Re: The third thing?
I left it open to inspire creativity and stress the importance of the first two, but yeah it's an option, and certainly cheaper than a discrete input stage. I might opt for op amps or something first though.
How important is it anyway we're all being pretty darn fussy at this stage of the game aren't we 🙂 Tweaks should be taken on order of importance of course, bigger bottlenecks first.
Regards,
Chris
sx881663 said:
I left it open to inspire creativity and stress the importance of the first two, but yeah it's an option, and certainly cheaper than a discrete input stage. I might opt for op amps or something first though.
How important is it anyway we're all being pretty darn fussy at this stage of the game aren't we 🙂 Tweaks should be taken on order of importance of course, bigger bottlenecks first.
Regards,
Chris
Re: Re: The third thing?
Yes but we do what we can. I know that speakers are by far the biggest bottleneck but I'm not about to build any. Wouldn't have any place for them anyway. For now I will be content with my small, simple Tang bands in near field. Actually a lot better than you would think.
Roger
classd4sure said:
Yes but we do what we can. I know that speakers are by far the biggest bottleneck but I'm not about to build any. Wouldn't have any place for them anyway. For now I will be content with my small, simple Tang bands in near field. Actually a lot better than you would think.
Roger
Agreed. Tang Bands are great for the price. People who listen to my setup (PC, Tripath, TangBand) are amazed at the quality.
Regards,
Dean
Regards,
Dean
Deanbob:
Jung or super regulators, I think this is the way to go 😉
For now I study the basics to implement them in my DAC's but in the future I will try them in the UCD.
One of our forummates (Alain maybe) fed AD opamp with batteries and he reported improvement in sound, if I recall well.
Please post your results/pics and good luck!
Mauricio
Jung or super regulators, I think this is the way to go 😉
For now I study the basics to implement them in my DAC's but in the future I will try them in the UCD.
One of our forummates (Alain maybe) fed AD opamp with batteries and he reported improvement in sound, if I recall well.
Please post your results/pics and good luck!
Mauricio
maxlorenz said:
I have in hand this small size power supply from LC-audio http://www.lcaudio.com/index.php?page=69.
What do you think, would it be good enough to get some obvious improvement (to feed 4 x UCD180 opamp stage)?
The LC-Audio is ok. Up to 1A.
You can replace the NE5532 in LC-Audio PSU with a fast op-amp.
Check this link too:
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/sonelec-musique/electronique_realisations_alim_sym_001.html
ps: the curent UcD op-amp psu is fine.
You can replace the NE5532 in LC-Audio PSU with a fast op-amp.
Check this link too:
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/sonelec-musique/electronique_realisations_alim_sym_001.html
ps: the curent UcD op-amp psu is fine.
Hi,
Hmmmmm I think you might be working backwards if you try to feed four of them from one regulator. It might be a try it and see situation but obviously the ideal would be one regulator per input stage/module.
Providing that one includes both rails anyway.
Those things are soooo expensive (Super Regulators)!!
I'm sure somewhere there's a kit you can buy that's alot cheaper.
Here's what I think is a half interesting question.
What's best, a Super Regulator per input stage, which we'll just call otion A and regard it as the ultimate solution for the sake of argument.
Option B, where it becomes interesting.
One Super Regulator shared among X numbers of modules, a little more realistic cost wise, not as "ideal" performance wise.
Compared to option C, and I think much more to my own personal liking, a fairly basic DC regulator that's built for the job, total cost each, very little, but obviously now one per module, as per option A.
I think it's more the super isolation we should seek and not the super regulation.
Remember when I mentioned biggest bottleneck first?
Why spend so much on a high grade regulator if you don't yet have mono blocks? Which supply between the input and output stage is your bottleneck really?
You have to think this could be a pitfall of money if you go about it the wrong way.
Regards,
Chris
Hmmmmm I think you might be working backwards if you try to feed four of them from one regulator. It might be a try it and see situation but obviously the ideal would be one regulator per input stage/module.
Providing that one includes both rails anyway.
Those things are soooo expensive (Super Regulators)!!
I'm sure somewhere there's a kit you can buy that's alot cheaper.
