additional upload same diagrams about a circlotron and another of my own favorite driver topology

Hi, I have to point out that:

1) My circuits have nothing to do with Olsson, so please don't call the file "Olsson".

2) In all (except one - the simplest version Fig 2 without the additional MOSFET) of your simulations the DC condition of the circuit is wrong. As a result the additional linearising MOSFET does nothing and works only as a non-linear resistor.

3) It is generally useful to understand, how the circuit works, before simulating it. Your results are completely useless, sorry, as you are trying to simulate an incorrectly configured circuit.

Alex
 
Last edited:
totem pole.Ess IV 1,3A idle current, 10Vss, load: 8 ohms (Totempole.Ess IV 10Vss-1A3.pdf) developed from the best audio engineer that I know
1) simplefield schematic for damping factor over frequency
2) AC-Analysis (damping factor over frequency)
3) AC Analysis (normally frequency response)
4) Fourier Analysis lin 10 KHz (THD) K2: 45uV K3: 30uV
5) Fourier Analysis log 10 KHz (THD)
6) Fourier Analysis log 100 KHz (THD)
7) Fourier Analysis lin 100 KHz (THD) K2: 375uV K3: 272uV
8) Transient Analysis 1 MHz
9) simplefield schematic

Circlotron Buffer 1,6A idle current, 10Vss, load: 8 ohms (Circl-I.ckt.pdf)
my favorite topology
1) schematic for damping factor over frequency
2) AC-Analysis (damping factor over frequency)
3) AC Analysis (normally frequency response)
4) Fourier Analysis lin 10 KHz (THD) K2: 20uV, K3: 4mV
5) Fourier Analysis log 10 KHz (THD)
6) Fourier Analysis log 100 KHz (THD)
7) Fourier Analysis lin 100 KHz (THD) K2: 35uV K3: 5mV
8) Transient Analysis 1 MHz
9) Transient Analysis 10 MHz
10) schematic
If you compare the THD spectrum between 10 KHz and 100 KHz, there are no significant different (and predominantly third harmonic is to see). Additional no visual deformation of the sine wave signal form is to observe, even by 10 MHz. The audible character would be prefer from the most music lover's
 

Attachments

  • Totempole.Ess IV 10Vss-1A3.pdf
    53.7 KB · Views: 312
  • Circl-I.ckt.pdf
    36.6 KB · Views: 291
Last edited:
Hi, I have to point out that:

1) My circuits have nothing to do with Olsson, so please don't call the file "Olsson".

2) In all (except one - the simplest version Fig 2 without the additional MOSFET) of your simulations the DC condition of the circuit is wrong. As a result the additional linearising MOSFET does nothing and works only as a non-linear resistor.

3) It is generally useful to understand, how the circuit works, before simulating it. Your results are completely useless, sorry, as you are trying to simulate an incorrectly configured circuit.

Alex


Hi Alex,
I haven't mentioned, that I have a large amount of P-CH MOSFETs and therefore I use this one also by simulation. This means, the positive and the negative rail are changed and all P-Ch in your driver stage by me N-CH MOSFETs.
The similarity to the Ollson topology are so great (Fig. 2), that I simulate your circuits in the same window. I can simulate 9 different circuits in the same window. So I always copy a circuit and change various details. The difference of FIG 2 to Ollson circuit only is that by Ollson is an additional voltage source for the quiescent current stability. As I know,
Amplifier Kits - Audio Amplifier Modules - MOSFET Amps
use the Ollson topology for their power amp devices

Regarded Fig 5 there must be additional faulty conditions in my simulation, because there are no different against Fig. 4
 
Circlomos results by p-spice simulation
Post #1 (non inverted mode, as shown) about
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/154388-its-cheap-its-n-its-dirty-its-circlomos.html
:worship::worship::worship::worship:
Please note:
output voltage (+20db): 10Vss load resistance (not complex): 8 ohms Gain: ~10 times (=20db)
the results are very very good at high idle current through the output
above 1A
Clipping behaivour is perfect without overshooting - through C3 there are rail to rail character (second PDF attachement).
In first PDF attachement there are:
1) schematic for damping factor over frequency
2) AC-Analysis (damping factor over frequency)
3) AC Analysis (normally frequency response)
4) Fourier Analysis lin 10 KHz (THD) K2: 540uV, K3: 230uV
5) Fourier Analysis log 10 KHz (THD)
6) Fourier Analysis log 100 KHz (THD)
7) Fourier Analysis lin 100 KHz (THD) K2: 1130uV K3: 390uV
8) Transient Analysis 1 MHz
9) Transient Analysis 10 MHz
10) schematic (normally frequency response)
 

Attachments

  • C ...-1 Totemp.Circlomos.Elvee.ckt.pdf
    42.6 KB · Views: 282
  • C ...-1 Totemp.Circlomos.Elvee.clip 100KHz.pdf
    6 KB · Views: 221
Last edited: