No, you made the statement that "you cannot achieve that level of performance with a linear supply".
It is clear that a regulated linear supply can perform equally well, and things become more difficult with unregulated supplies, linear or SM.
The SMPS has the huge advantage of efficiency, no question.
Agree.
Magnetization currents pretty much depend on core excitation.
Standard toroidal power supply transformers mostly get pretty high in this respect (up to 1.7-1.8 Tesla), whereas I have an upper limit of 1.2T with my c-core based power supply transformers. I hardly measure loss, and (also) because of the low T these transformers are quiet and stay cool.
Efficiency is low however; double the VA rating for cores is required to reach these specs.
Owen, all credits for the Wire Amp project.
I never meant to "derail" the thread, but as this is an open forum, comments on absolute statements are justified IMO when they seem questionable.
Owen's comment was quite clear in the context of this thread. I didn't for a second feel he was making a blanket statement about all possible iterations of a linear supply regardless of cost, size, efficiency or complexity. It's obvious he was comparing to the type of linear supply most of us would be considering as an alternative for this particular amp. (ie. Not regulated)
pieter t, you wrote this in reply to a very specifically chosen extract from opc's post.
If you read the rest of the post that you were quoting, you'd find this:
Basically I think we're going in a circle here and all you're chasing is likely already a work in progress (as explained in the post that you took issue with). Those measurements will demonstrate the ability of these smps to perform adequately in this application, user can decide then if there is in fact any compromise to be made and if they is happy to live with that compromise.
If you read the rest of the post that you were quoting, you'd find this:
Basically I think we're going in a circle here and all you're chasing is likely already a work in progress (as explained in the post that you took issue with). Those measurements will demonstrate the ability of these smps to perform adequately in this application, user can decide then if there is in fact any compromise to be made and if they is happy to live with that compromise.
Last edited:
Hi Guys,
To answer that question that popped up earlier:
I would say no at this point. One of the things we struggled with was getting the supplies to start up with the relatively high bias load presented by the amps. AP2 managed to modify both so that they start up without issue at 400mA. but connecting two amps to one PSU means you'd have to limit the bias of each amp to roughly 200-250mA. That's right on the edge of acceptable bias levels, so you might be pushing it.
Both supplies are really intended to power one amp each, with the larger supply being ideal for people who want more power (300W) and the smaller supply being ideal for those who want something more in the range of 100-150W.
Cheers,
Owen
To answer that question that popped up earlier:
I would say no at this point. One of the things we struggled with was getting the supplies to start up with the relatively high bias load presented by the amps. AP2 managed to modify both so that they start up without issue at 400mA. but connecting two amps to one PSU means you'd have to limit the bias of each amp to roughly 200-250mA. That's right on the edge of acceptable bias levels, so you might be pushing it.
Both supplies are really intended to power one amp each, with the larger supply being ideal for people who want more power (300W) and the smaller supply being ideal for those who want something more in the range of 100-150W.
Cheers,
Owen
I dont really need the power right now, but i like the idea of having it in reserve, its moreso the performance benefits of the DPS600 that interest me, otherwise i would be going for dps500. i got the impression from AP2 that running 2 amps would not be such a big problem when i mentioned it to him in an email recently, but maybe he misunderstood me, or I him
Hi, The main reason that the DPS-600 can offer a special performance when connected to a single amp(apart the startup current limiter that is possible modify), because it uses a differential feedback. these two signals control the current charge and discharge of a capacitor out of current loop.
in the case of two amps, this information is not in sync with one rail (a rail at a time), then under the impulse, the voltage drops. (this is what happens)
The problem we encounter with these two SMPS (600-500) is that they are discussed as SMPS in general, this is wrong becouse they are not normal SMPS.
do not use a pwm as a controller: (i mean, does not use the width of a pulse to adjust the voltage). This ensures that the transformer works with fixed parameters, well-adjusted for maximum performance.
I can not explain much of this work as SMPS, I think that's understandable.
I took a year to discard all based on the PWM circuits, only the harmonics generated can not be deleted because they are inherent in the nature of the square wave, then I had to solve the speed of response. (the power regulator and identical to a stage amp in class A but with 10MHz BW.
Power-Unit uses a non-standard transformer.
what has been achieved, is a small module that can provide up to 16Amp output, with great respect specifically to the amplifier, absolutely clean.
I understand that this subject is very delicate. I am sure that OPC is the right person to show what now I said ,even in other threads.
My comparison during development has been a 500VA transformer with 2x47000uF. I know so well if I passed the transformer or not. and what are the limits of a linear transformer.
I want to remember that the DPS-600, uses only 3x87uF (real capacitance at 100 Hz)
This is the first thing is not normal for this power & ripple.
Regards
Roberto
in the case of two amps, this information is not in sync with one rail (a rail at a time), then under the impulse, the voltage drops. (this is what happens)
The problem we encounter with these two SMPS (600-500) is that they are discussed as SMPS in general, this is wrong becouse they are not normal SMPS.
do not use a pwm as a controller: (i mean, does not use the width of a pulse to adjust the voltage). This ensures that the transformer works with fixed parameters, well-adjusted for maximum performance.
I can not explain much of this work as SMPS, I think that's understandable.
I took a year to discard all based on the PWM circuits, only the harmonics generated can not be deleted because they are inherent in the nature of the square wave, then I had to solve the speed of response. (the power regulator and identical to a stage amp in class A but with 10MHz BW.
Power-Unit uses a non-standard transformer.
what has been achieved, is a small module that can provide up to 16Amp output, with great respect specifically to the amplifier, absolutely clean.
I understand that this subject is very delicate. I am sure that OPC is the right person to show what now I said ,even in other threads.
My comparison during development has been a 500VA transformer with 2x47000uF. I know so well if I passed the transformer or not. and what are the limits of a linear transformer.
I want to remember that the DPS-600, uses only 3x87uF (real capacitance at 100 Hz)
This is the first thing is not normal for this power & ripple.
Regards
Roberto
sorry i should have been clearer by separating the sentences like below, i didnt mean regarding the dps600, only dps400 and dps500 as when i was in contact with you i was still undecided if i could justify the dps600 for my multichannel amp, but now with the group pricing it becomes more attractive. the feedback obviously cannot be shared over 2 dynamic rails simultaneously for the dps600
so it should read
qusp said:
AP2: I did not realize that the dps500 and dps600 were of the same family, the copy on your site seems to suggest a departure that uses new technology with the dps600. I dont know enough about switchmode supplies to analyze the schematic
for sure your description above has me even more interested in what seems to be a hybrid/new type of PSU. we were talking just before about linear supplies being great, provided you are prepared to build a second pair of amplifiers to power your amplifiers.but now it seems you have done exactly that for us in a neat SMD package. due to the 1 per channel requirement the dps600 is still not really small, but for sure its smaller than i could build a 16A capable CLASS A amp to power my amps with 😎
Last edited:
Hi Qusp,
sorry, while i write in translator, not have read your last post..one at time ahah!
dps-500 according to the total power output,can supply two amps (up to 800mA of bias), for this i advice the "/S" version.
i think, as said opc, that one dps-400 is perfect for 150w(8R), obvius have good reserve of power at low load.
as dps-600 for 300w(8R), it is in range of max power also at low load.
sorry, while i write in translator, not have read your last post..one at time ahah!
dps-500 according to the total power output,can supply two amps (up to 800mA of bias), for this i advice the "/S" version.
i think, as said opc, that one dps-400 is perfect for 150w(8R), obvius have good reserve of power at low load.
as dps-600 for 300w(8R), it is in range of max power also at low load.
DPS-500 & 600 uses a new concept, very similar, but not exactly equal.
