There is another factor to consider: most of the present time "discretes", highly regarded by audiophiles around the world, are in fact IC's in their own right: they have hundreds of emitters, a complex and delicate base structure, and couldn't be manufactured using the crude IC process used for the ICs of the function generator given in example.
In fact, the best discretes are manufactured by downgraded IC fabs: look at the regretted Lovoltech or Zetex, f.e.
Now, you probably find nice to have the two input jFETs of your differential input manufactured on the same die, as this eliminates dispersion and thermal problems, but why not go further, integrate the active loads, VAS, output stage bias, etc?
There are only benefits aren't they?
Reality is: things are never that simple, and in most of the cases, an optimum design (supposing such a thing exists) will consist of an hybrid, incorporating the best technologies available.
If you limit yourself to discretes, well... you limit yourself.
The choice is yours.
In fact, the best discretes are manufactured by downgraded IC fabs: look at the regretted Lovoltech or Zetex, f.e.
Now, you probably find nice to have the two input jFETs of your differential input manufactured on the same die, as this eliminates dispersion and thermal problems, but why not go further, integrate the active loads, VAS, output stage bias, etc?
There are only benefits aren't they?
Reality is: things are never that simple, and in most of the cases, an optimum design (supposing such a thing exists) will consist of an hybrid, incorporating the best technologies available.
If you limit yourself to discretes, well... you limit yourself.
The choice is yours.
Interesting point of view Elvee.
I could not understand what you mean Ginetto 61, but the idea to put several circuits into a chip, having because of that short paths, may be very good watching from one point of view, but watching from another perspective, you perceive the distance from the output to input too much close, too much small, this use to couple the output to the input, and this produces oscilations, triggered by the signal or spontaneous oscilations.... to cure this you have to block the possibility of oscilations using circuits and capacitors, this reduce the chip speed, the slow down is counterproductive, or not good.
regards,
Carlos
I could not understand what you mean Ginetto 61, but the idea to put several circuits into a chip, having because of that short paths, may be very good watching from one point of view, but watching from another perspective, you perceive the distance from the output to input too much close, too much small, this use to couple the output to the input, and this produces oscilations, triggered by the signal or spontaneous oscilations.... to cure this you have to block the possibility of oscilations using circuits and capacitors, this reduce the chip speed, the slow down is counterproductive, or not good.
regards,
Carlos
Last edited:
from my experience, i ve never heard an integrated power amp sound
as good as a discrete one, unless it s an hybrid topology, the one
that use an op amp to drive a pair of power transistors..
this is what i use for daily listening, a ne5532 driving a MP1620/MN2488
sanken darlingtons with a 55MHZ ft...i doubt that the final stage
of an ic power amp can have transistors with such perfs...
now, when it comes to preamplifiers, i think that op amps are now
better than transistors, provided that they are accurately biased
and not used with exagerated gain...a 5534 must not be used with gains
higher than 20db....for a typical riaa preamp, two stages are thus needed..
as good as a discrete one, unless it s an hybrid topology, the one
that use an op amp to drive a pair of power transistors..
this is what i use for daily listening, a ne5532 driving a MP1620/MN2488
sanken darlingtons with a 55MHZ ft...i doubt that the final stage
of an ic power amp can have transistors with such perfs...
now, when it comes to preamplifiers, i think that op amps are now
better than transistors, provided that they are accurately biased
and not used with exagerated gain...a 5534 must not be used with gains
higher than 20db....for a typical riaa preamp, two stages are thus needed..
Good evening Carlos,
I think I understand your point.
But I still see a lot of op-amps used in cost no object phono and line preamps, DACs ... and with good results as well
So they should be just fine for that applications and maybe there are also reasons that I do not know that make them a better choice over discrete
Those are very expensive units where the only goal is less noise, less distortion, more music
Not the same where signals and currents go up, like in power amps.
Very few use power chips
I am just rambling anyway ... I am everything but an expert
Kind regards,
gino
I think I understand your point.
But I still see a lot of op-amps used in cost no object phono and line preamps, DACs ... and with good results as well
So they should be just fine for that applications and maybe there are also reasons that I do not know that make them a better choice over discrete
Those are very expensive units where the only goal is less noise, less distortion, more music
Not the same where signals and currents go up, like in power amps.
