Q17 - an audiophile approach to perfect sound

More on this.

Amusing. With the new fresh Q4, I now have 14.30v on the positive rail and 14.31v on the negative rail. Measures taken after half an hour. 39mV at output (was 41mV). The influence of the symmetrical voltage is very weak on the output offset. JI'm not sure if I paced the zener back in the same place. So another influence on the circuit. I also replaced the BD135 that I was using on Q12 with a BD139. I don't know if that can have an influence. At first glance, no difference but I do not know the protocol to evaluate this component at this position. The BD139 is better "physically". It has a metal side. It is therefore easier to set up than the BD135 which is all plastic. Harder to make a pinout mistake.

The PCB from JLCPCB is of good quality. In some places, I have desoldered five or six times. No broken pellet.

Stef.
 
Last edited:
To properly run Q17 simulations, several libraries must be included into project.
These are proprietary, but can be downloaded from:
OPA1641 ->https://www.ti.com/lit/zip/sbom627 unzip and extract OPA1641.LIB
FQA36P15 -> https://www.onsemi.com/pub/collateral/fqa36p15.lib
FQA46N15 -> https://www.onsemi.com/pub/collateral/fqa46n15.lib
FQP3N30 -> onsemi
FQP3P20 -> onsemi

Download these and place in the same directory with Q17 ltspice asc file. Open simulation file with ltspice and include following spice directives:
.inc OPA1641.LIB
.inc fqa36p15.lib
.inc fqa46n15.lib
.inc fqp3n30.lib
.inc fqp3p20.lib

To run transient, uncomment ;.tran 0 200m 100m 10m

Regards,
Tibi
I'm a beginner
Failed to find DC operating point for AC analysis.
 

Attachments

  • 20211213205258.png
    20211213205258.png
    17.3 KB · Views: 122
Hi Piersma,

Sorry but I've not understood:

You should match the DC impedances of the opamp's positive and negative inputs

Trying -++- 2x220uF Silmic on C2. No output offset change or something else on the scope's curves. I'll leave them for now. I will try later if I hear a difference.

Stef.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6543.jpeg
    IMG_6543.jpeg
    358.4 KB · Views: 135
Hello,

Some tests with different capacitors for C2, C3 and C6.

Frequency: 40Hz
Input: 23mVRMS, output: 1.12vRMS

First picture (standard config):
C3, C6 = 100uF/25v, C6 = 100uF / 16v BP Muse:
Offset: 41mV

Second picture:
C3, C6 = RFS 10uF/16v, C6 = 100uF / 16v BP Muse:
Offset: 41mV

Third pictures:
C3, C6 = RFS 10uF/16v, C6 = 2x100uF / 6.3v RFS:
Offset: 42mV

You can easily see the influence on the signal. We can't see very well on the pictures but with 10uF in C3 / C6, there is noise around the square signal.

Stef.
 

Attachments

  • Q17-Mini-square_40Hz.jpg
    Q17-Mini-square_40Hz.jpg
    48.2 KB · Views: 76
  • 10uF-100uFBP.jpg
    10uF-100uFBP.jpg
    48.3 KB · Views: 93
  • 10uF-2x100uF-RFS.jpg
    10uF-2x100uF-RFS.jpg
    53.5 KB · Views: 88
Hello!

For Tim: I tried with more that 100uF (FC 220uF) for C3 & C5. No change on scope.

For Tiby: If you want a new measure with something else in C2, tell me. Currently, the best is still 100uF Muse BP. We only see a difference for the low frequencies.

I still looking to found a method to reduce output offset. Can we play with R17 and/or R18?

Cheers,

Stef.
 
Yes, it's noisy but at the moment I only have that. We can see the bumps on the REW / RTA at -80dB BUT I can hear it on my test broadband speaker. With the same speaker, my Pass AM 15W with the big analog PSU produce no noise. We can't say if the amp is on or off. We still have to put things into perspective. Noise can only be heard with the ear glued to the speaker.

For C2?

It seems that what we put in C2, there is a big difference on frequencies below 200 Hz, at least on the square signal. Which will automatically change the sound signature of the Q17. With my old ears, it's more difficult and above all very subjective.

Stef.


EDIT:
I forgot to specify that currently the Q17 proto is connected with a 60cm electric cable to the power supply which is in the chassis of my old Chinese Quad405. This is not the best. ;)
 
Last edited:
Hello!

For Tim: I tried with more that 100uF (FC 220uF) for C3 & C5. No change on scope.

For Tiby: If you want a new measure with something else in C2, tell me. Currently, the best is still 100uF Muse BP. We only see a difference for the low frequencies.

I still looking to found a method to reduce output offset. Can we play with R17 and/or R18?

Cheers,

Stef.
The DC offset should be minimal if you match the input impendance. Try R16 = 13 k.
 
Hello!

More C2 test with 2x220uF.

I mounted C2 on a tulip socket. It is faster.

Tested Panasonic FC, Vishay BC 150 and Elna Silmic II. See name of the picture.

The FC is the worst (on the scope as well).

I have the impression that the bigger the capacitor is physically the better it is.

Stéphane
 

Attachments

  • Vishay_BC_MAL2150_63v.jpg
    Vishay_BC_MAL2150_63v.jpg
    48.3 KB · Views: 103
  • Panasonic_FC_25v.jpg
    Panasonic_FC_25v.jpg
    48.6 KB · Views: 88
  • Silmic_II_25v.jpg
    Silmic_II_25v.jpg
    48.1 KB · Views: 115
  • IMG_6546.jpeg
    IMG_6546.jpeg
    273.7 KB · Views: 121