I love the first 2A3 amp I made not long ago. The wonderful sound make me want to explore the "famous" 300B as my ultimate amp to enjoy! In searching the design available, I would invite all the expert in tube amp diyer to help me make good decision on the following:
1. for 300B amp, would Audio Note Kit one or JE Labs 300B has better sound? (or has a better chance of good sound with right parts?)
2. The (power) transformer seems to be the decisive factor for a good 300B amp (besides tubes). Any suggestion for good quality one with reasonable price?
3. I normally use two sources regularly (CD and FM). Is using preamp make more sense for 300B or direct in is better?
4. If direct in is better, I am thinking of using a toggle sw to switch the source. Is this a good idea? (because I have not seen anyone done this on 300B amp)
Many thanks,
Thomas
1. for 300B amp, would Audio Note Kit one or JE Labs 300B has better sound? (or has a better chance of good sound with right parts?)
2. The (power) transformer seems to be the decisive factor for a good 300B amp (besides tubes). Any suggestion for good quality one with reasonable price?
3. I normally use two sources regularly (CD and FM). Is using preamp make more sense for 300B or direct in is better?
4. If direct in is better, I am thinking of using a toggle sw to switch the source. Is this a good idea? (because I have not seen anyone done this on 300B amp)
Many thanks,
Thomas
If your looking for a kit do yourself a big favor and check into the Ladyday's from DIY hifi.
http://www.diyhifisupply.com/diyhs_ladyday.htm
While you will not need a preamp, you will need a volume control.
Good luck with your project.
http://www.diyhifisupply.com/diyhs_ladyday.htm
While you will not need a preamp, you will need a volume control.
Good luck with your project.
tomchaoda said:
The cascaded 6SN7 drivers in the JE sounds like mud. Something like one of Thorsten's 300B designs using either a pentode (my fave) or a 6C45/417/other high mu triode like 8532/6J4
I think you mean output transformer, the power transformer, provided it's of decent quality is fairly trivial.
Some suggestions; Magnequest, Lundahl, One-Electron, Electraprint, James, Tamura, Tango. Depends on your budget mainly.
You might not need a preamp. Build the poweramp with a switch (source selection) and a volume control and see what you think. If you need more, build a preamp. If not, drill some holes and install them into the chassis.
A toggle is fine, provided it's a make-before-break type so it doesn't 'pop' when you change sources.
Attachments
VIVA 2A3...CHEAP AND CHEERFUL.
Hi,
First of all I think you won't notice much of a difference between a 300B and a 2A3 except perhaps for a tiny bit more power output from the latter.
IMO, the 300B is about the most overrated powertube ever and I'd personally rather listen to a PP 2A3 than having to live with only a so so 300B amp (and that's the vast majority of them).
With the exception of the AN Baransu 300B amp, all others I hgeard so far were nothing but dissapointment, to my ears at least.
Furthermore, the driverstage of such an amp is actually the one that will determine most of what the amp is going to sound like, the powertube is not amplifying anything to a significant enough degree to be dominant.
Penthode + DHT is often a good combo as is high gm triode + DHT.
The rest of the pitfalls I suppose you know already so no need to rehash them here.
Cheers,
Hi,
First of all I think you won't notice much of a difference between a 300B and a 2A3 except perhaps for a tiny bit more power output from the latter.
IMO, the 300B is about the most overrated powertube ever and I'd personally rather listen to a PP 2A3 than having to live with only a so so 300B amp (and that's the vast majority of them).
With the exception of the AN Baransu 300B amp, all others I hgeard so far were nothing but dissapointment, to my ears at least.
Furthermore, the driverstage of such an amp is actually the one that will determine most of what the amp is going to sound like, the powertube is not amplifying anything to a significant enough degree to be dominant.
Penthode + DHT is often a good combo as is high gm triode + DHT.
The rest of the pitfalls I suppose you know already so no need to rehash them here.
Cheers,
Hi,
Not that I know of.
It uses 5692 and 5R4GY besides the obvious 300B, all wiring is high-purity silver including the OPT's primary and secondary windings. Silver foil coupling caps, tantalum resistors...IOW the works.
Mayb Thorsten Loesh knows more about the topology of the beast...
Cheers,
Not that I know of.
It uses 5692 and 5R4GY besides the obvious 300B, all wiring is high-purity silver including the OPT's primary and secondary windings. Silver foil coupling caps, tantalum resistors...IOW the works.
Mayb Thorsten Loesh knows more about the topology of the beast...
Cheers,
Hi,
De gustibus et coloribus.....
Anyway, I'm sure that you can make yourself a far better 300B amp (SE or otherwise) than most of the commercial offering I've heard so far.
I think the key lies with the driver and PS. If you opt to go for a DC feed on the DHT then that becomes a critical issue as well.
Easy enough to go for AC and get it quiet on a 2A3, not so simple with the 300B though.
Cheers,
De gustibus et coloribus.....
Anyway, I'm sure that you can make yourself a far better 300B amp (SE or otherwise) than most of the commercial offering I've heard so far.
I think the key lies with the driver and PS. If you opt to go for a DC feed on the DHT then that becomes a critical issue as well.
Easy enough to go for AC and get it quiet on a 2A3, not so simple with the 300B though.
Cheers,
Another option
Thomas, you might also consider the Axiom 300B design. I haven't heard or built this amp, but plan to do so in the near future. I think it offers benefits unavailable to regular 300B SE topologies, such as ridding the driver and output stages of the dreaded cathode resistor (and bypass caps), dispensing with coupling capacitors or transformer secondaries by direct coupling, and providing a form of PSU noise cancellation by connecting the next stage's cathode to the PSU of the previous stage. The circuit is a little more complicated than typical 300B designs, especially if you use diodes as suggested in the schematic. And you'll be purchasing a heap o' iron, unless you design around resistor tube loading (search DCMB on Google and in this site for this latter). Those significant downsides aside, methinks this particular design takes SET fidelity a notch higher. Some might even say it stands the chance of bettering a PP topology.
Axiom 300B
Thomas, you might also consider the Axiom 300B design. I haven't heard or built this amp, but plan to do so in the near future. I think it offers benefits unavailable to regular 300B SE topologies, such as ridding the driver and output stages of the dreaded cathode resistor (and bypass caps), dispensing with coupling capacitors or transformer secondaries by direct coupling, and providing a form of PSU noise cancellation by connecting the next stage's cathode to the PSU of the previous stage. The circuit is a little more complicated than typical 300B designs, especially if you use diodes as suggested in the schematic. And you'll be purchasing a heap o' iron, unless you design around resistor tube loading (search DCMB on Google and in this site for this latter). Those significant downsides aside, methinks this particular design takes SET fidelity a notch higher. Some might even say it stands the chance of bettering a PP topology.
Axiom 300B
Konnichiwa,
It is basically the same as the (old) Kegon (and for that actually the ANJ Ongaku), but single 300B, not parallel. Much of the sound comes from the Silver/Permalloy Output Transformer and silver leaf/mylar capacitors Kondo uses.
Here is what is a schematic more or less accurate (few Kondo Amp's are 100% identical between samples, he is constantly improving things) of the Baransu:
What you describe is the AN UK Baransu, very different. The Circuit is at the core the standard AN UK, 6SN7 Cascade, DC coupled, among my least favourite driver stages, after trrying most of them, basically like this:
But loads of fancy parts....
Sayonara
tomchaoda said:
It is basically the same as the (old) Kegon (and for that actually the ANJ Ongaku), but single 300B, not parallel. Much of the sound comes from the Silver/Permalloy Output Transformer and silver leaf/mylar capacitors Kondo uses.
Here is what is a schematic more or less accurate (few Kondo Amp's are 100% identical between samples, he is constantly improving things) of the Baransu:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
fdegrove said:
What you describe is the AN UK Baransu, very different. The Circuit is at the core the standard AN UK, 6SN7 Cascade, DC coupled, among my least favourite driver stages, after trrying most of them, basically like this:
But loads of fancy parts....
Sayonara
Regarding the article I read before of why SE make better sound than the Push-Pull are (accoring to my memory):
1. PP are basically utilize inverse circuitry. As one know any symmentrical waves seperated and then combine later can never be 100% correct as original. Thus, the sound wave will not be as good as SE.
2. In the dynamic of sound (which is 3D), there is always a lag or a bit slight forward ahead of original sound (phase) using PP. this will cause phase shift which is hard to measue in 2D instruments and yet very sensitive our human ear!
3. PP circuitry tends to cancel out most of the secondary harmonic distortion and left over the odd harmonic distortion. As one know the musical intrument's sound mostly come from the secondary harmonic distortion.
Therefore, the author concluded that to get a good sound music, the SE is the only way!
Again, this is from what I read before and it is from memory only. If you aregue these points, I may not have enough knowledge to defend them; but all discussions are welcome! This is what diyaudio forum is for...
Thomas
1. PP are basically utilize inverse circuitry. As one know any symmentrical waves seperated and then combine later can never be 100% correct as original. Thus, the sound wave will not be as good as SE.
2. In the dynamic of sound (which is 3D), there is always a lag or a bit slight forward ahead of original sound (phase) using PP. this will cause phase shift which is hard to measue in 2D instruments and yet very sensitive our human ear!
3. PP circuitry tends to cancel out most of the secondary harmonic distortion and left over the odd harmonic distortion. As one know the musical intrument's sound mostly come from the secondary harmonic distortion.
Therefore, the author concluded that to get a good sound music, the SE is the only way!
Again, this is from what I read before and it is from memory only. If you aregue these points, I may not have enough knowledge to defend them; but all discussions are welcome! This is what diyaudio forum is for...
Thomas
Deriving two seperate phases does not mean that the signal is (for want of a better expression, but one I've seen used a lot) cut in half.tomchaoda said:
I have no idea what you're talking about. A reference/link to the original article would help.
NO!. PP cancels the 2H that the amplifier creates internally due to it's own non-linearities, NOT, the second harmonics of the actual instruments themselves in the music signal that passes through the amplifier.
Then the author has a very limited viewpoint.
I was able to find the article, unfortunetely, it is in Chinese. this is the link:
http://purer.myrice.com/audioking/audioking.htm
The author concluded that to meet the ultimate sound as a power amp, he proposed his 8 points of view:
1. Single ended
2. Pure Class A
3. Direct Heated tube (triode)
4. don't use negative feedback
5. mono is better than stereo
6. use tube rectifier
7. use as minimum parts as you can (simple is the best!)
8. Don't use parellel design
This is author's point of view. That's OK! In my case of solid-state (I have Aleph 5 and Aleph-X in Class A. Listening a non-Class A now is a thing hard to bear!) Maybe you can help and educate me why PP is something I should consider? (as I am new in tube).
thanks,
Thomas
Thomas, don't be dismayed to see alot of Black and White and Either-Or perspectives in responses to your post. Here's my Black and White: there is no Black and White, no electricity without heat, no movement without friction. Anyone who tells you PP does everything better than SE---or vice versa---spins yarn from a form of physics inapplicable to the rest of the universe. My two cents? SE does certain things better than PP; PP does certain things better than SE, and both irrevocably so. I experience SE to be more immediate than PP---probably due to the inherent simplicity of the circuit. I also find SE a little easier on the ear---probably due to its more ear-friendly distortion spectrum (the second harmonic cancellation to which you refer). For my part, I prefer a more immediate presentation with less listener fatique, so prefer SE.
Indeed.
I have always had contempt for 'classic' PP topologies like the Mullard, Williamson, Dynaco. Amps based on these sound only slightly better than bad SS and often worse than good SS. At best they sound 'nice'
Until recently i was listening to a PX25 SET; absolutely glorious within its own confines but certainly limiting with respect to both suitable speakers and more disturbingly with respect to music tastes. I mean the amp's taste, not mine. It would be amazing with jazz trios, girls with guitars and chamber music but would seriously fall apart under Schoenberg, Mahler or ELP. Big band music would be another no-no. And this with a real driver (PX25 is btw very easy to drive) and separate PS for each stage.
Sadly, i don't have enough OSRAM PX25 for PP.
A simple PP 2A3, transformer splitted from a 6S45P, again with separate supplies provides considerably less magic but better dynamics; real loudness ability; great tone, low level resolution; SS comparable bass (only with Mercury) and most importantly, the ability to play all of my records equally well.
Where is the PP amp at its weakest? IMO in the recreation of a believable acoustic space.
So, both topologies offer a certain compromise of virtues; you need to choose you own poison. For me the choice is (for now) made - i won't have an amp choose the music.
You're making my point. Thomas quoted an author who says "SE is best" for reasons he has decided. But it isn't the case in all cases, as you've said. However, I doubt that 1% of 'philes or DIYers have heard PP done properly, so whilst their decisions re preferences are valid, saying one topology or another is better is bollocks. I've built both (many ccts), and to my ears PP is much better when done right, but you may like something else. So, what I was saying in my previous posts could be "don't get hooked on someone else's religious beleif re amplifier topology". Ideally try both and decide.serengetiplains said:
But don't quote rubbish like in PP the signal is split (and can't be put back together seamlessly), or PP amps cancel the even harmonics in the music itself, or you'll get an argument.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.