Very few use power chips
I am just rambling anyway ... I am everything but an expert
Kind regards,
gino
Carlos,
If in your early days when you began to tinker with amplifiers the only thing out there was Lm3886, LME498xx, or some other monolithic IC then your ideas of what an amplifier should look like would be completed reversed. Your natural instinct would be to look on the new, let's say mostfet or bjt, as something strange or odd. It is just what humans do. The majority of the high end op-amps and chip amps sound very good indeed with very respectable numbers. I think discrete might go the way of the tube.
Even though the discrete amplifier will probably remain as part of our lives the majority of non-diy types and the general population will be forced to accept amplifier IC's as the norm because they are CHEAP and produced in huge numbers. Every item that we will come into contact with, on a daily basis, which reproduces sound, will eventually be one chip. The diy community will always be fond of discrete amplifiers because we can put so much of ourselves into them. My main concern with the small monolithic items and op-amps is they will not tolerate huge amounts of power or poorly designed power supplies.
My hulking discrete amplifiers weigh over a hundred pounds each. Isn't that what a POWER amp is supposed to look like.
Tad
If in your early days when you began to tinker with amplifiers the only thing out there was Lm3886, LME498xx, or some other monolithic IC then your ideas of what an amplifier should look like would be completed reversed. Your natural instinct would be to look on the new, let's say mostfet or bjt, as something strange or odd. It is just what humans do. The majority of the high end op-amps and chip amps sound very good indeed with very respectable numbers. I think discrete might go the way of the tube.
Even though the discrete amplifier will probably remain as part of our lives the majority of non-diy types and the general population will be forced to accept amplifier IC's as the norm because they are CHEAP and produced in huge numbers. Every item that we will come into contact with, on a daily basis, which reproduces sound, will eventually be one chip. The diy community will always be fond of discrete amplifiers because we can put so much of ourselves into them. My main concern with the small monolithic items and op-amps is they will not tolerate huge amounts of power or poorly designed power supplies.
My hulking discrete amplifiers weigh over a hundred pounds each. Isn't that what a POWER amp is supposed to look like.
Tad
Wahab, i have this IC you have mentioned and high speed darlingtons too
Please, send me the schematic you are using.
carlos.eugenio1951@yahoo.com
.....................................................
Ginetto
This is what i am feeling and watching.... also knowing there are some chips are prefered to use in the place of discrete, and this happened since the early days, in special with the FM multiplex decodification into receivers, phono amps, power supplies and electronic applied to medicine... you have agreement...and this makes me think, once again, why they have used discrete into the generator, and many others using too...i am dowloading generators, models from the sixties to the nineties and almost all them are using discrete into the output amplifier...maybe fashion...maybe influences they had...maybe the first one to use discrete have created a "standard"
.....................................................
Tryonziess
You have agreement, 100 percent agreement, i do think they will be alike tubes in the future, also i do think does not make any sense, now a days, to use discrete in several applications, also i think they have used discrete into the generator because influenced by others, because market beliefs that prefere the discrete because it is, maybe, more reliable.
You see, i am not so addicted to discrete, i think my mind is not so closed and i can see the chips as a future.
The trouble about those chips are fashion i think...because fashion they decide to make them small... as a consequence they cannot have a good sized metalic tab to allow enougth heat transference to the heatsink..this limits the power, or the whole hell thing will melt....not to melt they use overpower protection, overshots protection, overcurrent protection, over voltage protection...and all that stuff, all them together, produce a very strange sound without the dinamics you may have into the discrete amplifiers, in special the ones does not use E/I limiters... in my imagination, because fashion, market needs, market pressure, the need to be small.... and high power together small size does not combine (only to Class D)
What you think about, is something is inside my mind too, and this makes me continue not to understand exactly why they have used discrete.... error?, mistake?, bad decision? wrong engineering decision?, market influences?...why not a chip into the generator output?...and several others made the same mistake?
I am discrete addicted.... because i have access, i can tweak, i can replace, i can substitute, try, adjust, clean inside, remove parts, include sub circuits, try connections, upgrade, update..well..i can play with it.... the chips are those black boxes..they operate or they do not operate, all you can do is replace by other models, to try different sonic signature...and the socket is an enormous advantage we have into the chips, so, the 8 pins, dual in line, is easy and fast to substitute.
Down the sixties i have made a ua741 equalizer, was mono and only 6 bands, and the use of this chip was a need, also was easy to calculate the filters into the feedback line, i have perceived, since that day, the chip as a future...but also i could see them as fragile to heat.and terrible because could not operate with higher voltages alike plus and minus 30 volts for instance.