Therefore, both are not normal like other SMPS, as i have post before.
Only for commercial reason now is available the dps-600/DA for class D. at this point the difference with the DPS-500 are:
not running at 110Vac
max power output 650w
size (more compact)
competitive price
this version use same regulator stage of dps-500.
Sorry for this OT, i put only for clearance
Regards
Therefore, both are not normal like other SMPS, as i have post before.
Only for commercial reason now is available the dps-600/DA for class D. at this point the difference with the DPS-500 are:
not running at 110Vac
max power output 650w
size (more compact)
competitive price
this version use same regulator stage of dps-500.
Sorry for this OT, i put only for clearance
Regards
Bonjour guys,
Very interesting mini debate around the PS, we always learn from these little battles.
Now, what do I do with my 10 channels?
for 10x100w I guess I need the smaller DPS-400, would I get one free if I buy 10? 🙂
cheeese it starting to add up, I guess I will be well over 2000$ at the end of the project.. Gotta outperform a Bryston I tell ya!
I was planning 10x300VA toroids first with separate chassis but now i am very keen on this SPMS modules, in only one big chassis..
Very interesting mini debate around the PS, we always learn from these little battles.
Now, what do I do with my 10 channels?
for 10x100w I guess I need the smaller DPS-400, would I get one free if I buy 10? 🙂
cheeese it starting to add up, I guess I will be well over 2000$ at the end of the project.. Gotta outperform a Bryston I tell ya!
I was planning 10x300VA toroids first with separate chassis but now i am very keen on this SPMS modules, in only one big chassis..
Last edited:
So, the 600 is the fancy one with the feedback that beats even an 'audio grade' 1kVA Tx with 40,000uf of Nichicon grade 4 caps (or 60,000uF). (Per mono block (placed by the speakers as you're often FAR better off using the shortest speak cables you can))
So here was my plan, to use active cross overs to split the bass off from the mid and top. I planned to use the one big linear supply (Tx and main caps) to drive two amplifier boards and banks of output devices, in each mono block.
Am I to understand then that this can't be done with the 600 as it is, due to the two sets of bias currents? Or the need for two separate sets of feedback intrinsic within the SMPS?
Two 600's per mono block starts to cost maybe more than the big linear supplies (which I already own several times over) and whilst I'm considering buying two of the SMPS I'm not sure I'd stretch to four at this time.
Also, does the output voltage of the SMPS vary with the change in AC main voltage (from the UK (and probably EU) legal limits of 215 to 253V)? And is it good for 275 V AC mains as it goes up to that sometimes here in some parts of London.
Does the SMPS performance vary with the change in mains voltage?
I think it said it somewhere in previous pages but does the amplifiers early stage need to, or benefit from being, regulated when using this 600 SMPS? Or the 500 or 400?
Thanks.
So here was my plan, to use active cross overs to split the bass off from the mid and top. I planned to use the one big linear supply (Tx and main caps) to drive two amplifier boards and banks of output devices, in each mono block.
Am I to understand then that this can't be done with the 600 as it is, due to the two sets of bias currents? Or the need for two separate sets of feedback intrinsic within the SMPS?
Two 600's per mono block starts to cost maybe more than the big linear supplies (which I already own several times over) and whilst I'm considering buying two of the SMPS I'm not sure I'd stretch to four at this time.
Also, does the output voltage of the SMPS vary with the change in AC main voltage (from the UK (and probably EU) legal limits of 215 to 253V)? And is it good for 275 V AC mains as it goes up to that sometimes here in some parts of London.
Does the SMPS performance vary with the change in mains voltage?
I think it said it somewhere in previous pages but does the amplifiers early stage need to, or benefit from being, regulated when using this 600 SMPS? Or the 500 or 400?
Thanks.
