After years of using Shunt HV and Series HV for tubes I noticed:
Shunt HV: the sound off treble is more shimmer and clarity.
The midrange is also clear and coherent.
Less noise Series HV
Series HV has a much more emotional sound and is very emotional.
the middle sound is sweeter and more emotional
that's my comparison
Quanghao
What do you think of CLCLC HV type??
I like series regulator as it sounds quite good on the midrange. The shunt is more clarity but not sound as creamy.
Hi,
a serie regulator strives keeping its output voltage constant.
As such it is working in antiphase to the attached amplifier in voltage terms.
The shunt regulator is also working in antiphase but current wise.
To be able to do this it equires a series constant current pass element.
In both cases two different amplifiers -the reg and the attached amplifier- work in antiphase with differing responses in almost any respect (bandwidth, phase, step response, etc).
I don´t see any reason to assume that only one of both reg types leaves its sonic fingerprint, especially when the behaviour of the constant current source needs to be considered in the shunt reg´s situation also.
Wether one prefers a series reg or a shunt reg is probabely a matter of personal taste and the quality of implementation of the circuit in that special application and not of a inherent sonic superiority of one topology.
I prefer series regs due to their inherently better efficiency, widespread availability and costs.
jauu
Calvin
a serie regulator strives keeping its output voltage constant.
As such it is working in antiphase to the attached amplifier in voltage terms.
The shunt regulator is also working in antiphase but current wise.
To be able to do this it equires a series constant current pass element.
In both cases two different amplifiers -the reg and the attached amplifier- work in antiphase with differing responses in almost any respect (bandwidth, phase, step response, etc).
I don´t see any reason to assume that only one of both reg types leaves its sonic fingerprint, especially when the behaviour of the constant current source needs to be considered in the shunt reg´s situation also.
Wether one prefers a series reg or a shunt reg is probabely a matter of personal taste and the quality of implementation of the circuit in that special application and not of a inherent sonic superiority of one topology.
I prefer series regs due to their inherently better efficiency, widespread availability and costs.
jauu
Calvin
I thought we were talking about audio, not coleslaw...
The main difference is a series regulator is more efficient than a shunt regulator. A shunt regulator is simpler but wastes power.
IMHO, I always find the series regulator sounds quicker in terms of transient but the shunt has more texture and marginal more clarity.
You should make PSRR, output impedance, line regulation, noise output, and transient response of the series and shunt regulator are SAME. If those are not same, it is useless comparison. Two series regulator which the design are different can have different sonic signature because their specifications are different.
IMO, it is exactly the opposite. Sonic signature of LC or RC power supply is glaringly obvious. Proper series or shunt regulators have minimal sonic signature and what listener perceives as glaring difference is that absence of coloration in comparison to unregulated PS.
Completely another issue is what we prefer.
Afraid you've taken this out of context. I was referring to the audibility of the regulating element of shunt vs series regulators and not comparing this to the lack of regulation.
As for the LCLC sonic signature... it is certainly there, no argument. I always use an LC input, even when followed with a shunt reg. Would gladly remove it, but so far have not come across a regulator circuit that does justice to the music on its own.
Some people always prefer the sound of multistage LC filtering. I am not one of them. Otoh, there are particular situations where the lack of regulation seems sonically preferable. One just needs to keep an open mind, not follow a formula and make productive use of one's ears.
As for the LCLC sonic signature... it is certainly there, no argument. I always use an LC input, even when followed with a shunt reg. Would gladly remove it, but so far have not come across a regulator circuit that does justice to the music on its own.
Some people always prefer the sound of multistage LC filtering. I am not one of them. Otoh, there are particular situations where the lack of regulation seems sonically preferable. One just needs to keep an open mind, not follow a formula and make productive use of one's ears.
yes, CLCLC HV type, have natural sound , but need best cap for all.
yesn shunt , i think only best for DAC ,
thanks
Now ancient history, I did an experiment for Jan and wrote it up in LinearAudio -- you can have great "figures of merit", PSRR, Impedance and Noise, but distortion from the error amplifier puts harmonics onto the rails. If you have a line stage with poor PSRR you can readily hear the difference. In this case we used Erno Borbely's all JFET line amp (-40dB PSRR) powered by 13 regulators for a lengthy listening test. The AD797 used as error amp in the original 1995 Walt Jung TAA article sounded best, followed by Per Ander's "Sjostrom" using the AD825.
I would imagine that an HV regulator should follow the same principals. I have a collection of HV regulators from all the usual suspects (SY, Jones, Blencowe, etc. and the designs from the Audio Research Database)....someday.
I would imagine that an HV regulator should follow the same principals. I have a collection of HV regulators from all the usual suspects (SY, Jones, Blencowe, etc. and the designs from the Audio Research Database)....someday.
Last edited: