I checked all resistors values and R4, R8 and R10 are still all original.
What changed is:
1. R13 = 3.3K
2. R2 = 18R
So, I'll bring all back to the origilal for 62-63dB setup.
1. R13 = 3.3K -> 1.2K
2. R2 = 18R -> 8.2R
Plus add Q1 and R3=8.2R
What changed is:
1. R13 = 3.3K
2. R2 = 18R
So, I'll bring all back to the origilal for 62-63dB setup.
1. R13 = 3.3K -> 1.2K
2. R2 = 18R -> 8.2R
Plus add Q1 and R3=8.2R
Aha, so it wasn't 2K2 and 8R2. So now the situation is clear on the what to do list of actions. What new shape of tip you decided along the boron cantilever BTW?
I have an eliptic diamond on kind of new short boron cantilever. My original was about 15-20% longer and more flexible. Repair guys told me that new one is higher league than my original. Also the coil is smaller size.
BTW, and for R13, is it some differance betwen using CCF02 1.2K Vshay vs. CPF2 1.2K Vishay? Now, I use PRP PR9372 which is 1W rating.
Which one is the most preferable at R13 position?
Which one is the most preferable at R13 position?
Last edited:
CPF2 offers better than 100ppm 1.5% versions. Have you got any info on the DCR of the new cart coils? Should need some different loading value most probably.
Whops I lied http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analogue-source/129126-simplistic-njfet-riaa-1342.html#post4048828
I use some 15 ppm 3 watter. Very stable. The Welwyns I used in the DCB1's audiochain. Have to check the brand I actually dont remember.
Attachments
They are neat. IRC or TT Electronics 20 ppm WW it was for R13.
https://www1.elfa.se/data1/wwwroot/assets/datasheets/T-Wirewound_eng_tds.pdf
The question is if to use CPF2 1.2K (100ppm, 1%) or to look for better one. I have it in my hands.
They did not provided DCR and I will need to expiriment. My "old" cart did not react to any load change. I tried from 100R and till 47K. Was no differance in sound or volume level. This one is tesed with 470R, but I'll do full test right after dB change.
More spesifics: which one is better for R13?:
a. Vishay CPF2 1.2K (2W, 100ppm, 1%) - metal film
b. Mills MRA-5 1.2K (5W, 20ppm, 1%) - wirewound, non inductice
a. Vishay CPF2 1.2K (2W, 100ppm, 1%) - metal film
b. Mills MRA-5 1.2K (5W, 20ppm, 1%) - wirewound, non inductice
Salas,
I want to use an attenuator after the phono stage.
At the moment I am using a 10K single step attenuator for about 4 dB attenuation which seems to work fine but since it is easy for one to convince themselves that all is fine please let me know if you think this value should not stress the stage.
As the phono stage has begun to age it does just get better and better.
The most beautiful massed string sound I have ever heard from my system.
It is doing lots of work until I get a line stage assembled. It is driving a pair of First Watt SITs single stage mode with a 10k input impedance (only working above 500 hz., a First Watt J2 below and a pair of Yamaha crossovers below 100 hz. My plan is to place attenuatiors between phono and line and let the line stage have unfettered access to the amps and crossovers.
Doesn't sound strained but I suspect it will only get better with a proper line stage following. Just when you think dynamics may be suppressed something comes along to dispel that notion.
Such a fine device. Thanks, again.
I want to use an attenuator after the phono stage.
At the moment I am using a 10K single step attenuator for about 4 dB attenuation which seems to work fine but since it is easy for one to convince themselves that all is fine please let me know if you think this value should not stress the stage.
As the phono stage has begun to age it does just get better and better.
The most beautiful massed string sound I have ever heard from my system.
It is doing lots of work until I get a line stage assembled. It is driving a pair of First Watt SITs single stage mode with a 10k input impedance (only working above 500 hz., a First Watt J2 below and a pair of Yamaha crossovers below 100 hz. My plan is to place attenuatiors between phono and line and let the line stage have unfettered access to the amps and crossovers.
Doesn't sound strained but I suspect it will only get better with a proper line stage following. Just when you think dynamics may be suppressed something comes along to dispel that notion.
Such a fine device. Thanks, again.
"Such a fine device. Thanks, again.
__________________
Rick McInnis "
Yes, ain't it 🙂
Regards
__________________
Rick McInnis "
Yes, ain't it 🙂
Regards
@ Rick
It sure does a lot of driving work for you now. Its output impedance is rather low, about 50 Ohm. Still not sporting a high bias current chunky devices driving stage. 20K attn could help? Just two elegant TO-92 JFETS do the FSP's buffer thing for all those amps and crossovers now. So there must be room for experimentation. As to put in practice your plan of rearrangement or using a go-between powerful line circuit. Will it also work against transparency as long as boosting dynamics? Ultimately Rick only knows what he will prefer more. The saga continues.🙂
P.S. It will be nice to remind us about what consists the rest of your intriguing diy system when you will feel like writing a few lines. Any nice pictures?
@ Turbon
Regards
It sure does a lot of driving work for you now. Its output impedance is rather low, about 50 Ohm. Still not sporting a high bias current chunky devices driving stage. 20K attn could help? Just two elegant TO-92 JFETS do the FSP's buffer thing for all those amps and crossovers now. So there must be room for experimentation. As to put in practice your plan of rearrangement or using a go-between powerful line circuit. Will it also work against transparency as long as boosting dynamics? Ultimately Rick only knows what he will prefer more. The saga continues.🙂
P.S. It will be nice to remind us about what consists the rest of your intriguing diy system when you will feel like writing a few lines. Any nice pictures?
@ Turbon
Regards