What makes amps sound different?

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 54339 times.

DVV

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1138
What makes amps sound different?
« Reply #100 on: 16 Jan 2003, 05:47 pm »
Hi Hugh, all,

I think I have some schematic of yours somewhere ... :P

Quote from: AKSA
Folks,

I have studied amps quite intensively for about eight years now.  I have no particularly preference for tubes or SS, and like to build hybrids.  I sell two kitset amps called the AKSA, one of 55W and the other of 100W, a new preamp called the GK-1, and a small tweakable two way speaker.

I am not an engineer, and resolutely develop my circuits by ear, using only a meter and CRO ocassionally.  The 100W AKSA gives 0.045% into 8R resistive at 20KHz and 10 watts, sounds pretty good, and so I offer here my philosophy for designing amps.

****************************************************
· Prevent Interstage Crosstalk – Decouple the supply rail for the low current stages.

A hard working output stage creates heavy, periodic voltage sag on the supply rail, and this has adverse impact on the voltage amplifier and to a lesser extent on the differential input stage.  Interstage crosstalk can be almost eliminated by fitting a diode and small resistor in series from the positive supply rail and a decoupling electrolytic capacitor to ground.  Interestingly, sonic testing reveals that a similar network on the negative rail has no beneficial effect.  This simple decoupling network ensures that supply rail disturbances created by a hard-working output stage never interfere with the operation of the voltage amplifier and the input differential pair.  By ensuring that complex interactions cannot occur between the output and input stages, a potential source of serious intermodulation between the two input stages and the output stage of the amplifier is eradicated.  Listening tests reveal a cleaner sound, particularly on heavy musical passages, with superior resolution, clarity and a notable lack of intermodulation.


A better way yet is to use separate, fully regulated rails for the low current stages. This offers several benefits - low crosstalk, compensation for inherent voltage drops across transistors, prevents clipping from occurring the in voltage gain stages, improves detail and resolution and lets you use your high power transistors at lower voltages for the same power.

And the price penalty is really quite reasonable.

Quote

·  Foster High Linearity – Operate the voltage amplifier at constant current
Remembering the sterile sound and high frequency complications of the constant current source leads to an old concept called bootstrapping.  The technique uses the amplifier’s low impedance output to dynamically elevate the voltage amplifier power supply in step with the output signal, permitting the voltage amplifier to run at close to constant current.  Constant current operation for any amplifying device improves linearity, minimises distortion and greatly ‘speeds up’ the amplifier by removing loading on the voltage amplifier.  The bootstrap also has implications for source impedance.  The alternative, the constant current source, has been tried many times but always leads to a dry, unexciting sound – and it confers an extreme high frequency bandwidth which needs to be viciously tamed to ensure amplifier stability.  The taming process costs musical vitality.  To its discredit, the constant current source does confer an asymmetric clip, slicing the negative half cycle long before the positive.  However, although a bootstrap does suffer small current variations, it yields good (though deliberately not outstanding) voltage amplifier linearity and intrinsically confers rapid and convenient high frequency rolloff.  Early rolloff helps to make the amplifier stable without resorting elsewhere to draconian bandwidth limitation thus bringing some immunity to digital high frequency artefacts and radio frequency interference, allowing the designer to reduce the size of the output inductor and lag compensation.  Again, listening tests reveal that a current source powering the voltage amplifier creates a ‘dry’ sound.  The bootstrap gives a subjective impression of speed, attack, pace and liquidity – all of which add impressively to the subjective musical experience and take the listener closer to the passion of the original recording.


Bootstrap also reduces inherent slew rate, and consequently transient response. If used unjudiciously, it can also lead to transient intermodualtion problems.

You don't need draconian measures elsewhere, Hugh. I agree one should not go overboard with the bandwidth, but you can solve the problem quite easily with a low pass filter at the base of the predriver or driver transistor.

Quote

·  Minimise amplitude/phase Intermodulations – Split DC offset and AC feedback control.
This technique effectively changes the proportions of resistance and capacitance at the feedback node.  This reduces adverse signal damping effects arising from the RC series chain in the network whilst preserving offset control.  It also creates two AC paths to the blocking capacitor – usually an electrolytic – and this sets up a secondary charge path which masks the poor sonics of such capacitors by minimizing electrolytic memory effects.  The result is a superior, longer lasting decay, particularly on fast percussive material such as cymbals, a considerable reduction in the size of the shunt capacitor and an improvement in sonic ambience.


This has been done for some time, e.g. Luxman's "Duo Beta" circuit, and others have used it too, e.g. Marshall Leach. It is one way of doing it, to be sure, though I don't do it that way. I mean, it can be made to work well.

Quote

·  Eliminate Switching Transients – Implement charge suckout on the output stage drivers.
The output stage introduces switching non-linearities on the output as one output device hands over control of the speaker voice coil to the other.  Base junction charge suckout, identified by Self in his impressive 1993 series of articles, involves placing a small resistor and capacitor in parallel between the two driver emitters in a conventional darlington output stage.  This parallel RC network ensures that the drivers (and with them, the output devices) turn off more cleanly when speaker current flow passes to their opposite numbers at the crossover of the signal.  This greatly reduces switching distortion, the bane of all Class AB amplifiers, by removing the usual spray of high order switching spikes generated by the handover event.  It smoothes the transfer of the baton in the musical relay.  It is this phenomenon which is partly responsible for the splashy, grainy and often harsh top end of most solid state amplifiers, since the ear readily registers switching disjunctions at high frequency and the feedback loop lacks the necessary speed to correct it.
It is clear that many modern amplifiers deliver poor performance because of short term stability problems which manifest only in musical passages but rarely in steady tone testing favoured by contemporary testing regimes.


As the Japanese have been doing since circa 1975. I'll have some schematics on my site soon, with some examples from the Sansui range (AU-607, AU-919, BA-5000, etc).

Quote

·  Choose Semiconductors with care.
The final step in the re-design concerned the choice of semiconductors.  To achieve good slew characteristics, the speed of all active devices is important, particularly the voltage amplifier.  Also important is the output stage current versus voltage linearity (sometimes referred to as transconductance), since this ensures a high feedback factor under conditions of high output at high frequencies.  Note that the speed of the output devices is NOT of the importance one might expect.  Of course, cost and availability are also important factors.
It is important to maintain a consistent current gain in the output stage as the speaker current demand increases.  This parameter relates to large signal linearity;  a vital component of the amplifier’s overall transfer function.  The choice finally settled on one transistor complementary pair which achieves constant gain (hfe or beta) from 100mA to 7A.  This was the 2SC5200 (npn) and the 2SA1943 (pnp).  These devices were developed by Toshiba specifically for push pull audio amplifiers, and are rated at a fast 30MHz.  These are impressive figures for a 12 amp, 230V, 150 watt transistor with excellent SOAR ratings.


Hugh, my data sheet says 15A continuous, 30 A impulse for those transistors.

I have been using their predecessors, 2SC3281/2SA1302, also driven by Motorola's MJ15030/15031 for many years. Having run out of them, I am also switching over to 2SC5200/2SA1943.

Quote

The drivers must also exhibit high current capacity, with good linearity and matching speed.  A high current rating ensures they are not destroyed if the output devices are subjected to a momentary short, and a consistent current gain across a wide range fosters linear, stable performance into difficult loads.  The devices initially chosen were the ON Semiconductor (formerly Motorola) MJE15030 and MJE15031, and these are still used in the 100W AKSA.  These devices are commonly used as drivers in the very high power amplifiers of professional audio, and are virtually unburstable in a small, low power audio amplifier.  They can easily withstand a short term current burst of 8 amps, almost 100 times the working requirement in the AKSA circuits.  This rating guarantees a long, reliable life – very important in this application, and especially in a kitset where robustness is mandatory.  Recently new drivers have become available from Toshiba specifically for the chosen output devices, and if anything, their performance is superior, particularly in terms of linearity.  These devices, now fitted to the 55W AKSA, are 2SC4793 (npn) and 2SA1837 (pnp) and their speed is almost triple that of the Motorola devices.
The voltage amplifier is particularly important, since the amplifier’s entire voltage gain is incorporated in this common emitter stage.  Only this transistor configuration gives both current and voltage gain, and this is heavy going for a transistor owing to Miller capacitance, so it must be very fast and linear with high gain.  It must be able to withstand more than twice the rail voltage of the amplifier at 10mA without a heatsink.  Such a transistor with very low Miller capacitance is critical to good performance in a quality SS amplifier.


Agreed.

Quote

The input differential pair transistors are perhaps the easiest to choose.  Since they are small TO-92 devices, their die is small with low parasitics and they are fast.  Virtually any PNP device with a rating of at least 20mA and 100MHz is adequate.  However, it is fairly important that they be closely matched for gain, as this confers precise differential pair current balance.  Current mismatches affect the sonics and the DC offset of the amplifier quite significantly.  Finally, the 150V 2N5401 and BF491 were chosen from ON Semi and Philips, as these are inexpensive, quiet, very fast and available in batches with consistent beta, making matching relatively easy.
********************************************************

This article delineates what I have found to be important.  I claim no originality;  just careful, painstaking assembly of a variety of simple designs and meticulous listening.  The interpretations are mine;  some can be disputed on math grounds, and I don't pretend to follow some of the more obscure modes and happily eschew PSpice, which tells me almost nothing about the sonics or even the stability margin.  Some of this material amounts to audio heresy, and I make no apology for that, but neither will I strenuously defend my points because I haven't the time or energy.  The proof of it all lies in a good listen to my amps, nothing less.

I hope it's of some use, and have to say this is a very IMPRESSIVE forum, and my sincere thanks to JohnR, the Borg who set it all up!   :)

Cheers,

Hugh


Nothing to defend, Hugh, your philosophy is your own, and that's that. Nor do I see any attackers here, we cultivate a nice atmosphere here, everybody has a right to their own views.

People who design will invariably differ. In a lesser envirnoment, this might be a problem, but speaking for myself, I prefer that there be differences between us. Unison views lead nowhere, it's the difference in views which pushes us forward.

Cheers,
DVV

Dan Banquer

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1294
Power Amps and Saturation
« Reply #101 on: 16 Jan 2003, 05:52 pm »
Saturation of transformers is when you ask the transformer to deliver more current than it is rated for. When this happens the core of the transformer is "saturated" with more current than it can handle. The typical artifacts are higher distortion, and poor efficeincy.

DVV

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1138
What makes amps sound different?
« Reply #102 on: 16 Jan 2003, 05:58 pm »
Quote from: MarinRider
...

BTW, I have seen mention of saturation of mains power transformers in power amps in various threads. Can anyone explain the mechanism by which this happens?


Quite simply, it goes haywire. It starts to hum, buzz, heat up and distort your incoming mains 50 or 60 Hz sine wave, and all sorts of funny things happen to voltage and current, depending on type, level of saturation, etc.

It's not easy to do this, as most mains transformers will deliver quite a bit over their nominal rating before actually saturating. Even the most humble ones will go say 1.4 times over their nominal rating in short term peaks, quality toroids managing as much as twice their rating.

However, I would nevertheless advise proper dimensioning at the time of design, there's no substitute for that. This is, in many ways, going backwards - you have to analyze what you want coming out of the amp, and size your transformers according to that.

Cheers,
DVV

audiojerry

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1355
What makes amps sound different?
« Reply #103 on: 16 Jan 2003, 06:52 pm »
Hugh, thanks for your contribution and insights. I think you supported your viewpoints quite nicely, and based on what I've read from current owners, they are more than pleased with the finished product. But, taking on the actual assembly of a kit a still a bit too intimidating for someone like me. That's one reason why I've been pressing ('er encouraging) my son to take up the hobby with me. :-)

I'll say it again: this discourse is wonderful. Please keep it up guys.
 
DVV, thank you again.

Question for future discussion. Assembly techniques such as solder quality, soldering technique, internal wiring, length of wire runs - what potential impact do they have on the sonics: marginal, signifcant, or does it depend?

MarinRider

Mains Transformer Saturation
« Reply #104 on: 16 Jan 2003, 07:10 pm »
Are we talking magnetic saturation of the transfomer core here?

If so, the flux is determined by the number of turns and the voltage applied i.e. Faraday's Law. I don't see how either of these can increase due to excessive loading.

Have I missed something?

DVV

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1138
What makes amps sound different?
« Reply #105 on: 16 Jan 2003, 09:38 pm »
Quote from: audiojerry
Hugh, thanks for your contribution and insights. I think you supported your viewpoints quite nicely, and based on what I've read from current owners, they are more than pleased with the finished product. But, taking on the actual assembly of a kit a still a bit too intimidating for someone like me. That's one reason why I've been pressing ('er encouraging) my son to take up the hobby with me. :-)

I'll say it again: this discourse is wonderful. Please keep it up guys.
 
DVV, thank you again.

Question for future discussion. Assembly techniques such as solder quality, soldering technique, internal wiring, length of wire runs - what potential impact do they have on the sonics: marginal, signifcant, or does it depend?


All of them make very significant contributions to the sound. In principle, you want as short runs as possible - ideally, all components would be soldered wire to wire, zero leads in between.

As for soldering, it goes without saying that it needs to be good else all is lost. In fact, it's something of an art when done manually, but then, one can learn how to do it well with enough practice.

Oddly enough, in that respect, you have something of an audiophile situation - people are as partisan about their soldering irons as they are about audio. Some will swear by Cooper Tools, some by Weller (German company owned by Cooper tools), others like myself won't go without Ersa (another German company), etc. There is no middle ground, there can be only one. :P

Obviously, it also makes a difference which kind of soldering you happen to be using. Some are poor, some are good, others are very good. Generally, it's bets to use the type with silver inside, simply because it has shown itself to be longer lasting and less prone to coming loose.

Wiring influences the sound as well, both by length and quality of the wiring. So far, I have used only van den Hul, but I'm planning on investigating some alternatives, notably Ecosse, a Scottish firm, which has been highly recommended to me. That's when I'm not using pure silver wiring, which i still think of as best.

Cheers,
DVV

DVV

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1138
Re: Mains Transformer Saturation
« Reply #106 on: 16 Jan 2003, 09:43 pm »
Quote from: MarinRider
Are we talking magnetic saturation of the transfomer core here?

If so, the flux is determined by the number of turns and the voltage applied i.e. Faraday's Law. I don't see how either of these can increase due to excessive loading.

Have I missed something?


No, we are referring to overcurrent, when you start asking the transformer to deliver more current than it is rated for for longer periods of time, periods which fall beyond the term "transient".

It starts to heat up and distorst the 50 or 60 Hz sine wave badly, resulting in dropping efficiency and God alone, if even He, knows what and how else. But none of it's good.

That's not to mention possible buzzing and/or humming, depending on the type of transformer.

Cheers,
DVV

hairofthedawg

What makes amps sound different?
« Reply #107 on: 17 Jan 2003, 07:16 pm »
I guess my amp really is good...700Va transformer in each monoblock, 4 50000 uf caps and the semis mentioned, the 5200s and 1493s...  Only thing that bums me a little after looking at it  are a few spots of what looks like flux residue.  Nothing a little alcohol won't take care of but with the rep SL has, I didn't expect to see it.  It looks surprisingly simple although I don't understand why the 1493s are on one side of the board and the 5200s on the other.  The caps have the SL brand name on them so maybe they're custom...smaller caps are mostly Phillips and there are some resistors that look precision there next to them.  The case looks like it was designed to be a stereo but I can't imagine how they would fit all the extra stuff into one box.  What would I have to be doing to saturate that transformer?

cheers,

Dick

DVV

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1138
What makes amps sound different?
« Reply #108 on: 17 Jan 2003, 08:54 pm »
Quote from: hairofthedawg
I guess my amp really is good...700Va transformer in each monoblock, 4 50000 uf caps and the semis mentioned, the 5200s and 1493s...  Only thing that bums me a little after looking at it  are a few spots of what looks like flux residue.  Nothing a little alcohol won't take care of but with the rep SL has, I didn't expect to see it.  It looks surprisingly simple although I don't understand why the 1493s are on one side of the board and the 5200s on the other.  The caps have the SL brand name on them so maybe they're custom...smaller caps are mostly Phillips and there are some resistors that look precision there next to them.  The case looks like it was designed to be a stereo but I can't imagine how they would fit all the extra stuff into one box.  What would I have to be doing to saturate that transformer?

cheers,

Dick


Good question, Dick.

Well, for a start, you'd have to find some good speakers which are notorious for being an evil load - a good example are Apogees. Great sound with a select few amps capable of driving them, since they dip down to 1.8 ohms with a pahse shift of -42 degrees. To the amp, this is like seeing (off hand) something like 1.3 ohms. To add insult to injury, they are criminally ineffcient, if memory serves juts 82 or 84 dB/1W/1.

So, to saturate your transformers, and this is assuming no fuse blows beforehand to spoil your fun, and that no output device dies on you, you would have to play some outrageously loud music by its very nature at what would be window pane shaking levels. This would require tremendous power levels, 100W/8 ohms nominal being peanuts in this case, because that would be just 5 amps nominally, but since this is a load of just 1.3 ohms, actual current levels would be around 31 amperes, if not more. This would have to be loud music with a small dynamic range, i.e. small differences between loud and quiet, so the amp would be pumping out 600+ watts into such loads.

While the transformer may look like it can take it, 700 VA is equivalent to roughly 500 watts, so at 600+ watts, it would probably start to be and sound strained. However, this could also be caused by inadequate bridge rectifiers. Anyway, your amp might start to run out of breath, start sounding congested, strained, with reduced sound stage and imagie definition.

After a few minutes of that, however, your main worry would not be the transformer, but the neighbors which would by then have gathered a posse, found a rope and come a-lynchin' over to your place.

Cheers,
DVV

hairofthedawg

What makes amps sound different?
« Reply #109 on: 17 Jan 2003, 09:35 pm »
Very true, I don't think I've made it past eleven on my volume knob.  In fact, I think my landlord's bought their grandson a drumkit due to my testing.  He needs a little practice.  I'm using the BelCantos, also made by SL as speakers and I really wish I could make a smith chart of them, although I like the sound and am not really worried about how they fill out a spec sheet.    I guess what amazes me is how simple it looks when built when I know a lot of work went into putting it together.  How much time does it take to match components?  What criteria do you use to say "yes, that's matched."?

cheers,

Dick

audiojerry

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1355
What makes amps sound different?
« Reply #110 on: 17 Jan 2003, 09:47 pm »
Dick, please try this and report back to us!  :nono:

DVV

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1138
What makes amps sound different?
« Reply #111 on: 17 Jan 2003, 09:57 pm »
Quote from: hairofthedawg
Very true, I don't think I've made it past eleven on my volume knob.  In fact, I think my landlord's bought their grandson a drumkit due to my testing.  He needs a little practice.  I'm using the BelCantos, also made by SL as speakers and I really wish I could make a smith chart of them, although I like the sound and am not really worried about how they fill out a spec sheet.    I guess what amazes me is how simple it looks when built when I know a lot of work went into putting it together.  How much time does it take to match components?  What criteria do you use to say "yes, that's matched."?

cheers,

Dick


Refererring to semiconductors, as in power devices, the undustry is usually happy with a +/- 5% match. Better companies go for +/- 2-3% match, I go for less than 1% match.

As a matter of fact, I was in a shop owned by a friend matching BD 139/140 (10W, 80V, 1.5 A, 60 MHz) devices. I got down as far as 133/134 close, which is about 0.75% match. Yes, that's matched. :P

As for small signal devices, when i need a really close match, I go for SSM 2210/2220 (NPN/PNP) ultramtched pair. They are on the same substrate, and in fact look like an 8 pin op amp. But they are matched to a 0.01% tolerance, and in addition, have such a low noise floor that the associated emittor resistors produce more noise than those two together. Their only real limit is their voltage, just 40V, so when used with higher supply rails, you must cut the voltage. Good for phono stages and preamps, not so good for power amps.