If they produce chips, STK sized, no trouble!...but you see that STK size is almost dead..now a days they are small, filled with the hell protections, sounding very strange...in a such way i use to perceive they playing alike "portable battery radio"
I have tried several, and you can type "destroyersoueu" into Youtube and see i have made several, and some of them reproduced with a very nice sonic, but, all them with troubles when you increased the volume asking for power...if we accept 10 volts rms output, they sound as good as a very good discrete audio amplifier, but when you increase the power, heating increasing, protections entering...aaaagh!.... disgusting!
regards,
Carlos
Please, send me the schematic you are using.
carlos.eugenio1951@yahoo.com
.....................................................
Ginetto
This is what i am feeling and watching.... also knowing there are some chips are prefered to use in the place of discrete, and this happened since the early days, in special with the FM multiplex decodification into receivers, phono amps, power supplies and electronic applied to medicine... you have agreement...and this makes me think, once again, why they have used discrete into the generator, and many others using too...i am dowloading generators, models from the sixties to the nineties and almost all them are using discrete into the output amplifier...maybe fashion...maybe influences they had...maybe the first one to use discrete have created a "standard"
.....................................................
Tryonziess
You have agreement, 100 percent agreement, i do think they will be alike tubes in the future, also i do think does not make any sense, now a days, to use discrete in several applications, also i think they have used discrete into the generator because influenced by others, because market beliefs that prefere the discrete because it is, maybe, more reliable.
You see, i am not so addicted to discrete, i think my mind is not so closed and i can see the chips as a future.
The trouble about those chips are fashion i think...because fashion they decide to make them small... as a consequence they cannot have a good sized metalic tab to allow enougth heat transference to the heatsink..this limits the power, or the whole hell thing will melt....not to melt they use overpower protection, overshots protection, overcurrent protection, over voltage protection...and all that stuff, all them together, produce a very strange sound without the dinamics you may have into the discrete amplifiers, in special the ones does not use E/I limiters... in my imagination, because fashion, market needs, market pressure, the need to be small.... and high power together small size does not combine (only to Class D)
What you think about, is something is inside my mind too, and this makes me continue not to understand exactly why they have used discrete.... error?, mistake?, bad decision? wrong engineering decision?, market influences?...why not a chip into the generator output?...and several others made the same mistake?
I am discrete addicted.... because i have access, i can tweak, i can replace, i can substitute, try, adjust, clean inside, remove parts, include sub circuits, try connections, upgrade, update..well..i can play with it.... the chips are those black boxes..they operate or they do not operate, all you can do is replace by other models, to try different sonic signature...and the socket is an enormous advantage we have into the chips, so, the 8 pins, dual in line, is easy and fast to substitute.
Down the sixties i have made a ua741 equalizer, was mono and only 6 bands, and the use of this chip was a need, also was easy to calculate the filters into the feedback line, i have perceived, since that day, the chip as a future...but also i could see them as fragile to heat.and terrible because could not operate with higher voltages alike plus and minus 30 volts for instance.
If they produce chips, STK sized, no trouble!...but you see that STK size is almost dead..now a days they are small, filled with the hell protections, sounding very strange...in a such way i use to perceive they playing alike "portable battery radio"
I have tried several, and you can type "destroyersoueu" into Youtube and see i have made several, and some of them reproduced with a very nice sonic, but, all them with troubles when you increased the volume asking for power...if we accept 10 volts rms output, they sound as good as a very good discrete audio amplifier, but when you increase the power, heating increasing, protections entering...aaaagh!.... disgusting!
regards,
Carlos
Last edited:
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
I have the same thinking - discrete is simply more fun for DIY.
There seem to be many good reasons to choose a discrete approach, but I believe that Opamp technology is fairly advanced and that if you are skilled in the art you can design an amplifier with an Opamp and get as good a sound as a discrete amp. The key is 'being skilled in the art'.
There seem to be many good reasons to choose a discrete approach, but I believe that Opamp technology is fairly advanced and that if you are skilled in the art you can design an amplifier with an Opamp and get as good a sound as a discrete amp. The key is 'being skilled in the art'.
You have agreement Bigun.
The main problem into the chips are the size, say, the audio amplifier power chips.