Last edited:
this has been explained several times but i'll try again. you cannot use the 600 in this form for 2 reasons
1. the bias currents at start up will be too high even for the latest and last modification to raise the current output of the auxiliary/front end supply
2. the DPS600 uses a differential sense/feedback to track the load dynamically, this is not possible with more than one dynamically different load, such as left and right channels, or high/mid and bass driver channels because understandably it cannot track 2 different signals simultaneously. similar to how you could not expect a super regulator or even a tracking 3 pin regulator to follow 2 different loads, or even connecting 2 feedback loops to 1 amp, because that is exactly what you would be doing
i'll leave these for AP2, but i dont know that i would expect them to cope with 33% fluctuation in your mains voltage, which is quite unbelievable
1. the bias currents at start up will be too high even for the latest and last modification to raise the current output of the auxiliary/front end supply
2. the DPS600 uses a differential sense/feedback to track the load dynamically, this is not possible with more than one dynamically different load, such as left and right channels, or high/mid and bass driver channels because understandably it cannot track 2 different signals simultaneously. similar to how you could not expect a super regulator or even a tracking 3 pin regulator to follow 2 different loads, or even connecting 2 feedback loops to 1 amp, because that is exactly what you would be doing
IanAS said:
i'll leave these for AP2, but i dont know that i would expect them to cope with 33% fluctuation in your mains voltage, which is quite unbelievable
need to?.. no, the dps600 (have you read the datasheet?) like most decent supplies of this kind has an auxiliary regulated supply for exactly this reason. i understand as part of the modifications for the wire amps it will supply the higher voltage for the front end needed for headroom. opc has not done the testing yet AFAIK to find out if there is a real benefit to further post regulation with the linear regulator boards. I would expect the benefits to be minimal
one man's drawback is another's advantage. swings and roundabouts as we'd say 'down under'.
Hi all,
@ IaNas:I do not know if you're referring to some non-official version of the DPS-600, we certainly have talked about that was compared with 600VA and 2x47000uF it offers a better response of the transformer, both in repetitive bursts, that envelopes of orchestral (more prolonged).
But here, we talk about a specific version for the wire Amp or other good class AB, with up to 500mA bias. 450-500w rms otput
The working range of dps-600/400 is from 190 to 260V. In this range, output voltage drift 50mV or better.(voltage output, use a system as pll with precise ref compensated voltage).
Output voltage Vs. the load follows the curve with 200mV/Ampere. (test with 2x2200uF at output) and burst signal.
Obvius That this performance is linked to a minimum voltage of 215Vac. and not change up to 260V.
2xdps-600 can be used in parallel (on one amp)to INCREASE output current (30Amp peak) but at this point, (some have done), you should use 2xdps-500.
Both models can be mounted vertically, coupled.
DPS-400 is a compact SMPS Unregulated, very clean, they defended well, especially in the case of multi-way.
for the cost .. if you do not need 1Kg. for two units, then use transformers 🙂
@ IaNas:I do not know if you're referring to some non-official version of the DPS-600, we certainly have talked about that was compared with 600VA and 2x47000uF it offers a better response of the transformer, both in repetitive bursts, that envelopes of orchestral (more prolonged).
But here, we talk about a specific version for the wire Amp or other good class AB, with up to 500mA bias. 450-500w rms otput
The working range of dps-600/400 is from 190 to 260V. In this range, output voltage drift 50mV or better.(voltage output, use a system as pll with precise ref compensated voltage).
Output voltage Vs. the load follows the curve with 200mV/Ampere. (test with 2x2200uF at output) and burst signal.
Obvius That this performance is linked to a minimum voltage of 215Vac. and not change up to 260V.
2xdps-600 can be used in parallel (on one amp)to INCREASE output current (30Amp peak) but at this point, (some have done), you should use 2xdps-500.
Both models can be mounted vertically, coupled.
DPS-400 is a compact SMPS Unregulated, very clean, they defended well, especially in the case of multi-way.
for the cost .. if you do not need 1Kg. for two units, then use transformers 🙂
Last edited: