Slewmaster - CFA vs. VFA "Rumble"

SPOOKY LEACH

Hello
greetings trying to make spooky leach IPS i am following post #1400
along with blue pcb modifications can any one please check if it is
correct on the pink pcb component layout i have posted i have waited
for a long time to make spooky leach at that time components were
not available in my city now i have all the components to make it
warm regards
Andrew
 

Attachments

  • SpookyV1.2final Modify1.JPG
    SpookyV1.2final Modify1.JPG
    247 KB · Views: 663
  • SPOOKY.jpg
    SPOOKY.jpg
    589.6 KB · Views: 662
  • SPOOKYAMPV1.3proof.JPG
    SPOOKYAMPV1.3proof.JPG
    242.5 KB · Views: 654
SPOOKY LEACH

Hello
greetings R26/R30 schematic shows Q12 emitter going direct to Q11
collector if this was a modification i cant find values of the above
mentioned resistors can anyone help me PLEASE
warm regards
Andrew😕
 

Attachments

  • spooky schema.JPG
    spooky schema.JPG
    143.8 KB · Views: 706
From what I've seen CFAs are superior in the high frequency detail and VFAs are the bass kings. Which one sounds better depends on your own tastes and the speakers you are connecting them to. Bi-amping might be the best of both worlds.

Great reply. Thank you.

Actually, I am doing just that --- Bi-Amping a pair of JBL M2's but both drivers with CFA's..



thx-RNMarsh
 
Last edited:
Thanks for posting something interesting and intelligent (and a lot of work!). Too much nonsense in DIYA just gets depressing. I'm still figuring out the real cost/benefit of each circuit feature, and I have a hard time proving much that isn't "blameless". One thing I don't see much is a low-Z (~50 Ohms)@high freq feedback network, in VFA, which is done in CFAs for other reasons. Every other pole except the dominant pole should be pushed as high as is practical? The GLASUI numbers are impressive but I wonder if that isn't just pushing more gain/feedback? What is the GLASUI phase margin?
 
Thanks for posting something interesting and intelligent (and a lot of work!). Too much nonsense in DIYA just gets depressing. I'm still figuring out the real cost/benefit of each circuit feature, and I have a hard time proving much that isn't "blameless". One thing I don't see much is a low-Z (~50 Ohms)@high freq feedback network, in VFA, which is done in CFAs for other reasons. Every other pole except the dominant pole should be pushed as high as is practical? The GLASUI numbers are impressive but I wonder if that isn't just pushing more gain/feedback? What is the GLASUI phase margin?


The CFA's low z feedback pushes the poles and unity gain point into the mhz.
No lead compensation and minimal miller is required to retain stability.
The drawback is inferior PSRR (low Z). CFA + an advanced SMPS would
be golden 😀 .


"blameless" and the "sui" , unity gain is several hundred khz. With VFA's ,
you have to battle between usable gain up to 50khz and maintaining >80 degree margin for stability.
Miller capacitance and Cob is much more critical for VFA's.
VFA's are PSRR winners , due to the high Z FB.

Edit - "sui' uses a 2 stage differential for 120db LF gain , harder to keep stable.
It is the one design where I had trouble with stability in the first version.
Sansui used lead compensation to maintain margin in the old 70's design.

ALL the slewmasters are "derated for stability" , with 80+ degree phase margins.
One could use smaller capacitance's to raise unity gain and decrease THD
further. <20ppm @ 20khz and a non-ringing square wave was the design target
for all the slewmasters (cfa or vfa).
OS
 
Last edited:
From what I've seen CFAs are superior in the high frequency detail and VFAs are the bass kings. Which one sounds better depends on your own tastes and the speakers you are connecting them to. Bi-amping might be the best of both worlds.


I have always suspected that the back EMF of the woofer is more "transparent"
in the low Z feedback of a CFA.
Perhaps the fact that a VFA is more isolated from this affects its performance
in the "bass king" area ?






OS
 
OS;
What do you think about inverting the middle transistor in your 3EF? ie NPN, PNP,NPN and vise-versa. This can make ~=3EF compatible with Darlington circuits. But I agree that monolithic amps belong at Walmart.

I notice you don't seem concerned with OPS saturation; wasted VPP and heat? I suppose you are not designing 12V automotive amps.

And what about MOS outputs? In my day (~1980) BJTs died a lot so I like MOS SOA. But seems like some linear MOS circuits have no drivers and therefore slew problems? 100mA+ VAS current is not very practical.
 
Last edited: