Hi all. I registered not so long ago to be able to see the attachments.....
And, sorry to say, but I find the les mod is not more but to much (had to work in that pun).....
I'm not going to post diagrams or detailed photo's. I don't want others to take credit for my work. I've seen that happen before. But I can tel you that there is a simpler way to do it than adding tubes and totally changing the layout.
Well I guess we'll have to take your word for it:0)
I would hope that diagrams and photos would show that your mod doesn't retain the lighting capacitors that Yaqin uses.
LesBox ftw
As I recall it, although the original reported problem was hum, the real issue is that the unmodified preamp is just a poor circuit. Simple replacing the components won't fix that. The Hi-Q rebuild, to a new and much better circuit, does fix that.Soundwise said:
I have no connection with the rebuild - I am not even a customer - but I can read and critique a circuit diagram.
Yep - you have to appreciate the historical facts.
1. Received an MS22B as part of a main amp purchase.
2. Experienced the hum issues and cured in similar fashion to Soundwise.
3. Expected the MS22B to outperform my home made unit which it failed to do in all respects.
4. Converted the MS22B to my home made design and WOW!
5. So amazed I wanted others to share and not interested in making money from it.
Yes there is a lot of work involved but the conversion appears very repeatable and everyone who has tried it - Loves it.
One can always reverse engineer it back to the original but I don't think anyone will do that once they hear the improvement.
1. Received an MS22B as part of a main amp purchase.
2. Experienced the hum issues and cured in similar fashion to Soundwise.
3. Expected the MS22B to outperform my home made unit which it failed to do in all respects.
4. Converted the MS22B to my home made design and WOW!
5. So amazed I wanted others to share and not interested in making money from it.
Yes there is a lot of work involved but the conversion appears very repeatable and everyone who has tried it - Loves it.
One can always reverse engineer it back to the original but I don't think anyone will do that once they hear the improvement.
Unfortunately I can not. So please elaborate. Why is it bad? I have a problem with ppl telling me what to do without telling me why. I'm curious by nature and I want to learn.
Cause and effect... A problem could be that it sounds bad. A poor circuit a cause. My ears tell me different though.
The improvements I made I can't capture in a diagram because it will be the same. The only real difference I made are the 2pcs 1uF outputcaps instead of 4pcs. But that changes absolutely nothing on the sound.
I also own a Jolida JD9 which is (much?) better and certainly more versatile. I've owned for about 7 years now and I have been steadily upgrading it, I've just now finished another big (rather bold) rework that is a first for me. The next step will be a complete tossaround of parts.
It certainly is a best buy (according to the reviews, one actually had my inside picture). If you buy a modified version it costs $850 up to $1800, most of which mods are just plain silly (I tested it!). Mine is closer to the latter. If I feed it with the Koetsu+transformer there is a difference, and I do prefer the Jolida, but not much. I could happily live with the Yaqin and it's 'poor circuit' and not feel I'm selling the Koetsu (costing way more that 25-fold) short.
What also puzzles me: I've just done an upgrade on the JD9 that is just the exact opposite of what Les' PDF said, but with argumentation (the diode stool under the gnd of the voltage regulator upping to 12.6V). Together with all the just plain silly mods I find all over the internet (including the JD9) I really don't know who to trust or what to think. The one thing I have learned is to trust my own judgment and insight.
I do not argue that the circuit is poor. I haven't encountered 1 good project from Yaqin yet. But if it can be improved to well above it's price with little effort, I'm happy. What I wanted to convey is: if you bought a MS22B and aren't satisfied but you not an electronics buff the 'les' mod could be way to much (to complicated). It certainly was for me and I am not a noob. I managed to obtain a very good result by using my head and with hardly an hours work (preparationtime excluded for the dodgy teflon wires and opening and closing the box).
Changing the tubes certainly is not much help. And I do appreciate the effort in making such a verbose manual. It just doesn't explain much...
Soundwise said:
If, as you admit, you can't read and critique a circuit diagram then I wonder what sort of 'insight' you have into phono preamps?Soundwise said:
Soundwise said:
Soundwise said:
This is a DIY site. Hi-Q has shared his rebuild freely. I'm not going to post a detailed critique. I don't want others to make money from my work.Soundwise said:
This question from someone who claims 'insight' into phono preamps, yet cannot recognise an RIAA network! People reading this may wish to reflect on the skill level of some of those commercially involved with audio.Soundwise said:
Last edited:
That last quote knocked me off my chair as well, it puts everything else into context I think.
