Hotrodding the UCD modules

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#483
Bgt said:




😕
Click to expand...


I don't mean it as an attack you know, like I said you had me confused with that for over a week, in a month from now new people will be seeing the forum and they'll be confused by it..

No kidding I had to repeate technical communications (english class) three times, something about staying awake?

You've got to know who your audience is and lower yourself to our level, if you like.

Regards,
Chris
 
#485
classd4sure said:



I don't mean it as an attack you know, like I said you had me confused with that for over a week, in a month from now new people will be seeing the forum and they'll be confused by it..

No kidding I had to repeate technical communications (english class) three times, something about staying awake?

You've got to know who your audience is and lower yourself to our level, if you like.

Regards,
Chris
Click to expand...

Ok, I will. I don't have any intention of being mister wiseguy....but maybe I give the impression....but I am not really.
Thanx Chris

🙂:clown:
 
#486
deandob said:
Steff1777,

Excellent setup for your multichannel amp.

Can you tell me where you sourced your PCB mounted XLR sockets?

Regards,
Dean
Click to expand...

All used PCBs are custom made except the UcD as well. A friend designed them and we gave the files to a pcb company for production.

More pictures available here: http://www.homecinema-fr.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=29781525
 
#489
classd4sure said:


Pasi I'm so touched, how very kind of you to offer us all free aluminum plates 🙂

Why not tell us why you think turning the modules around would make a difference?


I dont' think it did because you weren't complaining about any heterodyning. I assumed before the improvement was the twisted wires which would lower the noise floor as it provides some common mode rejection.

The module is well built, the coil is encased, the daughter card with the comparator is at least a dual layer PCB with ground plane, where most transistors on it operate in a switching state.

The only improvement I see by turning the modules is that of reduced EMI on that daughter card. However I think if EMI was a problem, you'd have certainly heard some whistling, which are the audible difference frequencies between modules.

Also your modules could have broken in more as you've been experimenting so the sound would have slowly been getting better and better anyway. Had you considered this? Or were there already too many hours on them for it to be possible?


Mounting them upside down is not optimal I wouldn't do it myself.

Why don't you stand the modules on their side, so that the coil (hottest part) is on top, and see how that sounds?

Actually if all you're connections are secure you could leave it powered while you twist one of the modules around and see what it sounds like.

I'd like to know what you used for shielding the mains wire with too.
Click to expand...

I can give you some aluminimum plates if you go and get them from my home in Finland. I do not want to send them. 😉 Bit more seriously, i have some limited possibility to cut metal plates at material price in my job. So only cutting is free, not material 🙂


Honestly not very much idea why turning modules did what it seems to. I do not know electronics that well. Bert said it can cause some broblems how modules were before, that was only reason why i tried this.
I will investigate one day more precisely if it really is twisted cables more than turned modules. Modules are quite well "burned in" so i do not think that can be any kind of explanation.

I never hear any whistling but i think that there is bit less "odd" noise in tweeters now.

Agree that upside down position is not surely optimal.
CIAudios UCD amps have modules also upside down so i think i can use this also with my tweeter amplfier, which does not take very much power.

Mains cable accross the case is shielded type and grounded to case near mains plug. I have only put some wide adhesive tape to protect open contacts in mains plug. If that is what you meant.
 
#490
Pasi,

Here is another example with very little EMI(Electr. Magn. Interf) concerning interacting of the UCD modules. Housing is 23x23x8. I want to try an electronic transformer in this one. 210VA...should be enough but more interested in the sound. I am also going to try twisted cables. Became very curious now after all this discussion here in the group. Will do some measuring also concerning crosstalk with and without twisted cables. And testing of the MKT479's as filter cap..

An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
 
#492
Bgt said:


Ok, I will. I don't have any intention of being mister wiseguy....but maybe I give the impression....but I am not really.
Thanx Chris

🙂:clown:
Click to expand...

Thank you 🙂

I like your layout. Look forward to your results on twisting the wires too, if you care to share them. Twisting wires is just like having max seperation between modules, do it if you can. It's a real cheap tweak and the science is there (CAT5 etc). With a layout like yours it may be harder to measure a difference, also the runs are so short.. audibly, I believe you'll notice a difference right away, even if it's a slight one.

Best Regards,
Chris
 
#493
Bgt said:
Pasi,

Here is another example with very little EMI(Electr. Magn. Interf) concerning interacting of the UCD modules. Housing is 23x23x8. I want to try an electronic transformer in this one. 210VA...should be enough but more interested in the sound. I am also going to try twisted cables. Became very curious now after all this discussion here in the group. Will do some measuring also concerning crosstalk with and without twisted cables. And testing of the MKT479's as filter cap..

An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Click to expand...


Is that electronic transformer you are talking about that thing that looks like an SMPS that you have shielded? Where did you get it from, it looks very small, my SMPS is much bigger.

Best regards

Gertjan
 
#498
Hi Bruno, hi guys.

In order to replace a standard 470/63V (100V) UcD caps what is the best choice?

Anybody to test Silmic II (best Elna so far), Silmic, Cerafine?

470/63 ROA (Cerafine) has a 1050 ripple current. 0.12 loss tng

470/63 ROS (Silmic) has a 1250 ripple current. 0.08 loss tng

470/63 RFS (Silmic II) has a 1295 ripple current. 0.08 loss tng

but that`s not enough: we have the another devil in a box: TONEREX (ROB) series, 0.09 loss tng and 1500(!) ripple current within 1000(!) uF/63V (such value is not availiable in a "better" ROA/ROS/RFS caps series).

Silmic2 or Tonerex???
 
#499
Bgt said:


They are very easy to work with because you can disassemble every panel. This is easy if you're busy trying to find solutions to fit it all in a rather small case so you can keep wiring as short as possible.
Click to expand...

i know, i've got them too 😉
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.

I started using them for gainclones some time ago :clown:

wildbox: in general, the higher the ripple current, the better... My panasonic FC 680uF/100V are getting warm when i'm pusing it really hard...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom