[bluesky]

I find it interesting how little I could find read about this amp project, especially so given how popular the Clarinet and Cornet components are with us DIY'ers.  There have been very few posts on the Cymbal and I do recall Jim saying one time that he doubted if he will ever even break even on the developments costs of the Cymbal, let alone make a living out of it.

The Cymbals appeal to me as a cost effective way of being able to build a good tube amp one day so I tried to see what others might have to say on it's sonic qualities but a search turned up nothing on Audiocircle at least.

So.......I am wondering about the possibilities of a build using the well received Kiwame resistor, Obbligato and/or Russkie teflons as parts base.  Whilst I am certainly no design engineer it does seem a decent consensus that people into tube amps have long favoured a Class A SET topology and again, wondered, if the push/pull design did not attract builders as Jim's other designs have done.

I would appreciate the comments of anyone who has built the Cymbals and their experiences with parts and opinions on the sonic qualities of this amp and possible speaker matches.

Cheers

Bluesky     

[bluesky]

Hmmm, can anyone tell me any impressions of the Cymbal's sonics qualities and how they compare to the usual SET magic in the mid range, Jim anyone?

One of the specs that really intersted me was the very high bandwidth of the Cymbals.   SET's are notorious for providing some second harmonics magic to vocals in particular but fall short on bass and treble but the Cymbals bandwidth specs show that this would not be the case with their sonics.  The specs that are used in marketing, especially the Chinese brands are often very er........ "loose with the truth", even claims of reaching the 20Hz to 20kHz bandwidth are very wide of the mark.  I recently got some educational DVD's off Ebay in Australia where the measurements with a scope showed the frequency response of several Chinese amps to be way short of each frequency extreme and other measurements of squarewaves etc were atrocious as well, they were laughable compared to Jim's Cymbals.  By the time you have spent a bucket of money and time fixing up the problems you would have spent more money than building a set of Cymbal's using way better parts.

Just out of interest, have there been any testimonials or recent reviews of the Trumpet or 2A3 amp, if I ever won the lottery I'd buy these in a flash! 

Bluesky   

[Brinkman]

I'm a little perplexed myself as to the Cymbals not really taking off.

Jim said he didn't want to develop another product for an already over-saturated market (re: SET), so he really went the extra mile when he made such an accurate PP amplifier design without the aid of feedback. Of course, right now SETs are the in thing so perhaps there's a penalty for not following suit.

On the other hand, most of the reading I've done online in regards to the push-pull and the sort of folks who build these amps leads me to believe that bandwidth, response, and wattage are the primary concerns, with the negative feedback issue not being of great consequence. In this respect, the low output wattage of the Cymbal counts against it and/or the lack of feedback being a design consideration people open to the Push-Pull topography didn't ask for.

That said, I would certainly love to hear a pair.

[bluesky]

Hi

Thanks for your response! 

I agree and think there may be a "conspiracy" rather than consensus on tube amp topology.  The buying public (which includes me) get perceptions from what we read about designs and it has taken me an awful long time to work out that I should trust my ears rather than some opinions of people who may, or may not, have heard a particular amp.  We have probably all read of serious fights on forums about things where people simply take up a position and then denigrate anyone who does not agree with them, usually the less they know, the louder they are!

The other thing is that when you find a good designer, stick with them.  Hugh Dean and Jim are the two designers whom I regard as "Audio Timelords".  They know their stuff, every design has been well tweaked and much thought has gone into it, they simply do not release any dud products onto the market.  These days I don't get hung up on any particular topology.  I don't lose sleep over which Class an amp is in, if it has feedback or not and which is the best hook up wire to use, yes, I only think about such serious issues when I am awake these days.

The sonics are the most important thing of course but I have discovered another issue which is also important and that is how the component looks.  Yes, I can imagine many saying how shallow this is and the only thing that matters is how the component sounds, I disagree.  Our perceptions are based on many things including the aethetics and music is an art, and engineering and design can be art.  The attractiveness of a design also includes a strong element of how the finished product looks sitting in your rack at home.  I would state that whilst I would not buy a product simply because I didn't like the colour I do say that people are attracted to products that look great and sound great.  To my eyes the Cymbal is not the most attractive looking amp around and this may be an issue.