If they increase size, then distance from input to output can be bigger, also the dissipation will be better, this way no more need of overcurrent protection (kill sonics), no need of overvoltage protection, the way they do is stupid, in the place to shut down and burn the rail fuse, they are interfering into the audio amplifier circuit... also no more overtemperature protection, they can limit the supply voltage, if you increase, a circuit will short the rail to ground burning fuse (not burning the shorting circuit, of course), so, power cannot be bigger than the level previously decided into the factory.
Say, no active circuit interacting with the amplifier, only "surrounding" circuits to avoid mess, but never changing amplifier parameters... a fan blower can be included, those small one used together computer Video Graphic boards, also special heatsinks into the chip frontal face.... well... alike Video Graphic Boards.
Impedance protection never reducing power, or controling power sensing the impedance the guy attached to the chip, a shut down.... too much low impedance, no sound!... till the guy remove the short or the low impedance speaker.... repeating, without changing amplifier parameters, without limiting current or audio swing.
I think they should keep the diodes against invertion only, and better to place them in series, so, will block inverted current, not even needed to short the rails..just block electrons to flow.
Also the chips made more flat, alike smd inside, not having thickness you will be rid of terrible heat interactions and also small distance between parts.
The Panasonic chips are this way, they work full power for thousand hours and will not damage...the ones we use, the small ones, those are filled with hell protections that kills sound.
Also no Stereo into a same chip amplifier, not to have interactions too...a single channel to each chip.
I really think, doing this way, unbeatable!, no discrete will beat a modern chip amplifier.
So, as you see, i am not against chips, i just think the main factory has taken wrong decisions to make them small...they are making small sound too.
regards,
Carlos
The main problem into the chips are the size, say, the audio amplifier power chips.
If they increase size, then distance from input to output can be bigger, also the dissipation will be better, this way no more need of overcurrent protection (kill sonics), no need of overvoltage protection, the way they do is stupid, in the place to shut down and burn the rail fuse, they are interfering into the audio amplifier circuit... also no more overtemperature protection, they can limit the supply voltage, if you increase, a circuit will short the rail to ground burning fuse (not burning the shorting circuit, of course), so, power cannot be bigger than the level previously decided into the factory.
Say, no active circuit interacting with the amplifier, only "surrounding" circuits to avoid mess, but never changing amplifier parameters... a fan blower can be included, those small one used together computer Video Graphic boards, also special heatsinks into the chip frontal face.... well... alike Video Graphic Boards.
Impedance protection never reducing power, or controling power sensing the impedance the guy attached to the chip, a shut down.... too much low impedance, no sound!... till the guy remove the short or the low impedance speaker.... repeating, without changing amplifier parameters, without limiting current or audio swing.
I think they should keep the diodes against invertion only, and better to place them in series, so, will block inverted current, not even needed to short the rails..just block electrons to flow.
Also the chips made more flat, alike smd inside, not having thickness you will be rid of terrible heat interactions and also small distance between parts.
The Panasonic chips are this way, they work full power for thousand hours and will not damage...the ones we use, the small ones, those are filled with hell protections that kills sound.
Also no Stereo into a same chip amplifier, not to have interactions too...a single channel to each chip.
I really think, doing this way, unbeatable!, no discrete will beat a modern chip amplifier.
So, as you see, i am not against chips, i just think the main factory has taken wrong decisions to make them small...they are making small sound too.
regards,
Carlos
Attachments
Last edited:
hi, carlos, the amp is low power, i mean no more than 10w/8 ohm....
the drawing is in my simulator, as once i made it run corectly,
i did build one stereo sample...
i use it because idle power dissipation is very low, 4 w for the 2 channel,
as this amp is on 24/7.....i did found that for the home listening level,
my 2 X 1OO W amp, using six power mosfet /channel was somewhat
inadequate not to say ridiculous : 100W dissipation and thus compsumation
for a listening level of say a pair of watts at most...
nowadays, if you re interested by the low power (but high quality) amp;
i ll send you the schematic as soon as i will have it converted to gif...
regards,
wahab
the drawing is in my simulator, as once i made it run corectly,
i did build one stereo sample...
i use it because idle power dissipation is very low, 4 w for the 2 channel,
as this amp is on 24/7.....i did found that for the home listening level,
my 2 X 1OO W amp, using six power mosfet /channel was somewhat
inadequate not to say ridiculous : 100W dissipation and thus compsumation
for a listening level of say a pair of watts at most...
nowadays, if you re interested by the low power (but high quality) amp;
i ll send you the schematic as soon as i will have it converted to gif...
regards,
wahab
I agree with you all. It's all about fun. ICs are nice and convenient building blocks, if you have fun with them, then OK. If you are into calculating, say, VA stage bias and like confirmation on the scope, then your toy is discrete.
After all, ICs are not magic black box, well yes they are, but there are made of the same silicon as we know in the discrete world. Given the schematic, you could certainly build a discrete version of an IC implementation. Or the gist of it.
As mentionned earlier, ICs tend to be overly protected and affect the sound in strange ways. Measurable numbers are quite impressive but when it comes to more subjective attributes, they are generally falling short, staging for one. But again, it depends where you are. Many ICs are infinitely closer to a gain wire than many DIY schematics I seen on the web.
The question is highly subjective but often, the cheap compressed FM on the 4'' speaker radio on the beach sounds better to my ear than my class A with OB in my sound room. I wonder why?
I agree that ICs are the future because of low cost, sound is way better than 30 years ago and keeps getting better and more convenient. Discreete will remain there for high power and diy.
After all, ICs are not magic black box, well yes they are, but there are made of the same silicon as we know in the discrete world. Given the schematic, you could certainly build a discrete version of an IC implementation. Or the gist of it.
As mentionned earlier, ICs tend to be overly protected and affect the sound in strange ways. Measurable numbers are quite impressive but when it comes to more subjective attributes, they are generally falling short, staging for one. But again, it depends where you are. Many ICs are infinitely closer to a gain wire than many DIY schematics I seen on the web.
The question is highly subjective but often, the cheap compressed FM on the 4'' speaker radio on the beach sounds better to my ear than my class A with OB in my sound room. I wonder why?
I agree that ICs are the future because of low cost, sound is way better than 30 years ago and keeps getting better and more convenient. Discreete will remain there for high power and diy.
Hello Wasab and Suricat!
Votre envoi n'est pas urgent, lorsque vous êtes prêt envoient ensuite à mon adresse ..... this is not urgent, send me when ready.
á bientôt
Charles
.................................................................................
Suricat
I also think discrete will remain to high power and diy..also audiophile grade amplifiers.
regards,
Carlos
Attached image, one chip working into the function generator, one from several.
Votre envoi n'est pas urgent, lorsque vous êtes prêt envoient ensuite à mon adresse ..... this is not urgent, send me when ready.
á bientôt
Charles
.................................................................................
Suricat
I also think discrete will remain to high power and diy..also audiophile grade amplifiers.
regards,
Carlos
Attached image, one chip working into the function generator, one from several.
Attachments
Hello Carlos 
They also call this an audiophile preamp
http://www.marklevinson.com/image_library/326S_interior_lo.jpg
It seems to me more an op-amp collection
It has been quite well judged
Actually for power amp on a chip it is much more difficult to find an example
There is the Gaincard for small power
Then there is an integrated, the Jeff Rowland Concentra based on a number of LM3886 paralleled
For higher powers I do not know examples.
Kind regards,
gino
They also call this an audiophile preamp
http://www.marklevinson.com/image_library/326S_interior_lo.jpg
It seems to me more an op-amp collection
It has been quite well judged
Actually for power amp on a chip it is much more difficult to find an example
There is the Gaincard for small power
Then there is an integrated, the Jeff Rowland Concentra based on a number of LM3886 paralleled
For higher powers I do not know examples.
Kind regards,
gino
You forgot the AD797/OPA2134 phono stage, dropped to $2.5K thanks to the economic love game
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
You just gotta shovel some sand in your living room, put in some heat lamps, invite some young folks and pour out a cold beer...
Carlos - I'm thinking don't worry about stereo chips, just bridge them or parallel them or leave one unused and use separate chips for stereo ?
One thing to keep in mind in the discrete vs. chip debate is the fabrication process.
For discretes, the substrate thickness, doping of the N and P regions, and many other variables can be adjusted to yield the specific characteristics desired for the device. The physical construction and silicon characteristics of the transistor you would choose for an input LTP will be very different from what makes a good VAS or a good power amp output stage. There is far more to the problem than just die size.
On an integrated chip on the other hand the designer does not have the same flexibility. While it is possible to have areas with different doping or implant depth that means more masks and more processing steps which means more cost. The easiest thing to vary is the dimensions of the various transistors while keeping the silicon characteristics the same across the die. So any integrated chip design will of necessity involve some compromises.
Opamps work so well because the application is relatively constrained: +/- 15V supplies, limited current on the output, so the compromises are fewer and the designer can take advantage of the inherent close matching in process, temperature, and noise environment of multiple transistors on the same piece of silicon. In my opinion there are applications where a high quality opamp will have a significant performance advantage vs. discretes.
I would love to hear from some of the analog chip designers on diyAudio (I know there are a few) about the details of what tradeoffs they have to make in the design process.
For discretes, the substrate thickness, doping of the N and P regions, and many other variables can be adjusted to yield the specific characteristics desired for the device. The physical construction and silicon characteristics of the transistor you would choose for an input LTP will be very different from what makes a good VAS or a good power amp output stage. There is far more to the problem than just die size.
On an integrated chip on the other hand the designer does not have the same flexibility. While it is possible to have areas with different doping or implant depth that means more masks and more processing steps which means more cost. The easiest thing to vary is the dimensions of the various transistors while keeping the silicon characteristics the same across the die. So any integrated chip design will of necessity involve some compromises.
Opamps work so well because the application is relatively constrained: +/- 15V supplies, limited current on the output, so the compromises are fewer and the designer can take advantage of the inherent close matching in process, temperature, and noise environment of multiple transistors on the same piece of silicon. In my opinion there are applications where a high quality opamp will have a significant performance advantage vs. discretes.
I would love to hear from some of the analog chip designers on diyAudio (I know there are a few) about the details of what tradeoffs they have to make in the design process.
I am not worried, just having fun Bigun... collecting opinions
THe answer i wanted did not came, despite several folks have cooperated a lot, in a matter of fact, the Chip is better in several applications (majority of modern life applications), but cannot hold power, nor high current and no high voltage.... as a result it is not good for audio power amplifier purposes.
The operational amplifier is wonderfull, and this happened because does not hold high voltage and no high current... avoiding that they are wonderfull, nothing to criticise on them.
My question was regarded my generator, and several others, that uses discrete into the output amplifier, and i think it is because the need to stand to shorts for long time as a friend told me in the begining of this same thread.... he was fast into the analisis and found the reason as a flash, i was wondering about a lot of different things, the guy is focused.
As we see, minds are not the same, some guys are trained or genetically equiped to be precise, fast and analise things with objectivity (Elvee)...others, alike me, go wondering.
hehehehe
Interesting the fabrication process dear mighty dub, you told me some things that i had not the knowledge about the process...thank you for that.
I have "made", or created, or redesigned, or copied, or calculated some amplifiers, but this does not turn me a designer, i am not, nor an engineer, i am a hobbyst, an experimenter, and assembler, a constructor, a transistor extra destroyer (destroyer x)... but to create amplifiers we start based, or referenced into our beliefs, also the topologie that sounds good to our ears.
My choice was bootstrap, i found it wonderfull in sonics, warm and nice to listen without be tiring, no fatigue listening and measuring very well too, satisfaction is guaranteed to the ones wants amplifiers to measure and to the ones wants amplifiers to listen music.
My option was to make it simple, less parts count if possible compared to others, and to include bypass into all electrolitics and also some care about the voltage stabilization to the input and some voltage stabilization (small) to the bootstrapp circuit and voltage amplifier.
I have listened the same amplifier having CCS everywhere, current sinks, without and with bootstrap, tripple darlington, composite input differential pair using simetrical and non simetrical approach, decisions about current to drivers were tested, double voltage supply (higher and lower to the differential) was tested (listening), single and dual transistors VAS was tested...i have not tested fets only....so, decisions where taken listening and evaluating during comparison, one channel standard and other modified..... referenced on the standard Aksa (without secrets) style i have made what i think is the better option and resulted the Dx Standard (and DHR Turbo) and some monthes latter the HRII and Precision 1 that are the best ones, despite, personally, i love the standard, the one i love the most (passion is a feeling that usually is non sense)
Each designer may use their beliefs and the analisis or the "company" intentions, if the amplifier will be high or low production cost, if is to audiophile or more normal users that only listen music without bother with numbers, if is to play loud and continuously...well... a lot of bureacratic decisions must be taken, an them the designer know how enters together his memory of circuits published and tested, some bibbles alike Doctor Stone, Doctor Self and others are used for sure, and mainly the designer crew beliefs gives the final decision about what to make...and this is a belief, a matter of faith, because when you select an option you are dennying all other options without listen and compare them...you decide "that" one is better and go ahead... really, not knowing if other possibilites may be even better.... alike a game, depends how luck they are when select a topologie..some of them are not creative and they copy the chip amplifiers internal circuits, recalculating the resistances as this, usually, are not shown...most of them copy things.
Well... a real designer should came to explain us the real things.... my thougths are imagination.
Some of them, alike Hugh Dean, use cooperation from skilled friends and he test all circuits to see they are good into sonics, each part is important to Hugh, a fine selection of parts and special carefull is taken into the board design..he beliefs and may have tested, that condensers sounds, even the supply ones because they are inside the audio chain during the electrons return to ground... well.... Hugh method is great, watching the scope and listening...he is the Master in my point of view, and his amplifiers, some of them, in special the Aksa 55 Nirvana plus, are unbeatable.
regards,
Carlos
THe answer i wanted did not came, despite several folks have cooperated a lot, in a matter of fact, the Chip is better in several applications (majority of modern life applications), but cannot hold power, nor high current and no high voltage.... as a result it is not good for audio power amplifier purposes.
The operational amplifier is wonderfull, and this happened because does not hold high voltage and no high current... avoiding that they are wonderfull, nothing to criticise on them.
My question was regarded my generator, and several others, that uses discrete into the output amplifier, and i think it is because the need to stand to shorts for long time as a friend told me in the begining of this same thread.... he was fast into the analisis and found the reason as a flash, i was wondering about a lot of different things, the guy is focused.
As we see, minds are not the same, some guys are trained or genetically equiped to be precise, fast and analise things with objectivity (Elvee)...others, alike me, go wondering.
hehehehe
Interesting the fabrication process dear mighty dub, you told me some things that i had not the knowledge about the process...thank you for that.
I have "made", or created, or redesigned, or copied, or calculated some amplifiers, but this does not turn me a designer, i am not, nor an engineer, i am a hobbyst, an experimenter, and assembler, a constructor, a transistor extra destroyer (destroyer x)... but to create amplifiers we start based, or referenced into our beliefs, also the topologie that sounds good to our ears.
My choice was bootstrap, i found it wonderfull in sonics, warm and nice to listen without be tiring, no fatigue listening and measuring very well too, satisfaction is guaranteed to the ones wants amplifiers to measure and to the ones wants amplifiers to listen music.
My option was to make it simple, less parts count if possible compared to others, and to include bypass into all electrolitics and also some care about the voltage stabilization to the input and some voltage stabilization (small) to the bootstrapp circuit and voltage amplifier.
I have listened the same amplifier having CCS everywhere, current sinks, without and with bootstrap, tripple darlington, composite input differential pair using simetrical and non simetrical approach, decisions about current to drivers were tested, double voltage supply (higher and lower to the differential) was tested (listening), single and dual transistors VAS was tested...i have not tested fets only....so, decisions where taken listening and evaluating during comparison, one channel standard and other modified..... referenced on the standard Aksa (without secrets) style i have made what i think is the better option and resulted the Dx Standard (and DHR Turbo) and some monthes latter the HRII and Precision 1 that are the best ones, despite, personally, i love the standard, the one i love the most (passion is a feeling that usually is non sense)
Each designer may use their beliefs and the analisis or the "company" intentions, if the amplifier will be high or low production cost, if is to audiophile or more normal users that only listen music without bother with numbers, if is to play loud and continuously...well... a lot of bureacratic decisions must be taken, an them the designer know how enters together his memory of circuits published and tested, some bibbles alike Doctor Stone, Doctor Self and others are used for sure, and mainly the designer crew beliefs gives the final decision about what to make...and this is a belief, a matter of faith, because when you select an option you are dennying all other options without listen and compare them...you decide "that" one is better and go ahead... really, not knowing if other possibilites may be even better.... alike a game, depends how luck they are when select a topologie..some of them are not creative and they copy the chip amplifiers internal circuits, recalculating the resistances as this, usually, are not shown...most of them copy things.
Well... a real designer should came to explain us the real things.... my thougths are imagination.
Some of them, alike Hugh Dean, use cooperation from skilled friends and he test all circuits to see they are good into sonics, each part is important to Hugh, a fine selection of parts and special carefull is taken into the board design..he beliefs and may have tested, that condensers sounds, even the supply ones because they are inside the audio chain during the electrons return to ground... well.... Hugh method is great, watching the scope and listening...he is the Master in my point of view, and his amplifiers, some of them, in special the Aksa 55 Nirvana plus, are unbeatable.
regards,
Carlos
Attachments
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.