When for some reason I have to match discrete devices myself, I always go for 1% or less.

As for time, it takes a lot of time even for simple gain matching. If you use some sophisticated machinery, like Hewlett-Packard's transistor matching 'scopes, which can match them by several characteristics, that takes even more time and a very, as in VERY substantial investment.

Some companies actually sell matched devices, including power devices. For example, Toshiba's 2SC5200/2SA1943 can be purchased matched in Singapore, but not having done it yet, I cannot say how good a match that is.

Cheers,
DVV

AKSA

What makes amps sound different?
« Reply #112 on: 17 Jan 2003, 11:24 pm »
Hi Dejan,

I should correct your comment about purchasing the 5200/1943 Toshiba outputs in Singapore matched.  No, this is not possible.  I buy large quantities, they come from the same batch at the factory, and then I match them.

You'd be interested in how this is done.

In a power amplifier, there is usually one driver for multiple outputs.  Thus the bases of the outputs are all connected on each side of the amplifier, and clearly for identical bias currents, the voltage drop across the base/emitter AND the emitter resistors must be equal.

Thus the principle matching parameter should be Vbe at the lowest current the device will see, namely the quiescent.  If we use larger emitter resistors (I use 0R47), then this will insulate us to some extent from beta variations, and at two amperes we are dropping no less than a volt across the emitter resistor, and this hefty negative feedback ensures euqal current sharing is forced at high currents anyway.

So the secondary match parameter is beta.  In any event I use 3%, as you identified in your previous post.

I designed a matching circuit which sets up a constant current of 50mA through the device under test (DUT), and a constant voltage across the collector emitter.  This is a simple circuit consisting of a current source with LED reference, and a differential pair to match base voltages.  It is powerered from a 12V gelcel.

First I measure Vbe for constant current and voltage, then grade them all within 1mV.  There is a surprising spread, and you must be quick, as a heating device chip quickly changes the parameters.

Now, within each graded pile, say of 607mV, you can now match for beta.  This is done, again under constant current and voltage, by measuring the voltage drop across a base stopper on the device.  A higher voltage gives a lower beta;  the relationship is reciprocal.  The relationship is:  beta = 100 x collector current/V(mV) across base stopper.  Once again, each device is beta matched within a millivolt using this technique.

Using this approach, it is possible to pair off about 60 devices from a sample of 100 in about an hour.  I have laid out the circuit on a pcb, attached it to a piece of timber, and as jigs go this is one of the most effective and accurate in my workshop.

I say all this because I wish to illustrate that the traditional, expensive approach of transistor curve tracers and elaborate test gear is neither necessary nor economically viable.  I am a low cost outfit, and it is crucial that I achieve high standards at minimal cost.  After all, I am Australian.....

Using my matched devices, it is normally possible to get quiescent balance on multiple outputs down to +/-7% on every amp constructed.  Good balance has profound impact on sonics.

Hope this is helpful,

Cheers,

Hugh

audiojerry

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1355
What makes amps sound different?
« Reply #113 on: 18 Jan 2003, 01:28 am »
Krikey!

DVV

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1138
What makes amps sound different?
« Reply #114 on: 18 Jan 2003, 07:46 am »
Well, if I didn't read this myself, I wouldn't have believed it. By sheer coincidence, we seem to use almost an identical procedure.

Quote from: AKSA
Hi Dejan,

I should correct your comment about purchasing the 5200/1943 Toshiba outputs in Singapore matched.  No, this is not possible.  I buy large quantities, they come from the same batch at the factory, and then I match them.

You'd be interested in how this is done.

In a power amplifier, there is usually one driver for multiple outputs.  Thus the bases of the outputs are all connected on each side of the amplifier, and clearly for identical bias currents, the voltage drop across the base/emitter AND the emitter resistors must be equal.

Thus the principle matching parameter should be Vbe at the lowest current the device will see, namely the quiescent.  If we use larger emitter resistors (I use 0R47), then this will insulate us to some extent from beta variations, and at two amperes we are dropping no less than a volt across the emitter resistor, and this hefty negative feedback ensures euqal current sharing is forced at high currents anyway.


Totally agreed on 0R47 ohms. I use this and 0R68, BUT I have a design on the table which uses - hand on, now! - 1R8. Yes, on point eight ohms. It's a prototype, so no advance comments yet.

There was atext I used to have by SGS-Thomson which suggested exactly that - to get better matching, use 0R47 emmitor resitsor or larger. The other method proposed was throwing a local feedback resistor, emmitor to base, and between the two, you bring them around to almost identical.

The last method proposed was to use a local feedback resistor emmitor to base on the driver; the sooner you rid it of excess charge, the less wobbling on mismatched power devices.

Quote

So the secondary match parameter is beta.  In any event I use 3%, as you identified in your previous post.

I designed a matching circuit which sets up a constant current of 50mA through the device under test (DUT), and a constant voltage across the collector emitter.  This is a simple circuit consisting of a current source with LED reference, and a differential pair to match base voltages.  It is powerered from a 12V gelcel.

First I measure Vbe for constant current and voltage, then grade them all within 1mV.  There is a surprising spread, and you must be quick, as a heating device chip quickly changes the parameters.

Now, within each graded pile, say of 607mV, you can now match for beta.  This is done, again under constant current and voltage, by measuring the voltage drop across a base stopper on the device.  A higher voltage gives a lower beta;  the relationship is reciprocal.  The relationship is:  beta = 100 x collector current/V(mV) across base stopper.  Once again, each device is beta matched within a millivolt using this technique.

Using this approach, it is possible to pair off about 60 devices from a sample of 100 in about an hour.  I have laid out the circuit on a pcb, attached it to a piece of timber, and as jigs go this is one of the most effective and accurate in my workshop.


Yesterday, I managed about 50 from a pile of 100, and that's only because they were made by Philips, one of the best manufacturers of that particular device (the best being Telefunken).

Quote

I say all this because I wish to illustrate that the traditional, expensive approach of transistor curve tracers and elaborate test gear is neither necessary nor economically viable.  I am a low cost outfit, and it is crucial that I achieve high standards at minimal cost.  After all, I am Australian.....


Well, I know you have it, no need to flaunt it. :P

Quote

Using my matched devices, it is normally possible to get quiescent balance on multiple outputs down to +/-7% on every amp constructed.  Good balance has profound impact on sonics.


I'll say it does.

Cheers,
DVV

Dan Banquer

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1294
Power Amps
« Reply #115 on: 18 Jan 2003, 12:12 pm »
One of the advantages of sliding bias is that output transistor matching becomes far less crucial. Where it does become important is power share between the output transistors.
Over the years I have observed that the PNP transistors always run hotter than the NPN transistors. According to one engineer I used to work with this due to some of the inherent problems related to semiconductor physics. What have you guys found?
I have a recommendation for both Hugh and DVV. Years ago I stopped using the mica insulators with the thermal grease. I use mainly Thermalloy 3  insulators. These have a better thermal coefficent and do not require thermal grease. Having a better thermal coefficent helps to put the heat on the heat sink where it belongs. You guys might find some better performance in certain areas by switching over.
To date I have not been satisified with Japanese discrete semiconductor. I have always used Motorola which is now ON Semiconductor. I wouldn't want to make the LNPA 150 with anything else. For discrete bipolar I think they are the best.

DVV

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1138
Re: Power Amps
« Reply #116 on: 18 Jan 2003, 01:56 pm »
Quote from: Dan Banquer
One of the advantages of sliding bias is that output transistor matching becomes far less crucial. Where it does become important is power share between the output transistors.
Over the years I have observed that the PNP transistors always run hotter than the NPN transistors. According to one engineer I used to work with this due to some of the inherent problems related to semiconductor physics. What have you guys found?


Frankly, Dan, I never looked. However, I will take a look from now on.

Quote

I have a recommendation for both Hugh and DVV. Years ago I stopped using the mica insulators with the thermal grease. I use mainly Thermalloy 3  insulators. These have a better thermal coefficent and do not require thermal grease. Having a better thermal coefficent helps to put the heat on the heat sink where it belongs. You guys might find some better performance in certain areas by switching over.


I've been using the same thing by a Swedish company (the name escapes me, Lind-something). As you say, no grease, and better thermal resistance coefficients, which is why I switched. Was around 1993, I think.

Quote

To date I have not been satisified with Japanese discrete semiconductor. I have always used Motorola which is now ON Semiconductor. I wouldn't want to make the LNPA 150 with anything else. For discrete bipolar I think they are the best.


Oddly enough, my experience with Toshiba power transistors is nothing short of outstanding. So far, at least. Used 2SC3281/2SA1302 for years, they never let me down, never failed to fullfill their specifications and were in fact fairly well amtched as is, typically below 10% (which still had me matching them to tighter tolerances).

Cheers,
DVV

AKSA

What makes amps sound different?
« Reply #117 on: 19 Jan 2003, 10:26 am »
Hi Dejan, Dan,

Thank you both for your comments.  We are learning from each other;  the primary benefit of forums like this.  Dejan, I am astonished that you too are using the same matching procedure!  It seems I'm in good company.......

Dan, I have used the Bergqvist SilPad for a little while.  Didn't like them.  They didn't seem to cool the device as effectively as a greased mica.

What sort do you use?  Where do ya get 'em??

Once again, my thanks for your informative posts.    :wink:

Cheers,

Hugh

DVV

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1138
What makes amps sound different?
« Reply #118 on: 19 Jan 2003, 11:59 am »
Quote from: AKSA
Hi Dejan, Dan,

Thank you both for your comments.  We are learning from each other;  the primary benefit of forums like this.  Dejan, I am astonished that you too are using the same matching procedure!  It seems I'm in good company.......


Yes, it's incredible, isn't it? Two people who have never met, never exchanged ideas, never communicated, on two opposing sides of the globe, arriving at basically the same idea quite independent of each other.

But I've seen this happen a few times before. For example, for the last 20 years or so, I have been using what in spoof of the aduio industry acronyms I termed as the "LVR" concept, where LVR stands for Local Voltage Regulation. What I do is filter the power, regulate it to say +/- 24V using TO-3 package of LM 317/337 (in proper heat sinks, of course), distribute the power as such. But every block of the preamp has its own local voltage stabilizer, which then reduces the +/24V to whatever is needed, typically +/- 15...18 V. Good or bad, electrically sound or not, but it does sound good when done properly. Anyway, in 1994, I accidentally discover that Harman/Kardon uses a most similar concept, a bit different but electrically very similar. Anyway, I didn't sue them. :P

A few years before that, I patented a testing procedure for PCs, duly registered. Up until then, people used these stupid little BASIC routines, which were essentially a purely academic set of tests, because they told you exactly nothing about how your PC will behave in real life, with real applications. So I put together a set of tests using real world programs, mostly of the WordPerfect suite, but also DesignCAD, etc, all of which I bought for the purpose. I made macros in each, things like search and replace letter "a" by letter "x" in a 350 kB file, etc. Completely repeatable, added routines to have the PC itself time it, eliminating uncertainties with stopwatches, etc. That was in 1988.

In 1990, first Byte (then VERY strong) and then PC Magazine, come out with functionally identical test suites. Well, I never sued them either. :P

But thankfully, some of the more weird ideas I had, some of which actually work, three of which work VERY well indeed, nobody else stumbled on - yet.

Cheers,
DVV

Dan Banquer

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1294
Power Amps
« Reply #119 on: 19 Jan 2003, 01:21 pm »
Hugh;
        try here.
http://www.aavidprecision.com/products/standard/access/thermalsil.shtml
The Sil Pads actually have a worse thermal coefficent than greased Mica. I only have the TO 3 package insulators. If you want me to snail mail a few of these than send me a snail mail address. DO NOT USE THERMAL GREASE ON THE THERMALLOY III'S.