Which audio buffer design is the best for Gainclone?

Status
Not open for further replies.
As I replaced my schematic file, even in the posting before you see now the actual schematic, wich sounds VERY fine:

An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.


Differences now:

- no more coupling cap, DC-coupled (the grid is on zero potential)
- More gain, a little bit to much (will reduce Rf from 10K to 6.8K.
- Overall feedback
- now 3Watt output on 8 ohm, before SOFT clipping starts

I think, it is now one of my best sounding amps and I will convert the second one soon.

But, maybe, I will finish first this real tube amp (was in the pipeline some time now), a PL519 single end in enhanced triode mode:

An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.


Franz
 
Carlos

I agree: the OPA627 or 637 fits in very good audio systems.

But (please, people, dont kill me! I know, I am in the Chip Amp forum...):

This LM3xxx chips, I don't really like them! As I mentioned before, the asymetrical outputstage of this chips is the bottleneck for real high end.

So, what is the "gain" to put the best opamp as a buffer in front of a not perfect powerstage?

I did not try other poweropamps up to now.

I would recommend to all owners of fullrange speakers, like Fostex FE206E in backloaded horn, coral beta, lowther and so on, to forget about this poweropamps and to build a hybrid like shown.

You will be surprised!

Franz
 
Nice schematic, saw it before somewhere but with a different opamp ( NE5534 ).

Some remarks: you could use a 100k or 220k resistor from the non-inverting input to ground ( imagine what will happen if the wiper has a bad day ). The use of an RC filter at the input is preferred as OPA627 has quite a high bandwidth and it likes a series resistor too at its input. Make that filters -3 dB point around 100 kHz.

Probably the use of an input cap ( when it is unknown whether the source is DC free or not ) would be a wise choice but when it can be avoided you should avoid it of course. Did you listen to it like it is now without the 47k overall feedback resistor ?

BTW I don't understand your remark on the asymmetrical output stage of the LM3xxx series when I think of Single Ended tube amps ( or even more: balanced tube amps ) !?!?!
 
I got some SSM2019 balanced driver, audio chips in last week from Digikey -- debating whether to use this or the AD797 for repairing my HP465 low noise preamp.

The SSM2019 is claimed to have 1nV Rt Hz noise, THD 0.001% and it costs way less than the OPA627. This would be a very good low noise input for the GC., or any preamplifier for that matter.

Jack
 
jackinnj said:
The SSM2019 is claimed to have 1nV Rt Hz noise, THD 0.001% and it costs way less than the OPA627. This would be a very good low noise input for the GC., or any preamplifier for that matter.

Jack

You really have to listen.
The AD797, athough good, doesn't sound to me nearly as good as the OPA627.
It would be nice to pick a chip just by the specs, so much easier.:bawling:
 
ChuckT said:
Just curious, is it better to use the opa627 as a buffer or with gain, if so, how much gain. This is for the input of a GC, of cause.


There are plenty of possibilities...
I use it as a buffer, but you could even use the OPA637 with a gain of 5, and decrease the gain at the power op-amp chip.
 
PMA said:
Oh really? Is open loop or high gain behaviour of 3886 that perfect? 😉 (especially distortion, but someone likes it distorted).

You can't go lower than 10x gain...
Do you think it would be a good idea to use an OPA637 with 5x gain and an LM3886 with, say, 15x gain?
I didn't test it, but it may work fine (better?).

As I said, plenty of possibilities...😀
 
carlosfm said:


You can't go lower than 10x gain...
Do you think it would be a good idea to use an OPA637 with 5x gain and an LM3886 with, say, 15x gain?
I didn't test it, but it may work fine (better?).

As I said, plenty of possibilities...😀

For a total of a gain of 75 then...seems a bit high doesn't it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.