Michel, we have to double current, not voltage, surely I explained badly, my problema is to use two (slightly) different voltage trafo putting in parallel two windings per branch, not in series. If amp worked with one trafo at 25+25 volt, with two trafos it must work still at 25+25 volt
In this situation of a stereo amplifier with originally 1 transformer but expanding with a second transformer one would use 1 transformer per channel. Not in parallel feeding 2 channels, where is the benefit in doing that!? And using 2 unequal transformers in parallel is silly. Using 2 slightly unequal transformers in 1 per channel mode is then also better (for a second reason).
Also the advice to make a drawing as words can be interpreted wrongly.
Also the advice to make a drawing as words can be interpreted wrongly.
Last edited:
I was amazed when I saw this type of design, especially seeing that the structure of the motherboard would easily allow dual mono circuitry. The explanation I gave myself is that, if the nature of the audio signals were perfectly symmetrical in intensity and phase for both channels, then it would not make sense to put the two transformers in parallel and dual mono design would have offered a better separation between the channels, but since music is anything but symmetrical between channels, then a peak in current demand for one channel can use up the current reserve not instantly used by the other channel, not possible in dual mono design. I don't know if my assumption is true but I can guarantee that the addition of the second transformer (albeit with the problem of the voltage step) with the parallel secondaries technique has given a great improvement to the sound performance of this toy, which drives the CS2 .4 with extreme ease and fluency.
I think also that this hybrid structure (between dual mono and common supply unit) with separation just after the virtually unique trafo in two separate channels with individual bridges and levelling banks, helps much in channels separation.
Of course, here's the transformed amp:
Trafo on the right is the factory one, that on the left is the added one with +1.2 per branch higher voltage.
Trafo on the right is the factory one, that on the left is the added one with +1.2 per branch higher voltage.
Everything is so desperatly french in this amp... 😐
These transformers remind me of a certain era at Philips Marantz B&O.
These transformers remind me of a certain era at Philips Marantz B&O.
Nothing against the french or La France (on the contrary) but concerning audio electronics I know what you mean 😇
Another thing I've found 'amazing' is that all internal cablage (minimal in effects) was made using the same wire tipology, a very thin single filament copper wire, for everything, power supply, audio inputs, audio outputs, 220 volts and led, everything with the same thin mono filament, which seems to have perhaps a good insulation material.
To this extraordinary 'uniformity' I couldn't find any explanation yet..!
To this extraordinary 'uniformity' I couldn't find any explanation yet..!
230
You mean solid wire? This was in fashion in the eighties/nineties at some brands but it has drawbacks too. Electricians do not like it because it may break in time. It is not suitable for wiring in vibrating environments.
It is surprising how much current can be pushed through thin wiring. You know as the second transformer made the difference with extra possible current. The iron and copper loss tests at school come to mind 🙂 Paralleling different 3 Phase transformers with different clock numbers. Oof.
You mean solid wire? This was in fashion in the eighties/nineties at some brands but it has drawbacks too. Electricians do not like it because it may break in time. It is not suitable for wiring in vibrating environments.
It is surprising how much current can be pushed through thin wiring. You know as the second transformer made the difference with extra possible current. The iron and copper loss tests at school come to mind 🙂 Paralleling different 3 Phase transformers with different clock numbers. Oof.
Last edited:
Sure, solid thin wire..! Somebody however already told me something about oddity of this amp's (or same brand others' too, maybe, I don't know) cablage. I must say the the sonic result is however really interesting, despite those things.
What may be the difference between this C-core and a R-core which maybe I've found in commerce? Are C-core replaceable by R-core maintaining the same good sonic results?
Here's an useful article by AudioExpress.
Last edited:
Yves Bernard André is a very pragmatic person, if he made this choice, there must be a reason.
I don't like the way his devices are made but I have a lot of respect for the person.
I don't like the way his devices are made but I have a lot of respect for the person.
Please explain why. I don’t know the man and I only know a few of the products but they are a niche in a niche it seems. Just like Micromega.
RM,
I am mostly interested by the transformers but can tale the amp card as well.
Please contact me at: hifiservice at b2b2c dot ca
I am mostly interested by the transformers but can tale the amp card as well.
Please contact me at: hifiservice at b2b2c dot ca
Thank you very much! I fear that yours are quite older than mine and for this may be different. Maybe I could think to substitute both mine with a matched new pair of R-core of pretty much VA (as 2x300), quite easy to find in commerce, and give amp an even more rock solid supply.
Would you post some info about your 1000 amp, if you prefer on PM because I could be interested in buying It.
