Re: I have to say i do not know exactly what you have made
I have to agree here - reinvention of the wheel, over and over. Change a resistor value and stick a new name on it - original work? No, but...
I started in this by trying to adapt the Symasym to a higher voltage and it took off from there. My efforts have NOT been for nothing, whether my final amp design is original enough or not. I learned a great deal along the way, had lots of fun too. You would take that fun away?
Lighten up a bit, Carlos.
destroyer X said:
I have to agree here - reinvention of the wheel, over and over. Change a resistor value and stick a new name on it - original work? No, but...
I started in this by trying to adapt the Symasym to a higher voltage and it took off from there. My efforts have NOT been for nothing, whether my final amp design is original enough or not. I learned a great deal along the way, had lots of fun too. You would take that fun away?
Lighten up a bit, Carlos.
Re: Almost the same board.. alike mine one
Chronologically speaking...
I started my Patchwork project just 7 months after your original DX. I didn't even look at your HRIxxx (whatever!) until today.
When I do a search on the solid state forum for "DX", I find MORE than a FULL page of all the amps you have posted since - they are all the same!
So, we all are supposed to NOT post any of the same old stuff, but do and you did and you probably will do it again....ahahahahahahaaaa!!!
destroyer X said:
Chronologically speaking...
I started my Patchwork project just 7 months after your original DX. I didn't even look at your HRIxxx (whatever!) until today.
When I do a search on the solid state forum for "DX", I find MORE than a FULL page of all the amps you have posted since - they are all the same!
So, we all are supposed to NOT post any of the same old stuff, but do and you did and you probably will do it again....ahahahahahahaaaa!!!
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
OS, that's a good looking pcb. I like the way you've put the power supply on the bottom edge.
For the active devices you could stagger the pin-out, i.e. push the middle pin out of line with the other pins to create a bit more distance between their respective pcb pads - makes soldering easier. In the case of the LTP devices it allows the traces to the middle pins a bit more room too.
For the active devices you could stagger the pin-out, i.e. push the middle pin out of line with the other pins to create a bit more distance between their respective pcb pads - makes soldering easier. In the case of the LTP devices it allows the traces to the middle pins a bit more room too.
This is the natural tendence my transistorized friend
the basic differential
The Vas with some variations
The ouput in emitter follower
Hundreds can do that without never watch my amplifiers, because this is very basic things..all them obvious..also my HRII and others...the one that made it first has no difference compared to other forum folks..just made it first...but circuit is obvious...natural things done by the "modern day's " influences, where Doctor Self uses to be our main Gurú.
I am sure you made by yourself, also my daugther that has 12 years old can do it...and she use to do and to correct daddy... all basic electronic knowledge, nothing is sophisticated.... about me was hard work only..but everyone can make that same stuff, without have influences from me...no doubt about that.
Innocent or not... resulted another variation over the same theme..and the forum is continuing to produce that same stuff... a rarity when someone has new ideas... also, those ideas are not up to date..so... despite our pride to be top creative audiophiles, we are delayed related the market... we already did those toy amplifier, it is time to create something really decent and up to date, not needed to be all that Kleinschmidt complicated sophistication but we should create something.
I would like to inform you, dear transistorized friend... 21193 i think, that Doctor Self does not publish all tips and tricks into his book..there only basic things..if this is a bibble for us..we gonna be always repeating ancient discoveries..the good ideas he has, of course, are beeing applied into the well paid designs he use to make to amplifier factories.
So..we do not have to watch Doctor Self published ideas as our target, our goal, as much more can be made, and is beeing made.
You see Pavel..the one has good ideas...ask him schematic to see if you have it..he may give you basic ones
So...there are better ideas around...i could see new ideas developed by Hugh those last monthes... something NO ONE has used..but it is not a DIY to be published.
There's no problems to be "inspirated" by others... i am sure you were not, but there are some kind of "colective thinking" that is based into all informations we receive...and our colective thinking is old and not updated.
I have made several old toys..nice ones... excelent sounding units..but..there are much more to be done..whey folks are doing the same, repeating the same old song, reinventing the wheel and the powder without smoke?
Are we unable to do better?... i am sure i can do better, and soon i will.
regards,
Carlos
the basic differential
The Vas with some variations
The ouput in emitter follower
Hundreds can do that without never watch my amplifiers, because this is very basic things..all them obvious..also my HRII and others...the one that made it first has no difference compared to other forum folks..just made it first...but circuit is obvious...natural things done by the "modern day's " influences, where Doctor Self uses to be our main Gurú.
I am sure you made by yourself, also my daugther that has 12 years old can do it...and she use to do and to correct daddy... all basic electronic knowledge, nothing is sophisticated.... about me was hard work only..but everyone can make that same stuff, without have influences from me...no doubt about that.
Innocent or not... resulted another variation over the same theme..and the forum is continuing to produce that same stuff... a rarity when someone has new ideas... also, those ideas are not up to date..so... despite our pride to be top creative audiophiles, we are delayed related the market... we already did those toy amplifier, it is time to create something really decent and up to date, not needed to be all that Kleinschmidt complicated sophistication but we should create something.
I would like to inform you, dear transistorized friend... 21193 i think, that Doctor Self does not publish all tips and tricks into his book..there only basic things..if this is a bibble for us..we gonna be always repeating ancient discoveries..the good ideas he has, of course, are beeing applied into the well paid designs he use to make to amplifier factories.
So..we do not have to watch Doctor Self published ideas as our target, our goal, as much more can be made, and is beeing made.
You see Pavel..the one has good ideas...ask him schematic to see if you have it..he may give you basic ones
So...there are better ideas around...i could see new ideas developed by Hugh those last monthes... something NO ONE has used..but it is not a DIY to be published.
There's no problems to be "inspirated" by others... i am sure you were not, but there are some kind of "colective thinking" that is based into all informations we receive...and our colective thinking is old and not updated.
I have made several old toys..nice ones... excelent sounding units..but..there are much more to be done..whey folks are doing the same, repeating the same old song, reinventing the wheel and the powder without smoke?
Are we unable to do better?... i am sure i can do better, and soon i will.
regards,
Carlos
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Re: This is the natural tendence my transistorized friend
So when I suggested the name for this amp, in this thread is 'Back to the Future Amp' you will make this really true. We go back in time to RCA and now you have promised to bring us back to the future with a new Carlos design
destroyer X said:
So when I suggested the name for this amp, in this thread is 'Back to the Future Amp' you will make this really true. We go back in time to RCA and now you have promised to bring us back to the future with a new Carlos design
I was not intending in any way to use the "DX corp." name , the PCB was started when I got booted from the DX thread and I never got around to change the name. It will be noobworx50 or panther ... etc.
Now you come to this thread and say we reinvent the wheel too much.This thread was suggested by the moderators.
Let's see , this is different...
1. it HAS an output inductor.
2. it uses high ft devices.
3. it has a CCS , but a zener or just a resistor can be used.
4. has a hefty DC supply on board. (all in one)
5. incorporates "lifted ground" and has better star grounding.-
6. HF feedback from VAS to LTP.
I suppose all who use this topology are "stealing" from RCA ... this includes the DX , AKSA , Bigun , ME. My intent was to make myself a pair of home theater surround amps and share the resulting board work with the forum.
That is totally ignorant..
Not in the spirit of the forum. The amp will sound better than a DX standard , no loss of soundstage , good bass , ABSOLUTELY stable ( it will have to work with 30 foot speaker cables). I do not need others to re(design) my amps , or make my layout/boards. I also draw them (like you) , but they look like finished products , not "hack jobs".Exactly my question , how about you ?? The big Dx amp, "DHR turbo" is just a poorly designed larger version of this RCA.
6 pairs of OP devices running off of those poor little drivers beta "droop" city!!! The only advice on schema is to use another output pair as drivers ... this would affect the VAS (load it down).My "supersym" right off the shelf would both be quieter , more reliable , and sound far better than a turbo.
I also noticed the "DX precision" , a self/RCA based amp with no CCS, (that stupid zener tail source again) why not go all the way , it is a "blameless"(self aka RCA 1975). I did not mean to criticize , but your statements show a lack of respect and your designs are no different (stolen).
OS
ABSOLUTELY my intentions , not to compete with Carlos , or to steal, that is why I try to catch all mistakes - and pay close attention to details.
The FINAL version with no errors.. (almost sure):
BTF50 (back to the future) is the name , since it uses the MJE's for drivers, one could use the MJL21193/4 and drive a sub with that one. Make 5 more with the $1.40 NJW's and stack all of them side by side for a dandy 5.1 HT setup. I KNOW they have good PSRR (have 2 already), so a single 25-0-25VAC 6-800VA trafo would do for all 6 channels.
[ ALL references to DX are removed ] I will begin to generate a PDF with BOM , tips . schema ,and other helpful stuff and it will be done soon.
OS
ostripper said:Fear not , Uncle Charlie. This will be done right. No BS.
Got # 1 - simulation is golden.
Also # 3 - Already have 2 of the NPN LTP versions , so I KNOW it works !!
The harder part.. board layout, is just about fine tuned .. all by hand , no layout program.
The "E , B, C" is the bd139/mje340 Vbe (on wires , like the aska)
Blue are Caps , red is resistors, yellow are the semi's. You need no power supply , it is on board (use 3300 - 10000uF !!) ,6A flat bridge is also there. One could easily make a true DX with just a couple jumpers. The "lifted ground" (22R) and a True output inductor is also there (green). 99% there (forgot the LED CCS resistor to ground).
OS
Nice layout.
Just a thought: the spacing of the power input pads at the bottom seems a bit tight. Also around the 1k VR.
Now of course if you used a layout program, you can still do it in manual layout BUT the program would warn you if some pad or track spacing gets to tight (and you can set the limit for the warning). It would also tell you (with the schematic input) that you made a wrong connection or forgot a connection.
Even if you like to do manual layout (as I do), a layout program greatly reduces errors and speeds up layout.
Something to consider....
Jan Didden
Thank you for comment , Jann. When I get it to this point, (lowest amount of jumpers - good rail/ grounding layout) I just try to maximize capacitor spacings (for greatest flexibility in component choices) and "sweat" the safety (AC) and trace clearances. Another feature of the whole "package" is that this board will accept almost any "mod" and still look nice.
The zobel is the only wire ("X to ground "X" on schema). I still have to choose which PCB fuseholder to use and decide whether to snubber the bridge.
No more rude than " amp in trash" comment. "what you sow is what you reap"
For IC's I think eagle and others are the ticket. But for this simple amp it is more fun and I can incorporate what I know absolutely works. All the component spacings are right to factory specs.
Yes, I could "carve" a hair more clearance between the 52VAC coming into the bridge.
The 1Kvr will get moved to the right a hair (mindreader). I think it will be a very nice little amp.
EDIT -Carlos, I am not mad at you ..even as I called the statement ignorant. IT WAS... PERIOD. I and many others thank you for DX, but you don't own the topology and I can't use your board and the virgin DX , so I did another "flavor".
OS
I see as a congratulation people doing things alike my amplifier
Of course i am not owner of the electrons..i just was the one worked for that topologie a lot.
Read once again.... the xdx would trash MY amplifier, the old bootstrapp technology, not the Ostripper amplifier or this one you are doing.... you can understand yours as a consequence if yours is a clone...but as it is not a clone this does not should hurt you..your conscience is clean and peacefull.
Can you read the text once again?...or you decide not to understand because you want that?
Not good to the forum.... a lot of amplifiers made those last monthes..all them almost the same..what is the advantage of this?
Topologie almost the same, will sound almost the same with some small differences..the inclusion of emitter resistances will kill the bass for instance..will be "that bootstrapp" with less bass only.
Waste of energy .... re-doing things already made... this is not a progress to the forum...you may be able, i believe, to do more creative things.... not to return to the standard design, for instance, using the emitter resistances.
This was already made and tested...maybe you wanna to see by yourself... a lot of work to see by youself...but this is fair..the need to believe into the results of some modifications.
The old ancient bootstrapp circuits used the traditional output coil and the power transistor emitter resistances...and that zener was used into several Sansui... i think Sansui designers were not stupid.
regards,
Carlos
Of course i am not owner of the electrons..i just was the one worked for that topologie a lot.
Read once again.... the xdx would trash MY amplifier, the old bootstrapp technology, not the Ostripper amplifier or this one you are doing.... you can understand yours as a consequence if yours is a clone...but as it is not a clone this does not should hurt you..your conscience is clean and peacefull.
Can you read the text once again?...or you decide not to understand because you want that?
Not good to the forum.... a lot of amplifiers made those last monthes..all them almost the same..what is the advantage of this?
Topologie almost the same, will sound almost the same with some small differences..the inclusion of emitter resistances will kill the bass for instance..will be "that bootstrapp" with less bass only.
Waste of energy .... re-doing things already made... this is not a progress to the forum...you may be able, i believe, to do more creative things.... not to return to the standard design, for instance, using the emitter resistances.
This was already made and tested...maybe you wanna to see by yourself... a lot of work to see by youself...but this is fair..the need to believe into the results of some modifications.
The old ancient bootstrapp circuits used the traditional output coil and the power transistor emitter resistances...and that zener was used into several Sansui... i think Sansui designers were not stupid.
regards,
Carlos
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Yes , I can do folded cascodes , leach , many others. For this application (rear channels with little space) I needed a VERY simple circuit that would still sound good.
The better amp (totally subjective) , like the small symasym , was suggested as a rear channel option. Since I wanted something "all in one" and small , I chose the best 8-9 transistor amp I know of - this one.
For the fuse holders , I want something that will be available (globally) , is small and inexpensive.
OS
All done with PDF
http://71.203.202.56/pdf1/Electronics/Projects/Audio_amp/Frugalamp/BTF50.pdf
It's done , not to better DX or anyone... it is a toy , but should be a good sounding one. Main objective was #1 .. for my own use, and #2, for a easy alternative to entry level chip amps (lm3886).
Any errors please tell me.
Next is supersym PCB.. after 50 emails , I have to do that one.
OS
http://71.203.202.56/pdf1/Electronics/Projects/Audio_amp/Frugalamp/BTF50.pdf
It's done , not to better DX or anyone... it is a toy , but should be a good sounding one. Main objective was #1 .. for my own use, and #2, for a easy alternative to entry level chip amps (lm3886).
Any errors please tell me.
Next is supersym PCB.. after 50 emails , I have to do that one.
OS
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Hi OS,
I downloaded the file. Nice work.
I like to look at the schematic, to see what choices you made.
I know you made changes since I posted the spice file, can you repost the spice file now that it's changed ?
For us beginners, some comments on the choices would be welcome, especially as they are different from the one's of similar topology and so you will have a different sound, a BTF sound !
A couple of comments:
Did you check LTP balance, I found that symmetrical resistor values produces an unbalanced LTP and you need to have R8 is larger than R5
The RCA uses 100R to establish driver current, but this might be a lot of current for your driver devices ?
I downloaded the file. Nice work.
I like to look at the schematic, to see what choices you made.
I know you made changes since I posted the spice file, can you repost the spice file now that it's changed ?
For us beginners, some comments on the choices would be welcome, especially as they are different from the one's of similar topology and so you will have a different sound, a BTF sound !
A couple of comments:
Did you check LTP balance, I found that symmetrical resistor values produces an unbalanced LTP and you need to have R8 is larger than R5
The RCA uses 100R to establish driver current, but this might be a lot of current for your driver devices ?
It is the first page on the PDF.
It is the reverse of the one I have running (NPN LTP) , 1 year and going.............................
I am so busy
trying to blow up the "supersyms" now.People don't realize that I expose these creations to the ultimate ignorance before I release them to the general DIY'ers. Here and now I do admit to
.... but , the morning after , I read the graph on how the OPS performed.. (the PC is involved).If any down loaders could mentally look at the schema , main PCB , and parts (silk) , and inform me of any anomalies , I would be forever grateful... thanks.
OS
EDIT : with the CCS I noticed that the value of the NFB trannies collector resistor did not matter. Worst case, one could jumper the PCB resistor for it. (all thought out).
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.