Single-ended and undecided. I really just need a place to start experimenting.
That being said, feel free to list any of your favorites for any audio amp purpose, so that this thread may be beneficial to many.
That being said, feel free to list any of your favorites for any audio amp purpose, so that this thread may be beneficial to many.
Last edited:
No TO-251, no D-Pak, no TO-247, no TO-3P, no TO-3.
Have recently tested tens of MosFets. This is what came out.
I currently recommend IRF 520 (TO-220) and many TO-220 Fullpak. They have an outstanding cleanliness and clarity - regarding MosFets.
Regarding surface mount: use a small ceramic disk to stick small fine circuits. In addition, the ceramic material is beneficial to the sound. Complex D-Amps do not sound good. Also, I have yet to see a D-Amp pcb on which "current" is observed - a prerequisite for very good sound. Even the simplest circuits are put on circuit boards without paying attention to "current": sit for hours and have to rework them to get a good sound;-)-; Even in D-class: the smaller the finer;-)
;-)
Have recently tested tens of MosFets. This is what came out.
I currently recommend IRF 520 (TO-220) and many TO-220 Fullpak. They have an outstanding cleanliness and clarity - regarding MosFets.
Regarding surface mount: use a small ceramic disk to stick small fine circuits. In addition, the ceramic material is beneficial to the sound. Complex D-Amps do not sound good. Also, I have yet to see a D-Amp pcb on which "current" is observed - a prerequisite for very good sound. Even the simplest circuits are put on circuit boards without paying attention to "current": sit for hours and have to rework them to get a good sound;-)-; Even in D-class: the smaller the finer;-)
;-)
.. through which you have to listen;-)
Parts are quasi windows, curtains, which modulate the signal.
Exact, you are right;-)
Parts are quasi windows, curtains, which modulate the signal.
Exact, you are right;-)
;-)
So you mean, the usual low-complex peek measurement methods represent high-complex auditory measurement methods? Already here is to peek low-complex experience;-)
So you mean, the usual low-complex peek measurement methods represent high-complex auditory measurement methods? Already here is to peek low-complex experience;-)
byeThanks for sharing. I assume single ended, since you haven't mentioned the P part (9520). What bias current did you use?
It seems that 510 and 9520 are a match for transconductance, and one can add a small cap to the N channel gate/source to aproximately match capacitances. Harris parts are preferred (this was discussed extensively on this forum, there's a flaw with the IRF P channel).
Same parts sound different. Different parts, like complementary transistors, sound very different. The half-waves are amplified differently. The ear perceives it: the sound is more impure, dirtier, more cloudy, coarser.
The IRF 520 already run great with 12 volts and 1 amp. For home audio purposes is it sufficient most time.
I want to build soon a fat power amplifier with them: about 30 - 40 volts and 5 - 8 amps per channel. How many I will need practically, I can not say yet. Their robustness is to be judged practically.
By the way: Push-Pull has nothing to do with HighEnd. The reason is the audible half-wave different amplification.
Certainly there are other characteristics that are needed to make a truly symmetrical push pull, not just capacitance. But since you are into experienting I thought I should link this (link below):
:
https://www.ne.jp/asahi/evo/amp/J200K1529/report.htm
:
https://www.ne.jp/asahi/evo/amp/J200K1529/report.htm
A nice approach;-)
My experience: The "real", and complete, balancing of amplifiers (by transformer, for example) brings (at least) two advantages: equal characters of the components in both half-waves and "short circuit" of the power supply character. However, the sound characteristics of the components add up. It does sound increasingly "artificial", "technical".
For high power applications I would try a complementary transistor PP-follower and a fine SE preamp.
My experience: The "real", and complete, balancing of amplifiers (by transformer, for example) brings (at least) two advantages: equal characters of the components in both half-waves and "short circuit" of the power supply character. However, the sound characteristics of the components add up. It does sound increasingly "artificial", "technical".
For high power applications I would try a complementary transistor PP-follower and a fine SE preamp.