F4 power amplifier

Official Court Jester
Joined 2003
Paid Member
same logic, as you see

input (from Graetzs) is on left , output to load (amp) is on right
 

Attachments

  • PSU pcb top.jpg
    PSU pcb top.jpg
    86.1 KB · Views: 411
  • PSU pcb bottom.jpg
    PSU pcb bottom.jpg
    58.1 KB · Views: 404
I’m not good at explaining theory but a choke is a reactive component with no resistive losses. A choke should give better regulation since it stores energy and has less losses than an bunch of resistors for a power supply filter. Inductors in the power supply are good at reducing ripple. Again this isn’t always the case but in a lot of cases. I’m not fully qualified like the pros here but I’m sure someone will give a better explanation than I did.



Just building on the differences between CRC vs CLC approach:
1) PS Stability
- Selection of L values is very important for CLC as you could theoretically build an unstable power supply, typically you need rather big inductors for the required range
- While CRC is wasting energy, it also makes it unconditionallt stable
2) Magnetic influence
- Inductors in CLC could have magnetic effect on the rest of the circuit
- CRC does not have this effect obviously
3) Ripple reduction (when designed with right parameters)
- CLC is a 2nd order low pass filter: eg 12 db slope
- CRC is a 1st order: eg 6 db. Hence CLC could suppress PS ripple theoretically better but again requires a more careful consideration

So my humble 2 cents: very difficult to call out singular best approach, one needs to consider multiple dimensions for a PS

Hope it helps, (well nothing conclusive so probably not, but still :))
 
Just building on the differences between CRC vs CLC approach:
1) PS Stability
- Selection of L values is very important for CLC as you could theoretically build an unstable power supply, typically you need rather big inductors for the required range
- While CRC is wasting energy, it also makes it unconditionallt stable
2) Magnetic influence
- Inductors in CLC could have magnetic effect on the rest of the circuit
- CRC does not have this effect obviously
3) Ripple reduction (when designed with right parameters)
- CLC is a 2nd order low pass filter: eg 12 db slope
- CRC is a 1st order: eg 6 db. Hence CLC could suppress PS ripple theoretically better but again requires a more careful consideration

So my humble 2 cents: very difficult to call out singular best approach, one needs to consider multiple dimensions for a PS

Hope it helps, (well nothing conclusive so probably not, but still :))

Thanks S. Do you have any sources for a formula for calculating how big the inductor needs to be?
 
My F4 Build

Sharing some pics. Just got my Mini Dissipante chassis from Hifi2000. They did a nice job on a customized faceplate:)

Another pair of F4’s coming alive soon;)
 

Attachments

  • 450A1151-3D81-4FC4-9DFA-F3EE78E66B05.jpeg
    450A1151-3D81-4FC4-9DFA-F3EE78E66B05.jpeg
    113.2 KB · Views: 261
  • F22E9250-5031-4A40-AE6C-7CF7B51D581C.jpg
    F22E9250-5031-4A40-AE6C-7CF7B51D581C.jpg
    976.1 KB · Views: 230
Sharing some pics. Just got my Mini Dissipante chassis from Hifi2000. They did a nice job on a customized faceplate:)

Another pair of F4’s coming alive soon;)

You've built a great RF-reveiver with those foil-resistors >1cm away from PCB with a "loop"-antenna... It's better to form the leads with two fine pliers so that the leads are as short as possible.
 
Member
Joined 2000
Paid Member
Preamp for F4

Another preamp that works well with the F4 is the S5 Electronics K-PL kit.
This was my first tube build and it was pretty easy. Needs a 200v power supply and 6.3v for filaments. Antek has a dual 140v and dual 6.3v secondaries.
I used a 175v version, but had to drop the voltage by ~40v. The 140v will get you closer with less fuss.

K-PL uses a 5670 triode tube, however member (audiowise) recommended the 6922 with a cathode cap. Said 6922 will halve the output impedance. I will be trying th 6922 as well with a 60uF MKP. As-is it sounds pretty good.
I upgraded the main board parts for $25.

Price is right. Basic Bud chassis and other parts came to under $200.
It is my opinion that it sound way better than the price suggests.


S5 K-PL
 
Member
Joined 2004
Paid Member
If I build this crippled version of the F4 to drive some headphones, do I really need R47 source resistors? What's the lowest value I could probably get away with in the case of a single n/p output pair?

Also, I'm considering building it with FQA19N20/FQA12P20 outputs, but that shouldn't make a difference in regard to the source resistor choice I suppose.
 

Attachments

  • f4-for-16e.jpg
    f4-for-16e.jpg
    50.7 KB · Views: 401
Member
Joined 2004
Paid Member
The goal is a scaled down F4 with fewer output pairs, hence I arrived at the crippled F4.

The F4 headphone schematic as seen in post #3026 F4 power amplifier may be what you're referring to, ZM? I still prefer the bigger output FETs.

I already have a case and PSU from my Aleph H build (see attachment), and a 18VAC 250VA transformer, plus a pcb and all the parts for the F4. If I read my notes correctly, the Aleph H currently conveniently dissipates something like 20W per channel, so the +\-22V @0.5A each should fit the current heatsinks nicely.

The amp will drive a HE6 headphone, with a ruler flat 50R impedance. The F1J drives them nicely. According to innerfideliy, the HE6 takes 1.018Vrms to reach 90dB SPL. Vrms=Vpk*2^-.05 and thus Vpk=1.44V. Ipk=Vpk/R and thus Ipk=30mA, roughly. With 6dB of headroom we're at almost 100mA.
 

Attachments

  • qLjCjfv.jpg
    qLjCjfv.jpg
    933.1 KB · Views: 367
Hi,
I am building F4 amp. I have dual mono ad1865 DAC with output transformers doing I/V conversion.
How to connect my dac to F4 to skip AC C1,C2 coupling caps?
Could guys help with this? Do you see any drawback of such approach? Which schematic is correct?
 

Attachments

  • F4_Transformer_v1.jpg
    F4_Transformer_v1.jpg
    60.3 KB · Views: 244
  • F4_Transformer_v2.jpg
    F4_Transformer_v2.jpg
    59.9 KB · Views: 245