I spent less than an hour for these two PCBs, from the transfer of the print to the PCB, dipping in acid, drilling and finishing. I spend more time on soldering.
By the way, I like to make PCBs myself, it's in true DIY spirit.
By the way, I like to make PCBs myself, it's in true DIY spirit.
That's all for now. I hope that these squares (wj reg) will also open soon.
Attachments
Today I inserted new PCBs with LSK389A into the amplifier.
It's still too early to make a judgement, it will take at least a few more days to settle down. But for now I can immediately say that it is a little thinner in the bass.
So far, it seems to me that at this moment InterFET's IF170A has a slight advantage over Liner Systems' LSK389A.
Adjusting the operating points of the amp itself is not a problem, however I had to increase the values of the resistor from 100R to 150R which is in series with the 100R trimer to adjust the offset so that should be taken care of if using the LSK389A. This already says that IF170A and LSK389A do not have the same operating points.
It's still too early to make a judgement, it will take at least a few more days to settle down. But for now I can immediately say that it is a little thinner in the bass.
So far, it seems to me that at this moment InterFET's IF170A has a slight advantage over Liner Systems' LSK389A.
Adjusting the operating points of the amp itself is not a problem, however I had to increase the values of the resistor from 100R to 150R which is in series with the 100R trimer to adjust the offset so that should be taken care of if using the LSK389A. This already says that IF170A and LSK389A do not have the same operating points.
Attachments
Today is the fourth day since the new version with LSK389A has been working. So far, I'm not satisfied with the sound of the LSK389 itself, at first I thought it lacked a bit of bass, but now I see that the rest of the spectrum is worse, the sound image is more closed, the fine details in the highs have been lost.
I will leave LSK389 for a few more days to see if there will be any further developments, but everything seems to me that I will return the version with IF170A again.
btw, compare the DS's, there is quite a difference
I will leave LSK389 for a few more days to see if there will be any further developments, but everything seems to me that I will return the version with IF170A again.
btw, compare the DS's, there is quite a difference
Last edited:
Great news! 😉
Super work on your Plantefeve ‘Cube’ amp!
I’m also a bit surprised the LSK389 at least didn’t match the IF170A in your listening experience.
Super work on your Plantefeve ‘Cube’ amp!
I’m also a bit surprised the LSK389 at least didn’t match the IF170A in your listening experience.
Unfortunately, with the LSK389A it is a completely different amplifier, completely unlistenable with some recordings. It was also a big surprise for me.
JM Plantefeve thought about that option, normally the output power also increases, the scheme is for 120W at 8ohm. Two pairs of outputs with a lower supply voltage can also be used.
No matter what the SST-404 has Vds=50V max, I would still opt for the cascade, it's safer. The SST-404 has a much lower transconductance than the 2SK170/IF170/LSK170 so I don't know how it will behave in this amp. To begin with, it will be necessary to increase the trimmer-resistor values below the SST-404 sources.
No matter what the SST-404 has Vds=50V max, I would still opt for the cascade, it's safer. The SST-404 has a much lower transconductance than the 2SK170/IF170/LSK170 so I don't know how it will behave in this amp. To begin with, it will be necessary to increase the trimmer-resistor values below the SST-404 sources.
Attachments
