Good supply for preamp, Comments?

[Bricolo]

Re: My last PS version from suggestions

From what I got from your suggestions, here the version that I will try first. First the section before the regulators.

Very interesting to see so much passion over a pure technical and theorical little question. I guest people that love music are passionate in nature 😉

Bye.

since your transformer has dual secondaries, why don't you use 2 diode bridges?

 

[fmak]

Re: Ladeeeees and Gentlemen

Drop me an email (you know where to find me) and I'll sort something out for you.

Should keep the rest of you busy for a while 😉

Andy.
------------------------------------------------

Andy, I sent you two emails over 10 days about getting your PS and got no response. Perahps this will help remind you.

 

[Peter Daniel]

You should definitely use separate circuits for bath rails and much bigger transformer. I was reading a review of Naim preamp and transformer used there is 800VA. This certainly contributes to the "images that have body and physical solidity" as mentioned in a review.

 

[SY]

Peter, that schematic was enlightening. Thanks for posting it.

It looks like the PS rejection of that circuit would be pretty good (off the top of my head; I haven't run a spice sim or prototyped it). A good, low-noise supply of a not-very-exotic design will work just fine IF the design goal is a preamp that will have little or no sound of its own. The Jung regulators will do fine, but are probably much fancier than what's actually needed.

 

[millwood]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Did somebody say, I'm not doing my own R&D's

As I follow the forum discussions pretty close, it seems to me that I'm not the only one "doing exploitation of the forum for commercial purposes".

Peter, that's a pretty weak argument: because other people kill people, then it is OK for me to kill people too.

Not something you want to do.

BTW, I have no problem with commercial uses of this forum: anything everything posted here, until and unless copyrighted, is in the public domain anyway.

I'll rephrase my question then. Where did you get the idea that I don't combine theory with experiments in my work. Was it from Fred?

I don't think you didn't combine it. everyone of us knows some theories and we function / behave besed on that. The point, at the risk of being boring and you are OK to ignore it, is that learning more of the theory is helpful to you and your success.

Of course, as one of my ex-bosses said; every one has the right to remain stupid.

 

[Peter Daniel]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Did somebody say, I'm not doing my own R&D's

I don't think you didn't combine it. everyone of us knows some theories and we function / behave besed on that. The point, at the risk of being boring and you are OK to ignore it, is that learning more of the theory is helpful to you and your success.

I agree with that and as I need (more theory) I learn on a way. That's less boring and more interesting approach, IMO.

 

[Algar_emi]

separate bridges and Transfo

This is an interesting suggestion. I'll keep it in mind.

Thanks Peter for the suggestion. I was planning to use complete dual supplies separate for each channel, that's why the small transfo. But I can probably used instead a 250VA transfo from one of my previous project.

The Jung regulator is maybe too much, but I will try the LM317 all by itself, then used as a pre-regulator with the Jung Reg. We will see. And as Peter said, I really like to start from good known existing circuits, try them and choose using my ears.

I've been succesfull so far doing that. I like my little DIY sound system more than my big (and expensive) commercial one (Simaudio, Copland, Dynaudio). I don't do that for any commercial reason, just my love of music. My DIY efforts give my the chance to own gear way to much expensive if I had to buy them. My SuperDAC cost me around 900$ CAN and sound much more fabulous than my Copland paid 3500$, so 😉.

My pursuit of a better preamp is also a journey of discovery, learning and just fun. To invest my effort in a commercial direction would probably kill all the fun and my interests also

 

[SY]

Of course, as one of my ex-bosses said; every one has the right to remain stupid.

That's an awfully weak way to make an argument. And the argument, which is that we can all improve ourselves by learning more theory, is one good enough to stand on its own.

 

[jackinnj]

Is it Miller time?

Sadly, Merton Miller passed away, I think 2 years ago.

There was an analyst at Morgan Stanley with the last name of Modigliani.

Music, its appreciation, and the regulator quiz. Don't you just love the analysis of non-Gaussian noise!

TANSTAAFL

 

[ALW]

You have raised the blind about a quarter of an inch, but still have not shed enough light on the subject for useful design goals and measurement

Fred,

Yes, vague, incomplete and of little direct use to anyone, I'd agree.

I never said I'd tell anyone how to achieve the result, but it does give a different goal to aim for, even if the route to that goal is improving conventional spec's (like PSRR).

This is one area where theory really can dominate, as measurement is hard, very hard indeed.

It should though provoke some discussion, maybe some designs and you never know, someone clever might hit on something really great - when's the last time you heard PSU linearity mentioned here....

Andy 🙂

 

[jan.didden]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Did somebody say, I'm not doing my own R&D's

The stability problem was caused by lack of proper grounding and was never because of not enough gain. But even if it was, I don't see a problem here as this was still a prototype and because it was a part of my R&D, I figured the way out of it myself, without your help. And it seems like you are the only one annoyed with the way I perform my R&D.

Is there any anybody else?

As I follow the forum discussions pretty close, it seems to me that I'm not the only one "doing exploitation of the forum for commercial purposes". Maybe it's time we open the special Manufacturers section?

I'll rephrase my question then. Where did you get the idea that I don't combine theory with experiments in my work. Was it from Fred?

Come on Peter, you made it clear that you refuse to learn more than you know.

I can not understand why you would stop right there and then. Do you never pose yourself the 'what if' questions? You cannot progress very far in audio, or in anything worthwhile, just by trail and error. Surely you don't want to spend the rest of your audio life copying other peoples work? Apart from the ethics on which I will not comment, you miss the ecstatic experience of eureka.

May I quote Richard Feynman, Nobel Laureate:

“The same thrill, the same awe and mystery, come again and again when we look at any problem deep enough. With more knowledge comes deeper, more wonderful mystery, lurking one on to penetrate deeper still”

Richard P Feynman, The pleasure of finding things out, Helix Books/Perseus Books, 1999, pg 144.

Buy it, you'll like it.

Jan Didden

 

[Peter Daniel]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Did somebody say, I'm not doing my own R&D's

Come on Peter, you made it clear that you refuse to learn more than you know.

I can not understand why you would stop right there and then. Do you never pose yourself the 'what if' questions? You cannot progress very far in audio, or in anything worthwhile, just by trail and error. Surely you don't want to spend the rest of your audio life copying other peoples work? Apart from the ethics on which I will not comment, you miss the ecstatic experience of eureka.

I thought, I made it clear that I refuse to learn any more than I need to know. Sometimes keeping a "clear" mind has more advantages than following commonly accepted "wisdom". And I have my moments of experiencing the eureka feeling. And I always pose to myself 'what if' question. It's just concentrates on slightly different aspects that might be in your case. I don't really know where this opinion, that I disregard theory came from. I'm just saying that theory is not everything and to make proper use of it you have to combine it with more empirical aproach. So what are we talking about here?

Copying someone elses work? Even Fred is doing that. BTW, how is your TEX-X?

 

[grataku]

I thought, I made it clear that I refuse to learn any more than I need to know. And I have my moments of experiencing the eureka feeling. And I always pose to myself 'what if' question. It's just concentrates on slightly different aspects that might be in your case. I don't really know where this opinion, that I disregard theory came from. I'm just saying that theory is not everything and to make proper use of it you have to combine it with more empirical aproach. So what are we talking about here?

Copying someone elses work? Even Fred is doing that. BTW, how is your TEX-X?

I am having deja vu all over again. I was just having so much fun reading this and you had to spoil it.
Fred got to you Peter. 😉 I posed that same texx question along time ago. Never got an answer. I would use this opportunity to inquire about the fate of the x-preamp, did it ever get over the simulation hump?

Today Fred has a point, it may change tomorrow as soon as a "measure head" comes along at which point he will become a practical subjectivist. That point is: it helps to have some theoretical basis to reduce guess work to a manageable minimum.
Does it mean you should give up your audio hobby if you don't have an EE degree? That remains an open question.

However, I am pretty sure you don't mean it in the way it reads that you "refuse to learn what you don't have to" that's bull crap.
You may not be interested in learning particle physics because you just don't give a S8 about it as far as anything audio and electronics I am sure you stumble in something you want to learn more about it everyday.

There is nothing wrong per se in wanting to keep the discussion on a practical level as much as possible.

 

[Peter Daniel]

However, I am pretty sure you don't mean it in the way it reads that you "refuse to learn what you don't have to" that's bull crap.

At this point it got so confusing that I'm not sure what you think I was trying to say and what it reads like.

I will just say that I don't have any aspirations to pose as an "audio designer" and I'm not claiming any priviledged EE knowledge. I'm just an average guy, building his own stereo, because can't afford to buy big guys products. If I made, on the way, some discoveries and felt that elusive eureka extasy, it was either by accident, pure luck or hard work. So don't put on me all those lectures about theory, because I will decide for myself what I need to know and how I'm gonna learn it. One thing is for sure, I'm not in the business of designing audio, but in the business of building audio. That should be clear.

 

[Peter Daniel]

Does it mean you should give up your audio hobby if you don't have an EE degree? That remains an open question.

I think there's only one answer to that question.

 

[fdegrove]

Hi,

One thing is for sure, I'm not in the business of designing audio, but in the business of building audio.

Which are two totally different fields entirely.

Algar_emi,

The Sylvain Bergeron PS should actually perform better than the original Classe Peter posted...at least on paper.😉

Cheers,😉

 

[jan.didden]

Peter, what is TEX-X?

Jan Didden

 

[Peter Daniel]

Peter, what is TEX-X?

Jan Didden

It's Aleph X, Texan style.😉

 

[millwood]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Did somebody say, I'm not doing my own R&D's

I thought, I made it clear that I refuse to learn any more than I need to know.

and I think all of us should respect your rights to do that, as that boss of mine had suggested, 🙂

 

[Peter Daniel]

I thought, I made it clear that I refuse to learn any more than I need to know.

Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with that statement. Do you?

I'm not executing any of my rights here, it just a simple way of life. And I think I learned more through the two years I spent here, on a forum, than during two years I spent in a College taking EET course.