I would like to add that some people have gone to their local shops and bought a soldering iron, solder sucker and PCB drills though they have never used such tools before. They have successfully done the conversions themselves and I really admire them for having a go. They know that I am only a keyboard away for getting help and can even send the PCB or the complete unit to me if they run into trouble, so eventual success is guaranteed whatever their skill level. I do not charge anything for this service as I just like to help people out whether it concerns the MS22B conversion or anything else. I can do a conversion in two evenings if I push myself and that includes full test including response plotting. The Yaqin MS22B circuit works brilliantly if you are feeding in single frequencies which is not often when playing vinyl, with a complex waveform going through it, simply put it is like asking someone to head a football and kick it at the same time. The conversion removes this problem and treats a complex wave input with the full RIAA correction one would expect across a mixed spectrum.
I would like to add that some people have gone to their local shops and bought a soldering iron, solder sucker and PCB drills though they have never used such tools before. They have successfully done the conversions themselves and I really admire them for having a go. They know that I am only a keyboard away for getting help and can even send the PCB or the complete unit to me if they run into trouble, so eventual success is guaranteed whatever their skill level. I do not charge anything for this service as I just like to help people out whether it concerns the MS22B conversion or anything else. I can do a conversion in two evenings if I push myself and that includes full test including response plotting. The Yaqin MS22B circuit works brilliantly if you are feeding in single frequencies which is not often when playing vinyl, with a complex waveform going through it, simply put it is like asking someone to head a football and kick it at the same time. The conversion removes this problem and treats a complex wave input with the full RIAA correction one would expect across a mixed spectrum.
Last edited:
I would be one of those you described. BTW, I love my solder sucker, never used one before.
As for going too far, I don't think so. Sure, it seems daunting for someone that has never done it before, it was to me, but all it takes is one step at a time and the instructions are very clear. Quite frankly, I was scared to do this, but I cowboyed up and have never regretted it. In fact, my head got real big afterwards. Now I think I can do anything!
Seriously, with DIY, labor is free and the parts are inexpensive, the improvement is way beyond expectations, what's not to like?
Hi Ciao, Like others, I have tried ECC81 and ECC82 as well as ECC83 just as an experiment. The effects of different types can be heard and some prefer an alternative to the ECC83. I am myself quite happy with the use of three ECC83's in the amplifiers I have made, whether they are MS22-B conversions or hard wired examples. I suppose it is all down to ones personal preference.
Ciao, I found an unused NOS Mullard ECC81 in my spares cupboard. Could not resist trying it in one of my hand wired units and yes, the Bass has slightly improved and it sounds very nice. I can tell by listening that the ECC81 has swapped Bass for a little top 'air' but I'll give it a go and see how it works out.
P.S. I always thought computers were bad for your health but a decent RIAA amp and Vinyl is definitely worse, I want to keep listening when I should be in bed
P.S. I always thought computers were bad for your health but a decent RIAA amp and Vinyl is definitely worse, I want to keep listening when I should be in bed
Last edited:
Hi,
LOL.
The better bass performance comes as no surprise to me, that makes sense.
I'm somewhat surprised at the subjective loss of top air as the ECC81 should provide for a much more extended HF band than the ECC83 ever could.
It would be nice if both CFs could be measured for distortion and bandwidth.
Another good candidate would be the ubiquitous ECC82.
Either way the bias voltages and grid leak resistors may well need some optimisation for best results as well.
Another idea that may well yield a nice improvement would to replace the electrolytic B+ decoupling caps for some nice polyprops, or bypassing them with say 5 microF or so.
Either way I see room for further improvement which always a good thing. (If not I get bored with it.)
Thanks for taking the effort and BTW the name is Frank.
Cheers,
P.S. I always thought computers were bad for your health but a decent RIAA amp and Vinyl is definitely worse, I want to keep listening when I should be in bed
LOL.
The better bass performance comes as no surprise to me, that makes sense.
I'm somewhat surprised at the subjective loss of top air as the ECC81 should provide for a much more extended HF band than the ECC83 ever could.
It would be nice if both CFs could be measured for distortion and bandwidth.
Another good candidate would be the ubiquitous ECC82.
Either way the bias voltages and grid leak resistors may well need some optimisation for best results as well.
Another idea that may well yield a nice improvement would to replace the electrolytic B+ decoupling caps for some nice polyprops, or bypassing them with say 5 microF or so.
Either way I see room for further improvement which always a good thing. (If not I get bored with it.
)Thanks for taking the effort and BTW the name is Frank.
Cheers,
Hi Frank, well my young friend popped in to see me while I had some Mike Oldfield playing on Vinyl. "What have you done" he exclaimed, "Where is all the life?". I told him I had swapped the CF for an ECC81 so quickly replaced the original ECC83. "Ah all the magic is back" he quickly exalted, so there you go. Mind you, it is not just an ECC83, this is one of the quickly being bought up Winged =C= 12AX7's. They have gone from £6 each to £13 each, no doubt my fault for telling the world how great they sound. Langrex is the supplier, I think he must be getting on for 800 sold now and not many left, anyway that's my excuse and reason for keeping the 12AX7 in there. In fact I just bought another six to add to my stock of 14. I need to get some more before they all go, I just don't know why this valve should sound so good as a cathode follower in my phono amps, could it all be down to its silver coloured Nickel Anodes? My friend has reminded me that we did all these tests long ago with most types of revered valve including a genuine NOS Mullard but the winged =C= just blew them all away. Why? Remains the unanswered question Frank, we cannot measure it unless perhaps someone lets me borrow a multi thousand Pound analyser. I am most certain that if you were here now you would be just as confused as I and all my friends are. Also bear in mind that the MS22-B conversions were just to raise its performance to what I thought was an acceptable level, not ever meant to be the worlds best by any means, yet others you have done the work will tell you it is indeed a tremendous transformation. Someone said it used too many parts now, well it uses 5 extra resistors but 4 less capacitors. If you were to be a bit crafty and say 1 valve now replaces 2 Transistors then I guess the component count is the same. For those you wish to criticise the conversion (not you Frank ), you must hear a converted unit first and then perhaps you will see it all in a different light. Enjoy your music everyone whatever you are using and a happy 2014. Regards Les
For those you wish to criticise the conversion (not you Frank ), you must hear a converted unit first and then perhaps you will see it all in a different light. Enjoy your music everyone whatever you are using and a happy 2014. Regards Les
Hi Les,
As some of the older tube aficionados around here may remember I used to import/export valves until the mid Nineties.
I well remember the first batches of 12ax7 we tested and listen to when they arrived in Europe.
They were excellent indeed, much better than the current WA, WB and what have you coming form other plant in Russia.
Another one that's become extremely hard to come by and is equally great is the old Voshkod 12AX7.
That being said, I'm afraid I have no logical explanation as to why this 12AX7 sounds so great in this particular instance (CF). Lower Miller capacitance perhaps. Just guessing.
Sure enough, I can fully understand that you need to stop somewhere when tweaking this circuit. Space limitations and diminishing returns etc.
Of course if you let me have a go at it I'd turn it into a little gas factory in no time: valve regulated PSUs for each channel/stage etc., etc.
Anyways, cheers for the kind reply and do keep up the good work,
Ciao ,
As some of the older tube aficionados around here may remember I used to import/export valves until the mid Nineties.
I well remember the first batches of 12ax7 we tested and listen to when they arrived in Europe.
They were excellent indeed, much better than the current WA, WB and what have you coming form other plant in Russia.
Another one that's become extremely hard to come by and is equally great is the old Voshkod 12AX7.
That being said, I'm afraid I have no logical explanation as to why this 12AX7 sounds so great in this particular instance (CF). Lower Miller capacitance perhaps. Just guessing.
Sure enough, I can fully understand that you need to stop somewhere when tweaking this circuit. Space limitations and diminishing returns etc.
Of course if you let me have a go at it I'd turn it into a little gas factory in no time: valve regulated PSUs for each channel/stage etc., etc.
Anyways, cheers for the kind reply and do keep up the good work,
Ciao ,
Well, I must say I feel really welcome here...
It seems some people can handle criticism very well and are very helpfull. It seems the ability to make elaborate quotes and the ability to read are mutually exclusive. Like I said in my last post, I do understand a RIAA network. But I wonder; do you? You never read my question. It feels really great to be quoted out of context and see my words twisted. Why the hostility and arrogance? I am just trying to understand something.
Why you claim to be right without explanation while others on other fora do the exact opposite with substantiation.
I don't think I'm going to waste any more time here trying to help. I know I can be clumsy in expressing myself but that's no reason to act like an ***.
Who said I was commercially involved in audio? Can you even read? Oh, and commerce and engineering are 2 different things. Oh well. Maybe if I were smart like you I would just copy your work and sell 'as is'. It's perfect anyway, so why change it. I think $900 would be a just price. I might sell a couple of 1000. Thanks for the free PDF. FYI: this was sarcastic.
It seems some people can handle criticism very well and are very helpfull. It seems the ability to make elaborate quotes and the ability to read are mutually exclusive. Like I said in my last post, I do understand a RIAA network. But I wonder; do you? You never read my question. It feels really great to be quoted out of context and see my words twisted. Why the hostility and arrogance? I am just trying to understand something.
Why you claim to be right without explanation while others on other fora do the exact opposite with substantiation.
I don't think I'm going to waste any more time here trying to help. I know I can be clumsy in expressing myself but that's no reason to act like an ***.