Hello!
Few days ago I started to thing about building integrated
amplifiers to drive my esl speakers. So I started to look
for some transistors in my drawers and it turned out that
I have some MAT02/03.
So there are the questions:
- as far as I can remember, Elektor used to apply these
in their "hi-end" amplifier, which actually also sported
2SA1216/2SC2922 for the power stage. Can anyone comment
on this schematic?
link is here: http://www.mif.pg.gda.pl/homepages/tom/files/200W.gif
To be honest, I feel that there's much room for improvement
in case of this schematic, changing 2SA1269/2SC2922 to
2SC5200/2SA1943 to say at least.
- does anyone have a copy of Elektor's "hi end preamplifier"
schamtics? (or any other schamtics that sports MAT02/03).
Thanks,
esl
Few days ago I started to thing about building integrated
amplifiers to drive my esl speakers. So I started to look
for some transistors in my drawers and it turned out that
I have some MAT02/03.
So there are the questions:
- as far as I can remember, Elektor used to apply these
in their "hi-end" amplifier, which actually also sported
2SA1216/2SC2922 for the power stage. Can anyone comment
on this schematic?
link is here: http://www.mif.pg.gda.pl/homepages/tom/files/200W.gif
To be honest, I feel that there's much room for improvement
in case of this schematic, changing 2SA1269/2SC2922 to
2SC5200/2SA1943 to say at least.
- does anyone have a copy of Elektor's "hi end preamplifier"
schamtics? (or any other schamtics that sports MAT02/03).
Thanks,
esl
esl said:
Any preamp having an LTP at the input can be modified to use MAT02/03.
On power amps the problem is the high voltages which the MATs can't take, particularly as on most power amps it's better to use higher voltages on the first stages. You see that Elektor had to put zeners on the collectors to solve that problem, and I don't think it's a good idea for our precious signal to go through them.
In this case it would be much better, sonically speaking, to put a cascode or a current mirror to handle the voltage, all other things remaining the same. Opinions on this matter would also be appreciated.
The rest of the circuit looks fine, as it has no cap on the feedback and a DC offset trimming at the input. The relay control at the output seems a bit confusing though.
Carlos
Audiofanatic:
thanst for the schematic. My esl'a are Martin Logan Scenario.
Hybrid speaker sporting 8" Rockford Fosgate woofer in a sealed
enclosure.
The problem with these speakers is the fact that they need
fair amount of power to sing, especially due to the fact that
their impedance above 10 KHz drops below 4 Ohms.
So, I think about buiding suitable integrated amp for them.
The schematic with 2SA1216/2SC2922 could be the one to go,
but - anyway - wouldn't it be better to use 2SC5200/2SA1943
and find any simpler schematics?
Vigier:
thanks, maybe this is the topology that I am gonna use.
Looks good, doesn't it?
esl
thanst for the schematic. My esl'a are Martin Logan Scenario.
Hybrid speaker sporting 8" Rockford Fosgate woofer in a sealed
enclosure.
The problem with these speakers is the fact that they need
fair amount of power to sing, especially due to the fact that
their impedance above 10 KHz drops below 4 Ohms.
So, I think about buiding suitable integrated amp for them.
The schematic with 2SA1216/2SC2922 could be the one to go,
but - anyway - wouldn't it be better to use 2SC5200/2SA1943
and find any simpler schematics?
Vigier:
thanks, maybe this is the topology that I am gonna use.
Looks good, doesn't it?
esl
MAT02 and MAT03
These parts are were made by PMI now Analog Devices
http://www.analog.com/Analog_Root/productPage/productHome/0,,MAT02,00.html
These parts are were made by PMI now Analog Devices
http://www.analog.com/Analog_Root/productPage/productHome/0,,MAT02,00.html
You don't have to have a specific MAT02/03 design. In most cases the MAT's will fit in a design with a discrete pair. Since the MAT's have a little larger capacitances some parts may need redesign (not much though).
Did I mention that I have a bunch of SSM2210 (=MAT02) and SSM2220 (=MAT03) for sale?
Did I mention that I have a bunch of SSM2210 (=MAT02) and SSM2220 (=MAT03) for sale?
Hello!
Thanks for your support, I'll probably go with the schematics provided by Vigier, but still have to rething driver and power
stage topology.
As I mentioned before - I am out to get some 2SC5200/2SA1943,
probably four pairs to work in the power stage. Does anyone
is in possesion of shematics sporting these Toshiba transistors?
What driver would be suitable for them, and in which topolgy...
As for MAT's, I have 4 of them at the moment
Thanks,
esl
Thanks for your support, I'll probably go with the schematics provided by Vigier, but still have to rething driver and power
stage topology.
As I mentioned before - I am out to get some 2SC5200/2SA1943,
probably four pairs to work in the power stage. Does anyone
is in possesion of shematics sporting these Toshiba transistors?
What driver would be suitable for them, and in which topolgy...
As for MAT's, I have 4 of them at the moment
Thanks,
esl
"Fred, LM394 is not = MAT02. LM394 has much more noise but for power amps this is not a big issue."
Would you like MAT02 >= LM324
The first page of the MAT-02 calls it an
"Improved direct replacement for LM394"
Noise is around 1 nV Per squareroot root Hz. when both are measured at the same collector current of 1 mA. This low level of Noise is not and issue for a power amp is probably over an order of maginitude better than needed. The low volgage handling and larger capacitance might make it a poor choice for this application though. Pehaps a good lookat the data sheets before posting might be a good idea in cases like these. I usually try to do that when comparing numbers.
"Did I mention that I have a bunch of SSM2210 (=MAT02) and SSM2220 (=MAT03) for sale?"
No.... and you should not unless it it is on the trading post thread.
I thought this I was your feeling too:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=138020#post138020
You already have a link to your website with every post you make. If this was an isolated "by the way type" mention it would be one thing, but you have used this forum to attract buyers to your website on several occasions. It gives every appearance that you are exploiting the forum for the chance to sell something. I don't believe I am the only one that has a problem with this. I don't come here to sell things or to have other people sell things to me. i would like the advice to be free of commercial motives. The are enough challenges to the credibility of many statements without accusations of commercialism becoming yet another tpoic for argument. This is why other forum websites have manufacturer's forums to avoid this sort of blurring of the lines. Please stop it. Your URL is easily accessible and thechance to link in the signature is already incredible generosity from Jason. I would fear the abuse of that privilege might remove that opportunity being available. Why do you have push the very boundaries of what is allowed to sell stuff? Is that all the community on the forum is to you is potential customers? If so let us know so we can stop offering you free advice for you to turn around and make money with on the same forum. It has really become obnoxious. If others feel different post away and we can move the thread.
Fred
Would you like MAT02 >= LM324
The first page of the MAT-02 calls it an
"Improved direct replacement for LM394"
Noise is around 1 nV Per squareroot root Hz. when both are measured at the same collector current of 1 mA. This low level of Noise is not and issue for a power amp is probably over an order of maginitude better than needed. The low volgage handling and larger capacitance might make it a poor choice for this application though. Pehaps a good lookat the data sheets before posting might be a good idea in cases like these. I usually try to do that when comparing numbers.
"Did I mention that I have a bunch of SSM2210 (=MAT02) and SSM2220 (=MAT03) for sale?"
No.... and you should not unless it it is on the trading post thread.
I thought this I was your feeling too:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=138020#post138020
You already have a link to your website with every post you make. If this was an isolated "by the way type" mention it would be one thing, but you have used this forum to attract buyers to your website on several occasions. It gives every appearance that you are exploiting the forum for the chance to sell something. I don't believe I am the only one that has a problem with this. I don't come here to sell things or to have other people sell things to me. i would like the advice to be free of commercial motives. The are enough challenges to the credibility of many statements without accusations of commercialism becoming yet another tpoic for argument. This is why other forum websites have manufacturer's forums to avoid this sort of blurring of the lines. Please stop it. Your URL is easily accessible and thechance to link in the signature is already incredible generosity from Jason. I would fear the abuse of that privilege might remove that opportunity being available. Why do you have push the very boundaries of what is allowed to sell stuff? Is that all the community on the forum is to you is potential customers? If so let us know so we can stop offering you free advice for you to turn around and make money with on the same forum. It has really become obnoxious. If others feel different post away and we can move the thread.
Fred
The silly part of all this, is that you folks CAN'T read a data sheet. There are differences between the MAT02 and the LM394, BUT it is not noise. Also, if any of you actually bother to read these data sheets, please NOTE the very high capacitance shown in the Ccb and Cbe graphs. This is as bad or worse than that of an equivalent noise FET, like the 2SK389.
I read the data sheet.......
"The first page of the MAT-02 calls it an
"Improved direct replacement for LM394"
The low volgage (votage if I could type) handling and larger capacitance might make it a poor choice for this application though"
Will agree that it is not an exact second source but was designed to compete with the LM394 for designs by people who read all the data sheets and measure differences in the actual circuit.
I do find my self in contention with the silliness remark. There many more silly parts in the thread and not reading the data sheet is just one of them.
Thanks Mr. Curl,
Fred
PS Does't Bolder use this device in the front end of thre pre and power amps?
"The first page of the MAT-02 calls it an
"Improved direct replacement for LM394"
The low volgage (votage if I could type) handling and larger capacitance might make it a poor choice for this application though"
Will agree that it is not an exact second source but was designed to compete with the LM394 for designs by people who read all the data sheets and measure differences in the actual circuit.
I do find my self in contention with the silliness remark. There many more silly parts in the thread and not reading the data sheet is just one of them.
Thanks Mr. Curl,
Fred
PS Does't Bolder use this device in the front end of thre pre and power amps?
Fred Dieckmann said:
Fred,
Very often a manufacturer picks a single parameter on which their product is better, and then post the " improved replacement of..." statement. Except for this specific parameter, all the others may actually be (much) worse. I did NOT read this particular data sheet, but if I read such I statement I immediately become VERY suspicious. FWIW.
Jan Didden
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.