Jan
I don't have many values on hand but I found that this one got rid of the problem of the voltage ramping up and down on the output. It looked like a strange oscolation(sp). When I disconnected it the problem went away so I assumed it sure wouldn't hurt to try a different value. When I tried the 27K it acted correctly without a ramping problem and still gave me the same output. just running the output to the scope I get 29V rms out with 3 volts in, the same as before.
I made a twisted wire pair from 1" of #22ga wire and twisted the two together and soldered one end of each and floated the other end. Is this correct to replace the cap in the feedback loop?
Sound ...
Its ballsey with a lot of punch.
I don't have many values on hand but I found that this one got rid of the problem of the voltage ramping up and down on the output. It looked like a strange oscolation(sp). When I disconnected it the problem went away so I assumed it sure wouldn't hurt to try a different value. When I tried the 27K it acted correctly without a ramping problem and still gave me the same output. just running the output to the scope I get 29V rms out with 3 volts in, the same as before.
I made a twisted wire pair from 1" of #22ga wire and twisted the two together and soldered one end of each and floated the other end. Is this correct to replace the cap in the feedback loop?
Sound ...
Its ballsey with a lot of punch.
Yeah, that 'cap' seems OK. It was a standard practise in the hf world long time ago, don't know if they still use it.
I thought that the change of R102 to 27k would *increase* the problem, as it give stronger bootstrapping to the input, which is a form of pos feedback. But there probably was some phase shift through that 330pF turning it back into neg feedback. Funny how complex simple circuits can be...
Glad you enjoy the sound - that's the final arbiter, isn't it.
Jan Didden
I thought that the change of R102 to 27k would *increase* the problem, as it give stronger bootstrapping to the input, which is a form of pos feedback. But there probably was some phase shift through that 330pF turning it back into neg feedback. Funny how complex simple circuits can be...
Glad you enjoy the sound - that's the final arbiter, isn't it.
Jan Didden
JURASSIC PORK?..........
Hi,
It would speed up discharging the cap, yes.
As a side effect you may get somewhat better dynamics as well...
Where the heck does that dinosaur of a circuit come from anyway???
Geeeezzz.........
360V on that CF's plate seems rather steep too....
If you'd use a split cap configuration on the output you could at least do away with the input cap (C110).
That should improve the sound.
I think Jadis reworked the thing later on to use a lower B+, a 12AU7 CF as the first triode followed by a 12AX7 direct coupled to a 12AU7 CF.
Still needlessly complicated IMHO.
Hi,
It would speed up discharging the cap, yes.
As a side effect you may get somewhat better dynamics as well...
Where the heck does that dinosaur of a circuit come from anyway???
Geeeezzz.........
360V on that CF's plate seems rather steep too....
If you'd use a split cap configuration on the output you could at least do away with the input cap (C110).
That should improve the sound.
I think Jadis reworked the thing later on to use a lower B+, a 12AU7 CF as the first triode followed by a 12AX7 direct coupled to a 12AU7 CF.
Still needlessly complicated IMHO.
Hi,
Not sure where it was I found it...
Probably one of those Asian sites I guess...
Not even sure it's an actual Jadis circuit.
It did say so where I had it from but I'm starting to doubt these folks' sanity lately...(I'll leave it up to a guess as to whom I'm refering to......)
I took the liberty to add some comments.
No idea what it sounds like, you'll probably be running it with the handbrake firmly in the up position given the gain of the thing........
Cheers,
Not sure where it was I found it...
Probably one of those Asian sites I guess...
Not even sure it's an actual Jadis circuit.
It did say so where I had it from but I'm starting to doubt these folks' sanity lately...(I'll leave it up to a guess as to whom I'm refering to......)
I took the liberty to add some comments.
No idea what it sounds like, you'll probably be running it with the handbrake firmly in the up position given the gain of the thing........
Cheers,
Attachments
SY
I have hum in one channel as I haven't fired the other one up yet until all bugs are gone. It will have same hum I am sure.
Hum stays at the same level and makes no difference with tube swap. I have a box of 12AX7 tubes and have tried 9 with same result.
I would think that with DC on heaters it would be quiet.
I need a tall glass of red wine, maybe the whole bottle. Good thing I am on vacation now.
Any ideas?
I have hum in one channel as I haven't fired the other one up yet until all bugs are gone. It will have same hum I am sure.
Hum stays at the same level and makes no difference with tube swap. I have a box of 12AX7 tubes and have tried 9 with same result.
I would think that with DC on heaters it would be quiet.
I need a tall glass of red wine, maybe the whole bottle. Good thing I am on vacation now.
Any ideas?
Hi,
Not necessarily...
I'd work with both channels live, the B+ is probably common to both channels and with only half the load it may be stressing a tube.
Is the heater supply common to both channels? Maybe it's earthed at the socket side of the channel you're not using?
Cheers,
P.S. May be best to finish the bottle after the problem's been solved............
Not necessarily...
I'd work with both channels live, the B+ is probably common to both channels and with only half the load it may be stressing a tube.
Is the heater supply common to both channels? Maybe it's earthed at the socket side of the channel you're not using?
Cheers,
P.S. May be best to finish the bottle after the problem's been solved............
Frank
The channels are totally separate from one another. I could score the board down the center and seperate them. The heaters aren't hooked up on the empty channel nor is the power supply. The tubes are out also.
I will wait on drinking the wine until the line stage works correctly.
SY
It sounds like a fine wine but here in Iowa there isn't too much other than ripple available in the wine section. I will look however.
Here a wine is great if it has a cork in the bottle.
If you feel ambitious, disconnect the feedback loop, short the input of the cathode follower to ground and see if you still have hum.
Ah, you are thinking that with about 20db of gain my problem may lie there? I will try it.
The channels are totally separate from one another. I could score the board down the center and seperate them. The heaters aren't hooked up on the empty channel nor is the power supply. The tubes are out also.
I will wait on drinking the wine until the line stage works correctly.
SY
It sounds like a fine wine but here in Iowa there isn't too much other than ripple available in the wine section. I will look however.
Here a wine is great if it has a cork in the bottle.
If you feel ambitious, disconnect the feedback loop, short the input of the cathode follower to ground and see if you still have hum.
Ah, you are thinking that with about 20db of gain my problem may lie there? I will try it.
No, simpler than that- I'm trying to see in which stage the hum is originating by working backwards from the output. Thinking a little deeper (i.e., clearing my throat after saying something stupid), I realize that you can't actually take the CF grid directly to ground. Best you can do is take the second stage tube's grid to ground. So, OK, let's start there.
Stab in the dark
Check the 12AX7 CF output tube cathode voltage. If its above 100V you may need to cut some tracks etc. to float its heater supply (use the raw AC). By "float" I mean really float it with just a cap from one side to 0V or alternatively tie it to say +80 to +100V DC.
Cheers,
Ian
Check the 12AX7 CF output tube cathode voltage. If its above 100V you may need to cut some tracks etc. to float its heater supply (use the raw AC). By "float" I mean really float it with just a cap from one side to 0V or alternatively tie it to say +80 to +100V DC.
Cheers,
Ian
I replaced the 100K feedback resistor. I eliminated the DC on the heaters and tied a 100ohm resistor from each 3.15v leg to gtound. The noise is less now than with the DC on the heaters.
The heaters are wired using 22ga wire and don't have their own traces so there is nothing to cut. I will have to look up the voltages that I have written down for every stage. If my memory is correct there is about 100v cathode voltage.
Are you saying to inject 80-100 VDC into the heater voltage?
The heaters are wired using 22ga wire and don't have their own traces so there is nothing to cut. I will have to look up the voltages that I have written down for every stage. If my memory is correct there is about 100v cathode voltage.
Are you saying to inject 80-100 VDC into the heater voltage?
Hi Frank
Well, I too was concerned with that much voltage so I lowered it for trial purpose. It still had no effect on the hum. I can get rid of the hum if I pull out the CF tube but then what good it the linestage.
Voltages across the resistors: With 360V feed.
R103 .908, R104 17.4, R105 198, R107 .760, R108 246, R109 112
To me it would appear that the 112V was too high across R109, and I don't think the cathode voltages are correct in the first stage. Can I rebias both the cathode follower stage and the first stage or am I barking up the wrong tree? Can I re do the first stage and remove the feedback connection and jumper across R104? That would put R102 to ground(470K) and give me a cathode resistor of 1.6K.
Is Ian wanting me to make a voltage divider and throw B+ into the heater circuit of the cathode follower only or the whole heater supply?
Well, I too was concerned with that much voltage so I lowered it for trial purpose. It still had no effect on the hum. I can get rid of the hum if I pull out the CF tube but then what good it the linestage.
Voltages across the resistors: With 360V feed.
R103 .908, R104 17.4, R105 198, R107 .760, R108 246, R109 112
To me it would appear that the 112V was too high across R109, and I don't think the cathode voltages are correct in the first stage. Can I rebias both the cathode follower stage and the first stage or am I barking up the wrong tree? Can I re do the first stage and remove the feedback connection and jumper across R104? That would put R102 to ground(470K) and give me a cathode resistor of 1.6K.
Is Ian wanting me to make a voltage divider and throw B+ into the heater circuit of the cathode follower only or the whole heater supply?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.