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 26th June 2012, 09:13 AM   #11
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vietnam
Blog Entries: 2
Send a message via Yahoo to quanghao
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
It is usually not much different in noise that can be seen in simulation of different CCS topologies. Worse, lower noise doesn't always mean better sounding. I'm still not sure if I want to go the trouble building such a complex current source. What is your experience. Is it a big improvement soundwise? I mean, are you just relying on simulation numbers?

ADD: Note that the amp already uses regulated front end supply
??????

my experience is to practice many times,
and tested on actual measurements, tests by many people listen and compare!

current source I have is simple and I noticed not like, I want a smaller noise, so I need to change! I Want amplifier with parameters better technically.
__________________
Group buy DAC-END R (ES9018) full assembled board
update 06/14/2013 :http://www.audiodesignguide.com/DAC32/index2.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2012, 09:15 AM   #12
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vietnam
Blog Entries: 2
Send a message via Yahoo to quanghao
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
It is usually not much different in noise that can be seen in simulation of different CCS topologies. Worse, lower noise doesn't always mean better sounding. I'm still not sure if I want to go the trouble building such a complex current source. What is your experience. Is it a big improvement soundwise? I mean, are you just relying on simulation numbers?

ADD: Note that the amp would probably be using regulated front end supply

I do not understand this sentence, you just tell me!

my experience is to practice many times,
and tested on actual measurements, tests by many people listen and compare!

current source I have is simple and I noticed not like, I want a smaller noise, so I need to change! I Want amplifier with parameters better technically.
__________________
Group buy DAC-END R (ES9018) full assembled board
update 06/14/2013 :http://www.audiodesignguide.com/DAC32/index2.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2012, 09:18 AM   #13
Jay is offline Jay  Indonesia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Jakarta
I think removing the current mirror is not in line with the spirit of using such a complex current source for the LTP...? Any reason for removing those transistors?
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2012, 09:24 AM   #14
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vietnam
Blog Entries: 2
Send a message via Yahoo to quanghao
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
I think removing the current mirror is not in line with the spirit of using such a complex current source for the LTP...? Any reason for removing those transistors?
you say about current mirror for different pre??

or other?

New CCS its is no good for it??
__________________
Group buy DAC-END R (ES9018) full assembled board
update 06/14/2013 :http://www.audiodesignguide.com/DAC32/index2.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2012, 09:25 AM   #15
Jay is offline Jay  Indonesia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Jakarta
Quote:
Originally Posted by quanghao View Post
[/B]
I do not understand this sentence, you just tell me!
I mean, by looking at perfectionism in you, you might use regulated supply for the front end LTP. This regulated supply will help lower the noise so complex ccs will be less critical than if using no regulated supply.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quanghao View Post
[/B]
my experience is to practice many times,
and tested on actual measurements, tests by many people listen and compare!
What I want to know is if you have taken the trouble to "voice" the current source. I mean, have you listened and compared several constant current sources. If so, then good, I might try it out. I myself doubt if I can hear improvement because the power supply for the opamp itself will probably have negative effect to the amp.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2012, 09:30 AM   #16
Jay is offline Jay  Indonesia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Jakarta
Quote:
Originally Posted by quanghao View Post
you say about current mirror for different pre??

or other?

New CCS its is no good for it??
Why have you removed these 2 transistors?
Attached Images
File Type: gif Mirror.GIF (26.3 KB, 554 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2012, 09:32 AM   #17
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vietnam
Blog Entries: 2
Send a message via Yahoo to quanghao
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
Why have you removed these 2 transistors?
me you want to menu simple it
__________________
Group buy DAC-END R (ES9018) full assembled board
update 06/14/2013 :http://www.audiodesignguide.com/DAC32/index2.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2012, 09:47 AM   #18
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vietnam
Blog Entries: 2
Send a message via Yahoo to quanghao
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
Why have you removed these 2 transistors?
this
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1.jpg (634.9 KB, 552 views)
__________________
Group buy DAC-END R (ES9018) full assembled board
update 06/14/2013 :http://www.audiodesignguide.com/DAC32/index2.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2012, 11:12 AM   #19
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vietnam
Blog Entries: 2
Send a message via Yahoo to quanghao
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonsai View Post
You have removed the LTP current mirror. Although I expec this design will work without it, loop gain will be lower and current balance in the LTP will not be optimum. Both of these will lead to higher distortion.
yes i see it!

Thanks
__________________
Group buy DAC-END R (ES9018) full assembled board
update 06/14/2013 :http://www.audiodesignguide.com/DAC32/index2.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2012, 05:23 PM   #20
diyAudio Member
 
keantoken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Texas
Blog Entries: 2
Quanghao, the input stage to the OPA6x7 is not a conventional LTP. Notice the phase is actually reversed; the Jfet sources actually point up; they are P-channel. This could give nice advantages to the way compensation is applied.

There are ways to perform this phase reversal with an N-channel or NPN LTP (something like cross-comp) but I think these may cause stability problems.

It would be interesting to see if you can make it work with the same input topology as the OP6x7. Otherwise, the circuit is actually pretty conventional, if performing well.
  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
Jackson 637 Tube tester Info needed Zero Cool Tubes / Valves 0 19th September 2008 10:46 PM
Opa627/637 for sale Audio.Spec1 Swap Meet 1 4th August 2007 11:29 AM
Fs: Bb Opa627,637 vadimgal Swap Meet 6 14th January 2007 03:27 AM
Fs: Opa627/637, Ad1862 vadimgal Swap Meet 0 9th July 2006 02:16 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:40 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2