After looking at thoudands of xfmr's to use for my audio step-up over the last while, i've gathered both knowledge and confusion 
and need some help.
Can someone please point out the differences or pros and cons of the following two xfmr's.
the 1609 here : http://www.hammondmfg.com//1608.htm
and
the 125C here : http://www.hammondmfg.com//125a.htm
which is better to use?
furly
and need some help.Can someone please point out the differences or pros and cons of the following two xfmr's.
the 1609 here : http://www.hammondmfg.com//1608.htm
and
the 125C here : http://www.hammondmfg.com//125a.htm
which is better to use?
furly
furly said:
Of the two I would say the 1608 or 1609 would be the better for speakers. The 1650E maybe even better, especially if you intend to run the speaker full-range.
Transformer power ratings are proportional to the core size. When comparing two cores of the same material, a larger one will handle more power before saturating. ESLs don't need a lot of power, but they do need some...
The 125C is pretty small and I think you'd run into problems with the core saturating on low frequencies. The 125C is made for replacement of transformers in old radios, etc., and is not really a hi-fi device. Look at the crappy frequency response limits they spec.
Unfortunately Hammond does not specify the low frequency limit of their power ratings. There is a game that marketing people play in which they will claim that a transformer is good for 30W or 50W without telling you that that power rating is for 100 Hz. If you were to look at the same xfmr at 20Hz it would be good for maybe 10W before the core saturates. A 30-50W transformer can be sold for a higher prce than a 10W transformer.
There is another recent thread in this forum in which it is claimed that a toroidal power transformer can be used instead of an audio transformer. I have not tried it, but if it works it could be much less expensive than audio output transformers.
I_F
- Status
- Not open for further replies.