Hi, all:
Well, I don't understand all this discussion, but I can tell you that I love Soundstream Reference amplifiers and have been using them since the mid-late 90's when I bought two Reference 405 amplifiers for pro installation in a couple of my vehicles. Jaime has worked on one of them, but he said he isn't doing it any more.
I try other amplifiers, but I keep going back to the sound of these amplifiers. I am not a ground pounder, just SQ. I have so many in my garage as spares, I have lost count. But I did count how many Reference 500 (original, "S" and one "SX"), and I have 9 of them. They have been my favorite. Very versatile, I can run several in my car and have no problems using stock alternator and maybe an extra cranking power battery. But again, I probably don't tax them like some folks who wire them down to a micro ohm. I spent a huge amount of time insulating my truck so it is quiet as a library so I can hear my stereo, everything.
Awesome amplifiers. Always my favorites.
Well, I don't understand all this discussion, but I can tell you that I love Soundstream Reference amplifiers and have been using them since the mid-late 90's when I bought two Reference 405 amplifiers for pro installation in a couple of my vehicles. Jaime has worked on one of them, but he said he isn't doing it any more.
I try other amplifiers, but I keep going back to the sound of these amplifiers. I am not a ground pounder, just SQ. I have so many in my garage as spares, I have lost count. But I did count how many Reference 500 (original, "S" and one "SX"), and I have 9 of them. They have been my favorite. Very versatile, I can run several in my car and have no problems using stock alternator and maybe an extra cranking power battery. But again, I probably don't tax them like some folks who wire them down to a micro ohm. I spent a huge amount of time insulating my truck so it is quiet as a library so I can hear my stereo, everything.
Awesome amplifiers. Always my favorites.
Hello MOER, this is a response to your last message.
I am going to answer your questions in the order you presented them. But first I want to say I made a mistake in my last message. I said we built 12,000 amps in 19 years. I turns out we built over 320,000 amplifiers.
Please find the charts I have attached to this message.
The bias on the Class A’s was set at 100ma, that’s considerably more than a Class AB amp. That creates a .1 volt drop across the 1 ohm resistor at idle. The idea of the Class A’s was that it operates in Class A mode until the drop across the diode reaches 700mv, at that point the amp switches to Class AB operation.
You mentioned that the SOA on the TIP102 at 30v is 2.7A it’s actually more like 2.8v, at 40v it’s 2A according to chart (pg. 1). Then you said that the SOA of the TIP142 at 30v is 4A it’s not, on the chart (pg. 2) I provided you will see its only 3A, you say at 40v its 2.8A but it’s actually 1.7A, that’s a 15% increase with the 102’s. If you look at the last chart (pg. 3) that shows the TIP102 at 100ms, you will see @ 100ms at 30v the tIP102 has a SOA of 3.8A. Chart 1 and 2 were downloaded yesterday from Fairchild. Chart 3 is from Motorola.
A TIP142 at Mouser from Fairchild costs $0.915 @ 100 pcs. The TIP102 at Mouser from Fairchild is $0.59 @ 100 pcs. That a savings of 35%. It will take the same number of transistors to build any amp.
What this means is using the 102 @ 100ms which the engineer that designed the Rubicon amps didn’t. I was able to build a 700 watt amp with 6 pairs of devices and the Rubicon used 7 pairs.
7 pair @ .915 x 14 = $12.81
6 pair @ .59ea x 12 = $ 7.08
A Savings of -------- $ 5.73 = 45%
With greater SOA than the TIP142’s, especially when limited to 100ms.
I am going to answer your questions in the order you presented them. But first I want to say I made a mistake in my last message. I said we built 12,000 amps in 19 years. I turns out we built over 320,000 amplifiers.
Please find the charts I have attached to this message.
The bias on the Class A’s was set at 100ma, that’s considerably more than a Class AB amp. That creates a .1 volt drop across the 1 ohm resistor at idle. The idea of the Class A’s was that it operates in Class A mode until the drop across the diode reaches 700mv, at that point the amp switches to Class AB operation.
You mentioned that the SOA on the TIP102 at 30v is 2.7A it’s actually more like 2.8v, at 40v it’s 2A according to chart (pg. 1). Then you said that the SOA of the TIP142 at 30v is 4A it’s not, on the chart (pg. 2) I provided you will see its only 3A, you say at 40v its 2.8A but it’s actually 1.7A, that’s a 15% increase with the 102’s. If you look at the last chart (pg. 3) that shows the TIP102 at 100ms, you will see @ 100ms at 30v the tIP102 has a SOA of 3.8A. Chart 1 and 2 were downloaded yesterday from Fairchild. Chart 3 is from Motorola.
A TIP142 at Mouser from Fairchild costs $0.915 @ 100 pcs. The TIP102 at Mouser from Fairchild is $0.59 @ 100 pcs. That a savings of 35%. It will take the same number of transistors to build any amp.
What this means is using the 102 @ 100ms which the engineer that designed the Rubicon amps didn’t. I was able to build a 700 watt amp with 6 pairs of devices and the Rubicon used 7 pairs.
7 pair @ .915 x 14 = $12.81
6 pair @ .59ea x 12 = $ 7.08
A Savings of -------- $ 5.73 = 45%
With greater SOA than the TIP142’s, especially when limited to 100ms.
TIP102 and TIP142 charts
Hello MOER, I don't think the charts i gave you ever uploaded. so here they are again. along with my reply.
Hey MOER,
I am going to answer your questions in the order you presented them. But first I want to say I made a mistake in my last message. I said we built 12,000 amps in 19 years. I turns out we built over 320,000 amplifiers.
The bias on the Class A’s was set at 100ma, that’s considerably more than a Class AB amp. That creates a .1 volt drop across the 1 ohm resistor at idle. The idea of the Class A’s was that it operates in Class A mode until the drop across the diode reaches 700mv, at that point the amp switches to Class AB operation.
You mentioned that the SOA on the TIP102 at 30v is 2.7A it’s actually more like 2.8v, at 40v it’s 2A according to chart (pg. 1). Then you said that the SOA of the TIP142 at 30v is 4A it’s not, on the chart (pg. 2) I provided you will see its only 3A, you say at 40v its 2.8A but it’s actually 1.7A, that’s a 15% increase with the 102’s. If you look at the last chart (pg. 3) that shows the TIP102 at 100ms, you will see @ 100ms at 30v the tIP102 has a SOA of 3.8A. Chart 1 and 2 were downloaded yesterday from Fairchild. Chart 3 is from Motorola.
A TIP142 at Mouser from Fairchild costs $0.915 @ 100 pcs. The TIP102 at Mouser from Fairchild is $0.59 @ 100 pcs. That a savings of 35%. It will take the same number of transistors to build any amp.
What this means is using the 102 @ 100ms which the engineer that designed the Rubicon amps didn’t. I was able to build a 700 watt amp with 6 pairs of devices and the Rubicon used 7 pairs.
7 pair @ .915 x 14 = $12.81
6 pair @ .59ea x 12 = $ 7.08
A Savings of -------- $ 5.73 = 45%
With greater SOA than the TIP142’s, especially when limited to 100ms.
Hello MOER, I don't think the charts i gave you ever uploaded. so here they are again. along with my reply.
Hey MOER,
I am going to answer your questions in the order you presented them. But first I want to say I made a mistake in my last message. I said we built 12,000 amps in 19 years. I turns out we built over 320,000 amplifiers.
The bias on the Class A’s was set at 100ma, that’s considerably more than a Class AB amp. That creates a .1 volt drop across the 1 ohm resistor at idle. The idea of the Class A’s was that it operates in Class A mode until the drop across the diode reaches 700mv, at that point the amp switches to Class AB operation.
You mentioned that the SOA on the TIP102 at 30v is 2.7A it’s actually more like 2.8v, at 40v it’s 2A according to chart (pg. 1). Then you said that the SOA of the TIP142 at 30v is 4A it’s not, on the chart (pg. 2) I provided you will see its only 3A, you say at 40v its 2.8A but it’s actually 1.7A, that’s a 15% increase with the 102’s. If you look at the last chart (pg. 3) that shows the TIP102 at 100ms, you will see @ 100ms at 30v the tIP102 has a SOA of 3.8A. Chart 1 and 2 were downloaded yesterday from Fairchild. Chart 3 is from Motorola.
A TIP142 at Mouser from Fairchild costs $0.915 @ 100 pcs. The TIP102 at Mouser from Fairchild is $0.59 @ 100 pcs. That a savings of 35%. It will take the same number of transistors to build any amp.
What this means is using the 102 @ 100ms which the engineer that designed the Rubicon amps didn’t. I was able to build a 700 watt amp with 6 pairs of devices and the Rubicon used 7 pairs.
7 pair @ .915 x 14 = $12.81
6 pair @ .59ea x 12 = $ 7.08
A Savings of -------- $ 5.73 = 45%
With greater SOA than the TIP142’s, especially when limited to 100ms.
Steve Mantz of ZED and Wade Stewart of SoundStream in the same thread talking amp technology together. 
I don't think its gets much better then this. Makes me happy I lived 57 years, and thru the whole car audio thing up till this point in time. I guess if you live long enough you will see anything and everything...Woo- Hoo!
Now all I got left is to meet myself
lol lol lol...
I don't think its gets much better then this. Makes me happy I lived 57 years, and thru the whole car audio thing up till this point in time. I guess if you live long enough you will see anything and everything...Woo- Hoo!
Now all I got left is to meet myself
lol lol lol... Wade Stewart of Stewart Electronics and SoundStream, meet Steve Mantz of ZED.
Steve Mantz meet Wade Stewart.
Now who the hell am I, is the real question? LOL LOL LOL
Wade Stewart of Stewart Electronics and SoundStream, meet Steve Mantz of ZED.
Steve Mantz meet Wade Stewart.
Now who the hell am I, is the real question? LOL LOL LOL
Gentleman, <MOER & wadest >
I hope my introductions were not too late or taken out of context. It's a very rare occasion when two of the bigger names in car audio come around and visit us here in our little corner of the world.
We are a group of people that has spent a fair amount of our lifetime inside the gear you and and others have designed, built and mass produced under one name or another over the last ~30 years or so. We welcome you both gladly to our little piece of the world here, and openly invite you both to share and talk technology with us as freely as you wish.
We however do follow some very simple politeness rules here of trying to show dignified respect to one another. Industry giants like yourself hopefully will appreciate our open minded approach to sharing info and technology with one another here and both of you will continue to visit and be a part of what we have here. We all live together in a glass house gentleman. And we all know what they say about throwing stones in a glass house now don't we? The service end of the business can be pretty tough at times. I have often found myself cleaning up others workmanship. You should see the MC2205 I'm recovering/restoring currently
.As I said I don't think its gets any better then this < this meaning having the two of you here talking to one another and sharing engineering incite with all of us >
Who am I?
myself, no one special, a retired Silicon valley equipment engineer. I got my first 2 year degree in electronics at age 16 while I was in high school, in 6 weeks. I guess you could say I am quick learner lol. I spent most of my life working in around and on the equipment used to manufacture the Silicon you guys used to make money with.
I am one of the several others here that has serviced just about each and every piece of gear you guys ever designed, built, and took to market under your own name and others. And we did all that with little to no support from either of you or your companies. Hence why we all so eagerly appreciate you both being here together and sharing with us, < Us being the loyal repair tech's that supported all your gear for so many years >
Here on the DIY < its a very large forum mind you > I have had the pleasure to meet and learn from some of the biggest names in the audio technology business. When I found this little corner of the world I found Perry Babin here mostly by himself answering dozens of support questions daily to anyone that would care to ask for help. Perry being the great guy he is always giving of himself in such a selfless manner inspired me and I am sure others to come on board to do the same.
A word of wisdom to everyone. There are some really bright engineering people on this overall forum. Some of the larger and more successful names also. People that have written books on the subject of Audio engineering, books we all learned from in school. Only here on the DIY/ Nelson Pass forum do we all get to meet and greet everyone from the beginning technologist to the Past Masters of this huge business. What a great place to be.....
Welcome aboard the car audio section of the DIY forum, Thank you both < MOER & wadest > for joining us here in our little piece of the world, and please continue sharing both your keen incites with us all
Hello MOER, I know we have been having this debate over Soundstream Class A amplifiers are actually Class A. I hope you know that theres no animosity between us. we are just stating our beliefs. The person you should really be having this debate with is Nelson Pass. He designed the original soundstream car amps inluding the Class A amps. I merely adapted the technology once I was responsible for any future designs. It's nice to sort of meet you. I've heard alot about your amps but i have never seen one.
Thanks
Thanks
the heater, i recieved a different message from you the other day, one where you included your email address. if you want to contact me directly my email is: wade@fatpro.com
sorry i didn't get back to you sooner nut i was replying to your message and my computer locked up and when i got back online i had lost the reply to you and couldn't find your message.
you say you like the way the soundstream amps sound. i believe it's because we used Darlington transistors. in Darlingtons both the driver transistor and the output transistor are in the same package, so they phyisically vibrate against each other resulting in even order harmonic distortion just like tubes do. most transistor distortion is odd order harmonic distortion which are disinants, so they stop the normal resonance of music.
in my earlier days i was a musician and built guitar amps using Darlingtons under the name of Rock amps. we sold about 48,000 amps in three years and then another company bought it and i left. they weren't around for long after that. guitar players loved them ecause they sounded like tube amps and were smaller and lighter. i still get guitarists that want one of those amps.
i originally was saying that if 1moreamp is doing your repairs that you should stick with him. i have noticed his presence on DIYMA and i think he's a great guy. he sent me a message saying he was turning over you as a customer to me. i feel thats really up to you. he just told me today about his kidney problem. hopefully he can get a transplant and he'll be fine. you also mentioned that Jaime has done work for you also. he worked for me at Stewart Electronics where all of the Stewart pro audio products were made and where all of the early soundstream amps were made. he is still a great friend. if you ever have any questions or need anything just let me know.
it seems you have amassed a good bit of knowledge about car audio in general. from what i gather you have quite a collection of soundstream amps. i have found many people that collect them. most of the amps have never been out of the box or hooked up. i know of two people who also collect soundstream home audio products as well.
thanks, please contact me if you need anything.
sorry i didn't get back to you sooner nut i was replying to your message and my computer locked up and when i got back online i had lost the reply to you and couldn't find your message.
you say you like the way the soundstream amps sound. i believe it's because we used Darlington transistors. in Darlingtons both the driver transistor and the output transistor are in the same package, so they phyisically vibrate against each other resulting in even order harmonic distortion just like tubes do. most transistor distortion is odd order harmonic distortion which are disinants, so they stop the normal resonance of music.
in my earlier days i was a musician and built guitar amps using Darlingtons under the name of Rock amps. we sold about 48,000 amps in three years and then another company bought it and i left. they weren't around for long after that. guitar players loved them ecause they sounded like tube amps and were smaller and lighter. i still get guitarists that want one of those amps.
i originally was saying that if 1moreamp is doing your repairs that you should stick with him. i have noticed his presence on DIYMA and i think he's a great guy. he sent me a message saying he was turning over you as a customer to me. i feel thats really up to you. he just told me today about his kidney problem. hopefully he can get a transplant and he'll be fine. you also mentioned that Jaime has done work for you also. he worked for me at Stewart Electronics where all of the Stewart pro audio products were made and where all of the early soundstream amps were made. he is still a great friend. if you ever have any questions or need anything just let me know.
it seems you have amassed a good bit of knowledge about car audio in general. from what i gather you have quite a collection of soundstream amps. i have found many people that collect them. most of the amps have never been out of the box or hooked up. i know of two people who also collect soundstream home audio products as well.
thanks, please contact me if you need anything.
sheep, by earlier series are you talking about the D series and first Class A series. the very first amps were designed by Nelson Pass. i8 just made them more manufacturable. the II series were my first designs but they still were versions of Nelsons designsd. i don't remember exactly but it seems the switching frequency of the first amps was in the 30KHz region. they used resonant supplies, no clock chip or timers. they worked well but they operated on the theory that one transistor would always turn on before the other but if they didn't then the supply would blow up. i remeber the first trade show that soundstream attended was CES in Chicago in 1981. Lee Adams the durector of soundstream and Terry Carrol were both there. they hooked up amps before i got there and they were slowly raising the voltage on the power supply. of course everyone they did that to blew up. luckily they still had a couple amps left when i got there. the next amps and the first totally designed by me were the MC series. they used a PWM clock chip and operated at 56KHz. if you want to know anything else let me know.