Here's what I think is a half interesting question.
What's best, a Super Regulator per input stage, which we'll just call otion A and regard it as the ultimate solution for the sake of argument.
Option B, where it becomes interesting.
One Super Regulator shared among X numbers of modules, a little more realistic cost wise, not as "ideal" performance wise.
Compared to option C, and I think much more to my own personal liking, a fairly basic DC regulator that's built for the job, total cost each, very little, but obviously now one per module, as per option A.
I think it's more the super isolation we should seek and not the super regulation.
Remember when I mentioned biggest bottleneck first?
Why spend so much on a high grade regulator if you don't yet have mono blocks? Which supply between the input and output stage is your bottleneck really?
You have to think this could be a pitfall of money if you go about it the wrong way.
Regards,
Chris
Just takes a little planning that's all.
Star pattern, in each amp, from each amp, straight to the fuse box, where they all terminate to 1 point. Star pattern just means that, 1 single ground point for everything.
Regards,
Chris
Star pattern, in each amp, from each amp, straight to the fuse box, where they all terminate to 1 point. Star pattern just means that, 1 single ground point for everything.
Regards,
Chris
classd4sure said:
What are the benefits when using one regulator per module compared to shared regulator to all modules?
PS. my UCD psu is dual mono.
Hmmm... reading this thread, the most realistic thing for me to do is the input caps (I've got the version with caps before the AD8620) and the cap in the output filter.
With a bit of soldering practice I'm up to that challenge. I don't feel like experimenting and A/B testing a lot of caps though.
I'm going with what is regarded as high quality on this board and see how it goes. Just changing the cap type should do plenty (especially for the input caps)
However, it's not a plan for right now... First I need to complete my chassis and PS.
I'm going all Hypex on the electronics (except for the transformer I think...) - I like the extra functions that the Hypex softstart will bring.
On another note, kinda off-topic, I might be building a stereo UcD180 shortly after that. 300VA should be plenty for that application, but I was wondering... at 230V like here in europe, at what VA is a softstart needed? 300VA? 400VA?
Thanks,
Yves
With a bit of soldering practice I'm up to that challenge. I don't feel like experimenting and A/B testing a lot of caps though.
I'm going with what is regarded as high quality on this board and see how it goes. Just changing the cap type should do plenty (especially for the input caps)
However, it's not a plan for right now... First I need to complete my chassis and PS.
I'm going all Hypex on the electronics (except for the transformer I think...) - I like the extra functions that the Hypex softstart will bring.
On another note, kinda off-topic, I might be building a stereo UcD180 shortly after that. 300VA should be plenty for that application, but I was wondering... at 230V like here in europe, at what VA is a softstart needed? 300VA? 400VA?
Thanks,
Yves
Pasi P said:
I would expect possible improvements in cross talk/ seperation, imaging and soundstage etc ?
Why did you go with mono blocks? I thought that's what that was for. It seems like a waste to consider a single regulator for all the input stages when you've already gone dual mono.
Yves, sounds like a good plan, but with all the reports on here of those 470uF caps making such a big difference.... they're cheap and easy to change. I'd go for that too.
I don't think primary voltage makes a difference really, it's the VA that matters, so the same as before should be a safe bet.
Regards,
Chris
classd4sure said:
Yes, i went to dual mono mostly because i expect things you mentioned 🙂
Maybe i was thinking that op-amps PSRR is much better than amplifiers and therefore they do not need separate ps same way than amps do.
Anyway, separate high-quality op-amp ps for each module sounds too expensive and complicate for me.
Ok it sounds too expensive for most sane people I'd think if you're considering the likes of Super Regulators.
That's why I asked even awhile back, what's enough to be considered better? Maybe a decent job of of the ultra cheap and obsolete 78XX 79XX variety would be just fine. It's pretty basic stuff too, a little work with a simulator goes a long way if you're uncertain about anything.
If you want to build your own I don't see why you couldn't make it even better for very little extra.
My future plans include the less ideal stereo (or more) amp with an auxiliary transformer for multiple homebrew regulators. I can always split it up and go with monoblocks if I ever hit the lotto, at the cost of more transformers.
Load regulation of the auxiliary transformer is much worse but even cheap linear regulators will stiffen it up by presenting it with a fairly constant load that I think would be greater than that of the op amps. With a little snubbing to ensure the bandwidth is there.... I dont' see how you can go wrong with something like that.
Any more thoughts from others on the matter?
Regards,
Chris
That's why I asked even awhile back, what's enough to be considered better? Maybe a decent job of of the ultra cheap and obsolete 78XX 79XX variety would be just fine. It's pretty basic stuff too, a little work with a simulator goes a long way if you're uncertain about anything.
If you want to build your own I don't see why you couldn't make it even better for very little extra.
My future plans include the less ideal stereo (or more) amp with an auxiliary transformer for multiple homebrew regulators. I can always split it up and go with monoblocks if I ever hit the lotto, at the cost of more transformers.
Load regulation of the auxiliary transformer is much worse but even cheap linear regulators will stiffen it up by presenting it with a fairly constant load that I think would be greater than that of the op amps. With a little snubbing to ensure the bandwidth is there.... I dont' see how you can go wrong with something like that.
Any more thoughts from others on the matter?
Regards,
Chris
Chris,
The 470uF caps, that's the power supply caps (left & right of the T?)
Yes I can handle that, just don't want to touch any surface mounted stuff, just the regular electronics.
I'll mail you when I get to that point 😀
Thanks,
Yves
The 470uF caps, that's the power supply caps (left & right of the T?)
Yes I can handle that, just don't want to touch any surface mounted stuff, just the regular electronics.
I'll mail you when I get to that point 😀
Thanks,
Yves
ClassD4sure et alter:
Please consider that I'm a humble beginner seeking knowledge (and good sound)
but I think one of the advantages of super reg and the like is lower noise/lower impedance power supply to input opamp wich I believe could make a lot of difference to the final product.
Yes, look at this site and tell me what do you think:
http://www.wenzel.com/documents/finesse.html
Of course this will not be the first mod to do for me. Actually it will probably be the last one for my future monoblocks 😀
I'm hoping that someone else take the step before 😉
Best wishes
Mauricio
Please consider that I'm a humble beginner seeking knowledge (and good sound)
but I think one of the advantages of super reg and the like is lower noise/lower impedance power supply to input opamp wich I believe could make a lot of difference to the final product.Yes, look at this site and tell me what do you think:
http://www.wenzel.com/documents/finesse.html
Of course this will not be the first mod to do for me. Actually it will probably be the last one for my future monoblocks 😀
I'm hoping that someone else take the step before 😉
Best wishes
Mauricio
Hi,
Yves yes that's them.
Mauricio, same here but I think with what we expect to improve by this mode..... isn't a lower noise floor, it seems to be it's everything that has to do with better isolation. That's my theory anyway.
I'm waiting for cost to permit it, I'm sure alot of others are waiting with you, it will be dead last for me as well.
I enjoyed the link you posted, this certainly seems to be an area where there's more than one ways to skin ..... a dog. 🙂 Notice none of these circuits hardly look like they're worth close to what a Super Reg goes for... it's all about where to spend the money best.
Roger, that's probably about as far as I'd go with it myself, it need not be more complicated. Very nice. I like your high voltage option, was nice to throw that in there. Wouldn't it require a limiting resistor in series to protect the zeners?
Regards,
Chris
Yves yes that's them.
Mauricio, same here but I think with what we expect to improve by this mode..... isn't a lower noise floor, it seems to be it's everything that has to do with better isolation. That's my theory anyway.
I'm waiting for cost to permit it, I'm sure alot of others are waiting with you, it will be dead last for me as well.
I enjoyed the link you posted, this certainly seems to be an area where there's more than one ways to skin ..... a dog. 🙂 Notice none of these circuits hardly look like they're worth close to what a Super Reg goes for... it's all about where to spend the money best.
Roger, that's probably about as far as I'd go with it myself, it need not be more complicated. Very nice. I like your high voltage option, was nice to throw that in there. Wouldn't it require a limiting resistor in series to protect the zeners?
Regards,
Chris
- Status
- Not open for further replies.