Buzz: Have you built or simmed this circuit? Power supply ripple on the negative rail might be a serious problem. Since the circuit is balanced, it will cancel most of the ripple.
No. I built the more cumbersome, two transformer version and cannot be more happy. This has serious potential as well, based on what i am hearing. ZM has simmed it and i trust what he says.
lhquam is right ; I was avare of that from first moment when I go down with modulation ..... but I think it is small price having offset to gnd modulated with ripple , if we can go through just one core with signal
whatever - Bzzzzz will soon ( hopefully ) compare two things and then we'll know
in a meantime , we can search for 6-fillar wound repeater
if boyz from Jensen made 4-fillar , maybe they already have 6-fillar or can be asked to make it 😉
that one will be ideal for proper full bal F6 , with no flaws
whatever - Bzzzzz will soon ( hopefully ) compare two things and then we'll know
in a meantime , we can search for 6-fillar wound repeater
if boyz from Jensen made 4-fillar , maybe they already have 6-fillar or can be asked to make it 😉
that one will be ideal for proper full bal F6 , with no flaws
I love flaws. What about talking to BudP. Tell em what I need and I assume the third set is for the input pair. It will allow droppping the caps in signal path, correct. I thnk Jensen may have one already.
but wait ......... there is mooooore thinking needed to have it properly
nothing yet finished , so - please no ordering
nothing yet finished , so - please no ordering
Speakers and preamp are next. We are in theory mode. I am thinking of way to do ,ulti board for first and second versions.
Just keep in mind that transformers are summing devices What one winding finds will affect all. All "secondaries" and "primaries" talk among themselves, so be very certain that you do not build a resonance circuit across 5 or more windings.
As an addendum, we don't usually build multifilar wound transformers. This format does provide nice, civil, linear responding devices, just like nice, civil, linear responding power transformers do. I prefer to make meta stable devices. They do not measure as well, they are not civil and they will respond to every half wave with the enthusiasm that linear transformers can muster for only the first half wave of any sinusoidal event.
Doesn't mean I won't make a 6 filar transformer. They will not oscillate in resonance, by the way. They will still be metastable, but the E Field coupling, hence ALL of the internal gradient information for tones and transients will be somewhat compromised.
Metastable here means always returning to B zero at the same time that H reaches zero, so every half wave has that funny looking little initiating squiggle that you see on the hysteresis plots of nice, civil, linear transformers for the initial movement from their rest. These squiggles are present for each half of a square wave also.....
Bud
As an addendum, we don't usually build multifilar wound transformers. This format does provide nice, civil, linear responding devices, just like nice, civil, linear responding power transformers do. I prefer to make meta stable devices. They do not measure as well, they are not civil and they will respond to every half wave with the enthusiasm that linear transformers can muster for only the first half wave of any sinusoidal event.
Doesn't mean I won't make a 6 filar transformer. They will not oscillate in resonance, by the way. They will still be metastable, but the E Field coupling, hence ALL of the internal gradient information for tones and transients will be somewhat compromised.
Metastable here means always returning to B zero at the same time that H reaches zero, so every half wave has that funny looking little initiating squiggle that you see on the hysteresis plots of nice, civil, linear transformers for the initial movement from their rest. These squiggles are present for each half of a square wave also.....
Bud
OK guyzzz
made it - proper balanced , either with 5-fiillar or 6-fillar
or , to not put a foot in BudP's territory - I don't care are they *-fillar or sectioned , as long they're good
I have no intention , same as I didn't had cojones any time before , to mess with Black Art .....
so , to put it in other way - proper balanced is possible with both 5 and 6 identical windings on one core
problem is - no so called summing feedback node ( two 18R resistors coneccted together and being one to another virtual gnd ) but instead of that - inverting feedback net must be used ;
but - as we already wrote before and BudP confirmed - everything is summing up through common core for all windings
are you guys interested in schmtcs ?
they're , shortly said , pretty much same as that previously posted one , except added one , or two , input modulating windings
made it - proper balanced , either with 5-fiillar or 6-fillar
or , to not put a foot in BudP's territory - I don't care are they *-fillar or sectioned , as long they're good
I have no intention , same as I didn't had cojones any time before , to mess with Black Art .....
so , to put it in other way - proper balanced is possible with both 5 and 6 identical windings on one core
problem is - no so called summing feedback node ( two 18R resistors coneccted together and being one to another virtual gnd ) but instead of that - inverting feedback net must be used ;
but - as we already wrote before and BudP confirmed - everything is summing up through common core for all windings
are you guys interested in schmtcs ?
they're , shortly said , pretty much same as that previously posted one , except added one , or two , input modulating windings
Last edited:
disclaimer(s) :
- sim made by Mighty ZM , so ........ be warned !
- best feedback values/ratio yet to be determined ..... preferably in vivo
somehow , I think I prefer more 5-windings iteration
gnd is , anyway , just state of mind
- sim made by Mighty ZM , so ........ be warned !
- best feedback values/ratio yet to be determined ..... preferably in vivo
somehow , I think I prefer more 5-windings iteration
gnd is , anyway , just state of mind
Attachments
If they must be truely balanced, inductance, capacitance and DCR then they must be fillar wound. Difference between 5 or 6 in hand is incidental to cost or size. What might be good to think on is how much inductance is really needed and how do the inductance's per node sum to the core, in the circuit? In addition, how linear does the inductance need to be from 20 Hz to 3.5 kHz, where 48% nickle core gives up and quits work?
other than no complaints into the in box, I have no idea what buzz's experience has been, and do I not see 6 coil positions on the schematic? O are you referring to what I consider primary / secondary as the 5th repeater?
Bud,
Im too dumb to know what to tell ya. If ZM can provide info, ill be buying some. If you gotta use more expensive cores, so be it. This amp is worth it to me.
I just built more(possibly uneccesarily) complicated version, that sounds fantastic. It contains two of your transformers in a bridged setup. ZM has proposed two singl transformer versions. One is included in schema above. I would like to build it and prfer your work.
to Budp:
I'm saying that , taking all in account , 5-coils version will be good enough if you can make it in same quality as those 4-coil ones , you already sent to Buzzforb
Buzz - in post #4074 , left one is 5-coil , right one is 6-coil iteration
I'm saying that , taking all in account , 5-coils version will be good enough if you can make it in same quality as those 4-coil ones , you already sent to Buzzforb
Buzz - in post #4074 , left one is 5-coil , right one is 6-coil iteration