WITH further explanation, do you now concede that this statement is true in some topologies and false in others?
Wuyit is still at it. He is deliberately promoting his own erroneous beliefs and refuses to consider any argument that is opposed to his "closed" view of the world of science.
I think I will just not respond to Wuyit in this thread and when he starts repeating his preposterous claims in another thread I will report his post as breaking Forum rules.
I think I will just not respond to Wuyit in this thread and when he starts repeating his preposterous claims in another thread I will report his post as breaking Forum rules.
its the AC loops that are interesting.....and here the principle is the shunt arround the load...this short tight loop take everything else out of the loop...and thus reduces the influence prom the PSU caps and a modulated GND...the fact that the reference points for the controling device end the load is the same on both side of the load.. makes the world of difference....A strong and very pure concept...only problem is low wattage and very low efficiency. Maybe the task would be to develop some HiQ efficient drivers... should be possible...I think....But expensive with the dramatic rise in cost of the Neodynium...🙁
you don't need no neo.
Alnico has been used for many decades in high efficiency speakers.
Other than reduced weight, can you list the advantages of neo over alnico?
Alnico has been used for many decades in high efficiency speakers.
Other than reduced weight, can you list the advantages of neo over alnico?
I was thinking that there is no problem to choose proper loudspeakers for 1W power amp. They are not cheap, these could be (among many others) Montana or Klipcsh models.
Among russian diyers, there is one guru (Yuri Makarov) who crates 3W tube power amps, which's total weight approaches 500kg. Sound of his system, with Montana speakers (do not know exact model, its price is close to 80000USD), is recognized as the best on the territory of CIS countries.
There is problem with genuine quality of the first watt, not with speakers.
Among russian diyers, there is one guru (Yuri Makarov) who crates 3W tube power amps, which's total weight approaches 500kg. Sound of his system, with Montana speakers (do not know exact model, its price is close to 80000USD), is recognized as the best on the territory of CIS countries.
There is problem with genuine quality of the first watt, not with speakers.
hmmm.....with Neo.. there's plenty of advantages....the foremost is high flux, making it possible to make magnet structure that have less frontal/facial reflection area....
This fine thread should not be a lecture on loudspeakers, and I'am in forum for other reasons than to talk about speakers...but personally i don't think its difficult to get efficient speakers, problem is to find some that are true and in tune with music...(but that's another story)
This fine thread should not be a lecture on loudspeakers, and I'am in forum for other reasons than to talk about speakers...but personally i don't think its difficult to get efficient speakers, problem is to find some that are true and in tune with music...(but that's another story)
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
somethings strike me as crazy and this is one of them 😀
the amp weighs more than the rock band it's playing !
I'm curious as to how Yuri amp compares with Sakuma - battle of the giants ?
What is interesting, he explains and give all technical grounds to all the design features, from position of maximalism, of course. The more - the linear, more drive current - less parasitic effects, faradas electrolytics, etc.
I do not like the weight of my 8W 300B SE amp (65kg, made by NEM, Novosibirsk), they also prefer more, more iron, both for output trafos and for interstage trafos.
Speaking about the 4W buffer from this thread, it looks like a toy compared to tube monsters, and I prefer its sound compared to the 8W 300B SE.
I just have read about Sakuma concept, and he is more close to guys from NEM Novosibirsk (high quality trafos everywere), while Yuri Makarov stands for capacitive interstage links provided that driver capability is huge, and input impedance of consequent stage is low (signal info presented by interstage currents, not voltages). Voltages are easily distorted, while currents are not.
thune,
I can`t do that. It´s not a matter of topology, device type, varying signal, conventional or Ciuffioli bias and all that rubbish. Only a specified number of electrons can enter the path regardless of what is being generated, DC or AC, current or voltage, whereas electrons feel a force acting on them and an impedance in their way.
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
that's the wrong question, never ask a man to 'concede' 😀
the question is, where are the gaps in understanding here ?
in terms of electrons, I believe the key point being made is that that this design results in a more-or-less constant current draw from the power supply and so the supply of electrons is steady, flowing from the -ve rail through the amplifier and load to the +ve rail. In that journey the electrons divide up and take different paths where the impedance in their way varies with time in such a way that they all arrive at the +ve rail in-step, thus maintaining a steady flux.
the question is, where are the gaps in understanding here ?
in terms of electrons, I believe the key point being made is that that this design results in a more-or-less constant current draw from the power supply and so the supply of electrons is steady, flowing from the -ve rail through the amplifier and load to the +ve rail. In that journey the electrons divide up and take different paths where the impedance in their way varies with time in such a way that they all arrive at the +ve rail in-step, thus maintaining a steady flux.
Don't know why it seems so hard to grasp.
It's a single supply. There's a CCS between the reservoir capacitor's bottom plate and its top plate. In order to draw constant charge off the bottom plate, it has to be returned at a constant rate to the top plate.
The follower's in parallel with the load. So the only thing that changes is how that constant current is split between the follower and the load. In order for the current through the load to increase, current through the follower must decrease by the same amount. And vice versa.
Simple.
se
It's a single supply. There's a CCS between the reservoir capacitor's bottom plate and its top plate. In order to draw constant charge off the bottom plate, it has to be returned at a constant rate to the top plate.
The follower's in parallel with the load. So the only thing that changes is how that constant current is split between the follower and the load. In order for the current through the load to increase, current through the follower must decrease by the same amount. And vice versa.
Simple.
se
And elegant....and because the reference is the same below and above the shunt device...It becomes so device sensitive...but free from all other kinds of influence
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Vladimir, what's the difference between the 2P903A and the KP903A?
The former seems easier to obtain (from Russia and from Poland).
Guido.
P.s.: really a nice project!
There is no difference between them, the 2P903 means than military representatives participated in testing, i.e. they are considered as even more reliable.
In the same system, we listened to the jFET buffer from this thread (Zout=2,2 Ohms, idle current 1,2A) and to the similar buffer based on Mitsubisi RF MOSFETs RD100HHF1 (Zout=0,25 Ohms, idle current 2,8A).
Sound is obviously more extended and powerful with the last buffer, and seems to be even more detailed than with jFET buffer. But most people (including my wife) prefer jFET sound.
I thought about what could be a reason. I remembered sound of PS Audio Class D power amp, it seemed to be even more transparent, did accent on high frequency details. But, listening to it, one realises soon, that there is natural level of detality and transparency, and there is an artificially exaggerated level, with something extra additives, that finaly cause fast listening fatigue.
Maybe, people prefer, that sound would be free from any resemblance of harshness or unnatural, added detality.
Sound is obviously more extended and powerful with the last buffer, and seems to be even more detailed than with jFET buffer. But most people (including my wife) prefer jFET sound.
I thought about what could be a reason. I remembered sound of PS Audio Class D power amp, it seemed to be even more transparent, did accent on high frequency details. But, listening to it, one realises soon, that there is natural level of detality and transparency, and there is an artificially exaggerated level, with something extra additives, that finaly cause fast listening fatigue.
Maybe, people prefer, that sound would be free from any resemblance of harshness or unnatural, added detality.
Last edited:
In my view,
as long as the the bass is firm enough, a higher output impedance is advantageous for linearity. I`m suspicious about an accentuated brightness, a sign of high frequency disorder. Listening fatigue indicates grave phase errors.
as long as the the bass is firm enough, a higher output impedance is advantageous for linearity. I`m suspicious about an accentuated brightness, a sign of high frequency disorder. Listening fatigue indicates grave phase errors.
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
- Status
- Not open for further replies.