|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
| Vendor's Bazaar Commercial Vendors large & small hawking their wares |
|
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 |
|
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#4021 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: No. Utah
|
Quote:
__________________
James "Television is the poor man's whiskey." Russel Baker |
|
|
|
|
#4022 | |||
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Saddleworth
|
Quote:
In the case of the nc400/smps600 I think it is simply a case of - you always control the maximum size of initial production runs, so that you control the potential size & cost of any initial production rework problems - they've been surprised by the level of demand Didn't Bruno say something about he believed the 1st production batch would last til Christmas? (misremembered, but he certainly implied the demand for the 1st batch far exceeded his expectations) Quote:
Quote:
Interesting observations in there about non-linearities with displacement, change in drive unit distortion with temperature as well as change in drive unit parameters and therefore change in crossover characteristics. Time and operational dependent 'compression'. It's an old paper but I wonder how much has really changed in current moving coil loudspeakers |
|||
|
|
|
#4023 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: No. Utah
|
Thank you Chris. Very informative!
__________________
James "Television is the poor man's whiskey." Russel Baker |
|
|
|
#4024 | |
|
Account disabled at member's request
Join Date: Apr 2009
|
Quote:
Seems to be an excellent article; 1989, but IMO nothing shocking has changed in moving coil speakers since. |
|
|
|
|
#4025 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Saddleworth
|
Probably going really off-topic
(but, of course, nothing else in this thread has been off-topic )
So we've got a big stable power op amp block. And therefore I was going to say that implementing a transconductance amp was relatively straightforward, ...until I read section 4/page 144 of Distortion Reduction in Moving-CoilLoudspeaker Systems Using Current-Drive Technology which indicates that a loop gain of > 92 dB is required - nc400 specified as > 56 dB. However Esa Merilainen/Current Drive claims to have successfully implemented a transconductance amp using a TDA2040 Transconductance amplifier project - Current-Drive - The Natural Way of Loudspeaker Operation Also it's not so immediately straightforward if we want a balanced input transconductance amp. With regards the ncore itself, We need to know which components on the ncore are the input - so that effectively we know which are the +ve and -ve input terminals of the opamp - and feedback resistors We need to know what external compensation components (if any) are also required We also need to be sure of the block diagram/circuit diagram of the input buffer stages of the ncore. Anyone done an analysis/schematic? ...or Bruno do it for us ![]() Thoughts about current drive and crossovers current drive means the amp produces the current whatever the load and whatever signal is actually being converted by the transducer (speaker drive unit) So outside the driver's operational range, if we don't want the current to go into the driver it has to go somehwere else. So we've got to sink it in the crossover. This seems extremely inefficient. So active crossovers (DSP) is a very sensible way to go. DLCP please? |
|
|
|
#4026 |
|
is choosing a less facetious title...
diyAudio Member
|
typical pieter: as in the other thread, failing to take or it seems even acknowledge the whole argument because its convenient for your story.
sorry guys I actually just popped in to see what the state of the order lists etc are from end users as i'm still considering trying one of these on my subs, but since my ears are burning I couldnt help the reply. pieter enters the wire thread every now and then to tell us what the Class D guys are saying and for a spot of sport, I see he uses the same stirring tactics here..... I drew a parallel between this argument and the one against too high damping, which seems to be precisely what you are talking about here with current drive; yet 'for the sake of argument' pieter; you claimed you couldnt see the parallel..... Last edited by qusp; 17th May 2012 at 02:40 AM. |
|
|
|
#4027 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: -
|
Guys,
Currently all NC400 and SMPS600 are on stock, however we have had some unforeseen delay due to missing SMPS and audio cables.... The cables are now in transit and will arrive next week on Monday. All open orders (and new orders... ) will be shipped next week, starting on Tuesday.My appologize for this unforeseen delay. |
|
|
|
#4028 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Paris
|
Very interesting.
How would this loop mechanism affect available output power for a given load? I have done a lot a tests with a simple resistor inline with my amplifier (you can simulate that with WinISD Pro). The higher the resistor compared to the load, the closer you are from pure current drive (but of course the more power you are burning into the resistor...). Concerning the way current drive modify the frequency response in my experience it really depends on the impedance plot of the driver. So you typically get a "boost" in the lower frequencies (when approaching resonance) and in the upper range if the driver has its impedance rising (which is no more the case with modern motors sporting shorting rings). I found the benefits were great for a mid woofer (use above resonance) but not so for a woofer (electrical damping has its benefits) and compressions drivers (no distortion reduction). Here are two measurements with a modern midwoofer JBL 2020H, and a somewhat older design TAD TM1201H (older but better due to its great cone), measured in a ~50L closed box with and without a 44ohms resistor. The distortion shown here is 3rd order. As you can see the JBL is more "stable" in its upper range, because its impedance does not rise as much. The TAD also has more distortion in the low frequency that is not reduced by current drive (it is even increased, but it is only the effect of the boost: eq it and the distortion is the same), due to its small xmax. The benefits for distortion are obvious. sorry for the OT... Last edited by pos; 17th May 2012 at 09:05 AM. |
|
|
|
#4029 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Saddleworth
|
Quote:
The load is in the feedback loop of the amp The power delivery of the amp is determined by the total power going both into the load and the 'gain' resistor - Rf, the resistor to ground The ability for the amp to correct for errors in the delivered current is dependent upon its output impedance multiplied (divided) by the fact that it's contained within a feedback loop. Ie. - the output impedance of the amp is (still) very low - the effective output impedance of the closed loop is very high - It's not simply being simulated by the addition of a high series output resistance to a low output impedance system |
|
|
|
|
#4030 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Paris
|
So how much watt would a NC400 be able to output in a 4/8/16 ohms load with such a feedback loop?
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Hypex problem, who can help | Hansms | Class D | 8 | 10th March 2011 08:18 PM |
| Hypex | steveww | Class D | 14 | 18th November 2010 01:44 PM |
| Question for those who have tried hypex smps with hypex modules | avian | Class D | 12 | 3rd March 2009 09:30 AM |
| Hypex UcD 180AD + signal wires, Power Supply ST, Hypex Transformer TR100A | c10h12n2 | Swap Meet | 7 | 7th July 2007 03:55 PM |
| FS: Hypex UcD 400/180AD, hypex toroid | Archmage | Swap Meet | 4 | 14th November 2006 04:23 AM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |