The thermistor is between chassis (AC Earth) and signal
ground.
Also, I quoted the stereo current figures. The monoblocks are
more like 40A.
😎
ground.
Also, I quoted the stereo current figures. The monoblocks are
more like 40A.
😎
Looking at the picture again, thats how an amp should be build😎 If I win the lottery some day......
😀
Nice trick, placing the ampboard high in the case at the rearend, moving it as far away from the AC as possible.
I wonder how big that trafo is, looks like a 6-800VA to me, and what are the railvoltage's of a beast like that?
Darn Manu, now I have got the "itch"😀
Steen🙂
😀 Nice trick, placing the ampboard high in the case at the rearend, moving it as far away from the AC as possible.
I wonder how big that trafo is, looks like a 6-800VA to me, and what are the railvoltage's of a beast like that?
Darn Manu, now I have got the "itch"😀
Steen🙂
Steener,
more like +1000VA, it's a 6.3" diameter toroid, look at the fast JAPANESE
Looks like the P still hasn't run out of J109/K389s.
I wonder what the cascode transistors on the UGS5 board are, they look like TO-126. The heatsinks on the 2d stage look mighty strange.
Going full circle by returning to PP Null,brilliant. To me, this one is likely the last amp i'd live with.
(ps, i reckon us Northern Euro turds are the only ones for whom the word for Zero is Null )
more like +1000VA, it's a 6.3" diameter toroid, look at the fast JAPANESE
Looks like the P still hasn't run out of J109/K389s.
I wonder what the cascode transistors on the UGS5 board are, they look like TO-126. The heatsinks on the 2d stage look mighty strange.
Going full circle by returning to PP Null,brilliant. To me, this one is likely the last amp i'd live with.
(ps, i reckon us Northern Euro turds are the only ones for whom the word for Zero is Null )
steenoe said:
why I'm not surprised?
jacco vermeulen said:
krazy dutchie.......Serbian for zero is "nula" .........
btw
Steen is another one who talks sheeeeeeeeeet like ZM and Baobabwanna.......all the time
Choke,
oprosti mi, i forgot that your lingo backyard is even closer to the latin motherland.
You Serbian sheet have an idea on the cascode Q's on the UGS5 pic ?
oprosti mi, i forgot that your lingo backyard is even closer to the latin motherland.
You Serbian sheet have an idea on the cascode Q's on the UGS5 pic ?
The Japanese spec says that the operating temperature is 53 degC above ambient at idle. So much??
jacco vermeulen said:
why are you so sure that's UGS like we are used to see it?
and why you are so sure that Papa use cascodes at all in it?
think trice before you reply
Zen Mod said:Steen is another one who talks sheeeeeeeeeet like ZM and Baobabwanna.......all the time
That explains how I make my body clean . . . Ha ha ha!
I was wondering about that, too. Thats a pretty hot amp on a summers evening. Maybe the japanese got some numbers wrong?Babowana said:The Japanese spec says that the operating temperature is 53 degC above ambient at idle. So much??
At 483x545 mm's the amp is bigger than I thought, thats why the trafo size had me cheated.
Keep up the sheeeety talk🙂 We dont want to get bored, do we😀 Fun is the name of the game🙂
Steen🙂
Just a couple silly questions:
i would like to know accordingly with the schematic attached on the fist pages...but in general... how can i deduct the operational Class A range?
Is this design a pure Class A over the entire input/output range?
Where would i attach a probe on the circuit diagram if i would want to verify eather it's working in Class A or Class A/B?
One last question: what is the typical input range at the power amplifier? (2Vpk?!)
Thanks in advance.
Best,
Stefano.
i would like to know accordingly with the schematic attached on the fist pages...but in general... how can i deduct the operational Class A range?
Is this design a pure Class A over the entire input/output range?
Where would i attach a probe on the circuit diagram if i would want to verify eather it's working in Class A or Class A/B?
One last question: what is the typical input range at the power amplifier? (2Vpk?!)
Thanks in advance.
Best,
Stefano.
steenoe said:
yeah
from now you can call me "Bonsai..who one day will became Drakar"
edit:
time for yidish.......
use drek
Hi Stefano,
I will assume that you are referring to the AX100 schematic at the beginning of this thread.
This is a version of the Aleph-X and so it is a pure class A design. Because of the Aleph CCS the design does not switch into class AB. If the output load drops too low the circuit will current limit, instead of switching into class AB to supply more current. Actually the current output will drop as the load impedance decreases. Therefore there is no point on the schematic that can be monitored for a class A/AB switchover.
I hope that this answers your question.
Cheers,
Graeme
I will assume that you are referring to the AX100 schematic at the beginning of this thread.
This is a version of the Aleph-X and so it is a pure class A design. Because of the Aleph CCS the design does not switch into class AB. If the output load drops too low the circuit will current limit, instead of switching into class AB to supply more current. Actually the current output will drop as the load impedance decreases. Therefore there is no point on the schematic that can be monitored for a class A/AB switchover.
I hope that this answers your question.
Cheers,
Graeme
To the moderators,
This thread is starting to become noisy.
I would like to suggest that the recent discussion on the XA100.5 be removed from this thread and made into a new thread. Perhaps these posts could be placed on an existing thread like one of the sticky ones at the top of the page.
Thank you,
Graeme
This thread is starting to become noisy.
I would like to suggest that the recent discussion on the XA100.5 be removed from this thread and made into a new thread. Perhaps these posts could be placed on an existing thread like one of the sticky ones at the top of the page.
Thank you,
Graeme
yes it does, thanks.
i'm actually modelling the circuit to be able to find good values for the different parts.
Those are some of the results that i got so far, if anybody wants to comment them is welcome:
1- i found to be a good value for the four paralleled resistors on the output in total 0.22ohm (so a little higher). This value increases the frequency response a little bit.
2- i found to be a good value for the capacitors on the feedback path (C4 and C2) exactly 11pf (unfortunally this value doesn't exist so 10pf will be ok eather way).
Since i think, point 2, that this caps can affect the quality of the sound, i would like to find a very good capacitor like a jensen, but i can't find it for this low value. any ideas?
Best,
Stefano.
i'm actually modelling the circuit to be able to find good values for the different parts.
Those are some of the results that i got so far, if anybody wants to comment them is welcome:
1- i found to be a good value for the four paralleled resistors on the output in total 0.22ohm (so a little higher). This value increases the frequency response a little bit.
2- i found to be a good value for the capacitors on the feedback path (C4 and C2) exactly 11pf (unfortunally this value doesn't exist so 10pf will be ok eather way).
Since i think, point 2, that this caps can affect the quality of the sound, i would like to find a very good capacitor like a jensen, but i can't find it for this low value. any ideas?
Best,
Stefano.
Stefanoo said:
Sure . . . I have no idea.
Anyhow, your joke is well matching with either the jensen cap or the backgate.
Hi Stefano,
It is my understanding and my experience that these feedback caps are not required for this circuit to operate correctly. The caps are also not audible if present or absent. It is my understanding that NP adds these caps just to polish up the square wave output performance as seen on a scope. This is the type of thing that improves magazine reviews - not sound.
My opinion is that these caps are not worth worrying about.
Cheers,
Graeme
It is my understanding and my experience that these feedback caps are not required for this circuit to operate correctly. The caps are also not audible if present or absent. It is my understanding that NP adds these caps just to polish up the square wave output performance as seen on a scope. This is the type of thing that improves magazine reviews - not sound.
My opinion is that these caps are not worth worrying about.
Cheers,
Graeme
aleph 1.2's to AX100
GL and Grey, I reread several articles for calculating Class A opreration so I could perhaps approach 160 to 200 watts output from the XA100. Since as GL has noted the wattage drops as the load impedance drops. However the calculations that I did were for a normal PP type class A. So I fudged abit and came up with 42 volt rails but with a total of 5 amps of bias. If I look at the just the XA 100 I get the following:
assume 60volts peak to peak of a bridged balanced design
I (bias) = 1/2V/R(load)
I= 1/2x60/8=3.75amps--this is where my Aleph is set at.
VRMS output=60v/1.41=42.6volts
IRMS output=3.75A/1.41=2.65A
WRMS=42.6x2.65=112watts
P(disipation at idle)=2x60x3.75=450watts
Ok if I got that right then if I use 80V p to p
Ibias=1/2x80/8=5amps
IRMS=5/1.41=3.54A rms
VRMS=80/1.41=56V rms
Wrms=3.54A x 56V=200.9watts
P(disipation at idle)=2x80x5=800watts
My confusion is that this is a single ended and I would set the voltage rails at +/-40V. If I am splitting up my 24 out put devices into quads that means the 5amps/12=416ma per device. This may be pushing things a bit. Again the calculations may be wrong because in the PP world I would use 40 not 80volts in the calculations as the power is shared with N and P channel fets.
Do you think that I have done these calcs correctly?
I saw the quiet Plitron transformers for audio use on their web site for a 2kva is over $500 bucks. This could put a dent into my thinking.
GL and Grey, I reread several articles for calculating Class A opreration so I could perhaps approach 160 to 200 watts output from the XA100. Since as GL has noted the wattage drops as the load impedance drops. However the calculations that I did were for a normal PP type class A. So I fudged abit and came up with 42 volt rails but with a total of 5 amps of bias. If I look at the just the XA 100 I get the following:
assume 60volts peak to peak of a bridged balanced design
I (bias) = 1/2V/R(load)
I= 1/2x60/8=3.75amps--this is where my Aleph is set at.
VRMS output=60v/1.41=42.6volts
IRMS output=3.75A/1.41=2.65A
WRMS=42.6x2.65=112watts
P(disipation at idle)=2x60x3.75=450watts
Ok if I got that right then if I use 80V p to p
Ibias=1/2x80/8=5amps
IRMS=5/1.41=3.54A rms
VRMS=80/1.41=56V rms
Wrms=3.54A x 56V=200.9watts
P(disipation at idle)=2x80x5=800watts
My confusion is that this is a single ended and I would set the voltage rails at +/-40V. If I am splitting up my 24 out put devices into quads that means the 5amps/12=416ma per device. This may be pushing things a bit. Again the calculations may be wrong because in the PP world I would use 40 not 80volts in the calculations as the power is shared with N and P channel fets.
Do you think that I have done these calcs correctly?
I saw the quiet Plitron transformers for audio use on their web site for a 2kva is over $500 bucks. This could put a dent into my thinking.
You've still never quite answered my question about your current Alephs and their Plitrons. I'm curious as to whether you're drawing more than stock bias. Measure the voltage across the Source resistors and multiply by the number of output device pairs. (The front end draw in an Aleph is negligible--you can ignore it.)
A 200W Aleph-X will have rails on the order of +-32V. A 100W version will have rails in the low 20s...something like 23V or so.
Power dissipation for a stock Aleph-X with 200W output will be on the order of 600W/ch.
Grey
A 200W Aleph-X will have rails on the order of +-32V. A 100W version will have rails in the low 20s...something like 23V or so.
Power dissipation for a stock Aleph-X with 200W output will be on the order of 600W/ch.
Grey
- Status
- Not open for further replies.