Push-Pull driver stage? - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Tubes / Valves

Tubes / Valves All about our sweet vacuum tubes :) Threads about Musical Instrument Amps of all kinds should be in the Instruments & Amps forum

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 16th September 2006, 04:26 PM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Michigan
Default Push-Pull driver stage?

Hello everybody,

I have kicking this idea around in my head for a couple weeks now. is it possible to have a driver stage that opperates in push-pull? Wouldn't it have to be Interstage coupled? I have no idea, just a guess

-Moose
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th September 2006, 09:05 PM   #2
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Seattle
Yes, Lynn Olson is a major proponent.

http://www.nutshellhifi.com/triode1.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th September 2006, 09:10 PM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Hey-Hey!!!,
If the output is PP, then I don't see the need for an IT. If you want to drive a SE load, then I think you're going to have to use a TX. Seems that the extra complexity of a PP driver stage for a SE amp goes against the Holy Texts...

PP 2A3 for an 845 grid looks very useful.
cheers,
Douglas
__________________
the Tnuctipun will return
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th September 2006, 09:51 PM   #4
kevinkr is offline kevinkr  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
kevinkr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Blog Entries: 6
Any differential driver stage also commonly known as a long tailed pair is push pull if both output phases are used. (Signal taken from both plates.)

The cathodyne inverter while not a differential pair is also provides pushpull drive to the grids of a pp output stage. (Not my favorite choice either.)
__________________
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th September 2006, 11:11 PM   #5
latala is offline latala  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: staffordshire
If I understand you we have had push pull driver stages for ever
The Williamson is a classic design with a push pull driver!
ITs a voltage amp followed by a concertina phase splitter attached to a low impedance cathode coupled driver stage (push-pull) that then feeds the output valves . This was done in 1947 i think and became the first commercial amplifier to deliver its rated power with less than 0.1 % distortion
regards Trev
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th September 2006, 12:30 AM   #6
diyAudio Moderator Emeritus
 
ray_moth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Jakarta
Quote:
The Williamson is a classic design with a push pull driver!
Not really, IMHO. The Williamson uses a differential amplifier as its driver. If the two halves of the driver used separate cathode resistors, then it would be push-pull. You might want to do this if you wanted shunt negative feedback from the OP tube plates, either to the driver plates (to give the drivers a higher output impedance) or to the driver cathodes (to provide a voltage divider for the NFB). I personally think the second option would be a particularly good idea to improve the Williamson.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th September 2006, 07:21 AM   #7
latala is offline latala  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: staffordshire
Yes I realise that the driver stage is a differential in the Williamson but the output is push pull!
Also It would not!!! be a good idea to change to seperate cathode resistors as this was a distortion cancelling trick that Williamson came up with . It is often referred to in design notes
Regards Trev
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th September 2006, 12:44 PM   #8
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Quote:
Originally posted by ray_moth

Not really, IMHO. The Williamson uses a differential amplifier as its driver. If the two halves of the driver used separate cathode resistors, then it would be push-pull.

Hey-Hey!!,
Ray, I'll have to disagree with you on this one. It is the output which sets the definition. Would you say an output stage is not PP if it has a common cathode load CCS? I certainly would not...

I do agree with the rest, the seperate cathode resistors of a PP driver stage( fed a balanced signal ) is an excellent way of delivering FB. Look at the 6V6 RCA amps, both PP and PPP for an ancient example. These amps used a concertina to create the first PP signal. 6AU6's with plate loads about 3x the size of the FB resistor from their cathode to the plate of the output tube.
cheers,
Douglas
__________________
the Tnuctipun will return
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th September 2006, 03:32 AM   #9
diyAudio Moderator Emeritus
 
ray_moth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Jakarta
Quote:
Also It would not!!! be a good idea to change to seperate cathode resistors as this was a distortion cancelling trick that Williamson came up with . It is often referred to in design notes
Would so!!! Actually, I agree that simply separating the drivers' shared cathode resistor into two separate resistors, with no other change at all, would be a bad idea.

What I meant was that the second NFB option would be a good idea for the Williamson, i.e. balanced NFB loops from the OP tube plates to the driver cathodes. This would require separate driver cathode resistors to make it work.

As long as the Williamson's original triode-connected OP stage is used, adding more NFB loops is perhaps not so much of an issue (although I still think it's a good idea). However, if you wanted to use a pentode OP stage, or even UL, then you would require more NFB to get a decent damping factor. The design of the Williamson is not conducive to increasing NFB significantly using the existing global loop, because of potential instability due to having two coupling caps and the OP transformer inside the existing global NFB loop.

I believe that adding another, internal NFB loop, which would include the output tubes and drivers but exclude the input and splitter stages and the OP transformer, would enable NFB to be increased sufficiently to achieve adequate damping for pentode or UL output without incurring problems of instability. Williamson's design, with the splitter coming before the drivers, makes this approach feasible.
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th September 2006, 05:29 AM   #10
jlsem is offline jlsem  United States
diyAudio Member
 
jlsem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dallas,TX
6C45 PP IT 845SE amp.

Steve Bench has something similar as well.
__________________
When an LP gets scratched it still makes sense; when CDs crack up they go completely senile and gibber incontinently. - Hugo Williams
  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
A push-pull differential stage- why not? darkfenriz Solid State 53 23rd December 2007 01:00 PM
split push-pull output stage andrew_whitham Tubes / Valves 16 22nd March 2007 06:25 PM
driving 845 push-pull with a signal from a 300B SE stage Antonio Tucci Tubes / Valves 1 20th February 2007 08:04 PM
6BQ5 as a Push Pull Output Stage. ppl Tubes / Valves 7 23rd December 2004 09:32 PM
Push Pull Output Stage Question 316a Tubes / Valves 4 10th February 2003 01:04 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:33 AM.


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