A bit of amplifier nostalgia

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Hello All,

I was cleaning out some old files recently and came across the attached article from a 1966 Radio Electronics magazine, and I thought the “old timers” might get a little nostalgia kick out of it. The regulated power supply is rather unusual for a power amplifier. This was the first amplifier I ever built. I used it for at least 10 years with AR 2A speaker clones. At the time, I thought it sounded really good, I am not sure what I would think today.

Cheers,

ceulrich
 

Attachments

  • Build a COP 30:30.jpg
    Build a COP 30:30.jpg
    476.7 KB · Views: 633
The output stage is underbiased with only two compensation diodes and a resistor, as shown in the diagram the output bias is only 0.9V, not 1.2.
Some observations:
- no bootstrap, making the VAS work harder
- emitter resistor in the VAS - good for improving frequency response
- phase lead compensation - not Miller, reducing the possibility of slew rate distortion
So while this circuit has some good features there is a strong possibility of crossover distortion. With a Vbe stabiliser, emitter resistors, and epibase NPN transistor the circuit might well perform well today.
 
1)
I'm looking at the ~$9 cost on the output transistor! Wow!

9$U from ***1966*** !!!

Inflation calculator says:
9 dollars in 1966 are equivalent to 71.45 dollars in 2018.

2) very acceptable for 1966.
It (justly) brags about using the *first* commercially available high power Silicon power transistor.

3)
This amplifier doesn't have thermal stability resistors , neither thermal compensation Thermistors or transistor as the NAD 3020 . Does someone knows how it avoids thermal runaway?
oh yes it does: look at D1 and D2 1N4154 diodes.

Yes, it´s underbiased, they must compensate for 4 BE junctions, so typical old style is 3 diodes (1 less than nominally needed) plus a small value resistor to get "just there", yet they use just 2.

*Maybe* they wanted to play it safe.
 
This amplifier doesn't have thermal stability resistors , neither thermal compensation Thermistors or transistor as the NAD 3020 . Does someone knows how it avoids thermal runaway?

Early versions of the 2N3055 had a high intrinsic base resistance. In other words, a built-in base stopper resistor. Put a modern 3055 in the 3020 amp and they do run away. Unless you install either emitter or base resistors. Same thing with this amp. Put in emitter resistors on pain of transistor death.
 

PRR

Member
Joined 2003
Paid Member
$9 was not a lot for a power transistor. In today's money that would be 27 gallons of gasoline or a half day minimum-pay work.

The amp runs past class B, actually marginal class C. The idle current for 0.9V bias on two Silicon bases is nominally "zero". The crossover distortion is marginally masked by NFB, and un-mentioned because in the early days experimenters might not have the gear, might not know to look at low levels, or just kept head-in-sand posture.

Interesting that they did not bootstrap the "VAS" pull-up. That makes the large-signal output impedance a few Ohms more than it needs to be.

Why the interest? Even the published numbers are not amazing (except a lot of power for a "simple" transistor amp in 1966). You can NOT get the same baked-wafer 2N3055 that they used; the epitaxial MJ3055 was far from the same part but much simpler to make (once the technology matured), and would almost do the same work in un-critical circuits.

There are better (and worse!) amplifiers not so far in that future.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.