Perhaps the "Gentlemen prefer blondes" sydrome might be at work here where pretty blonde girls get all the dates.  So.......just perhaps, a "prettier" Cymbal may be asked out more often, I am sure she has a great personality but I also want "to sleep with the girl", further evidence of how shallow I am!  I do think that aesthetics do matter in the overall scheme of things.  I have looked at the picturs on Jim's website and thought I'd like have a more symetrical arrangement of tubes and shifting the trafos either to the rear or out of site.  Hum may be problem here though but if I could use effective wiring regimes, good shielding and grounding techniques then maybe I could have my cake and eat it too.

Just some thoughts,

Bluesky   

 

[Brinkman]

Your point reminds me of one of the epiphanies I've had in learning how to DIY: woodworking skills are an incredible asset.

Just as there's a great sense of pride in having manually constructed a component you use and get joy from on a daily basis, there's obviously an equal amount of pride in having housed the component to match your tastes, other components, or associated surroundings in the dedicated listening space. Right now (for me), learning about the circuit topologies takes precedence over being picky about looks, so I'd never reject a product based on it's looks alone. The Cymbal is no exception; it is not married to the chassis.

The one consideration of the Cymbal that keeps me from saving towards it's purchase rooted in the amount of money I bring in coupled with it's low-wattage. Frankly, when the wife and child are out of town I enjoy cranking things up a bit. My musical tastes are incredibly diverse whereas a low-output amplifier is not.

To add to my earlier post, I'd say that one of the most friendly aspects of SET design is actually in it's limited bandwidth and other commonly associated deficiencies. It becomes a lush-sounding consequence-free platform for tweakers who want to dabble in component swapping and other fun obsessive audiophile pasttimes. A wide-bandwidth, low-distortion Push-pull amplifier that sounds incredibly accurate out of the box without being dressed up in exotic wood doesn't seem conducive to the well-monied obsessive tube guy itching to use magic capacitors and NOS tubes exclusively. The fact that there's nothing preventing anyone from having a set of Partially Silver Stranded Secondary output transformers custom wound by Electra-Print specifically for a pair of Cymbals or that it's more than likely deserving of a fancy chassis (with a little effort) is apparently lost on your average audio nerd.

Best,
Brinkman

[bluesky]

Hi Brinkman

Great minds think alike, so guess where I am off to in the morning?  To a local woodworking club! 

This club has everything that opens and closes as far as machinery goes, plus a heap of wood gathered from local farms which helps them off load old trees and allows the members access to a lot of really nice woods.  Here in Queensland where I live in Australia, the State government allows poker machines but the deal is that the gambling must contribute to a "community development fund" which then funds clubs like this one.  The management committee has worked out the right things to say and twice a year they get new machines, trouble is they are running out of space!  Still, I am enrolling in some course to learn a heap of new skills and come out of it with all my fingers intact, machines that slice and dice wood quickly do not care what they cut up!

Perhaps I can make us a both a set of cases for these Cymbals one day soon.

Cheers

Bluesky 

[hagtech]

I'm a little perplexed myself as to the Cymbals not really taking off

Virtually everyone wants more power.  I get requests for a 50W amp design all the time.  I tried to do it once, but couldn't.  You have to give up class A operation and add feedback.  I got to about 25W using four 6080 per channel (that's eight triodes in push/pull).  It took two 5AR4 rectifiers per channel.  I forget, but I think it also took two power trannys per channel.  It pulled 280W out of the wall.  I might still make one, see if it can power some Maggies. 

more symetrical arrangement of tubes and shifting the trafos either to the rear

This was the only way I could jam it into the same chassis as a CLARINET.  It had to have the "family" look. 

jh

[glass_painter]

Hello All,

I have a feeling that the biggest reason this design did not take off is the tube of choice.

Since BAT started using the 6H30 tube, the prices for this tube become very high and not very suitable for the average do it yourselfer.

There is another tube that can be a drop in replacement for the 6h30 which is 6N6P, the average price for this tube is around 3 to 4 USD and according to Lukas Fikus from the "lumpizator" site it even sounds better.

I do not think any change is needed in the design, Jim can you verify this?

Thanks,

Good luck.

Gil

[Brinkman]

  I got to about 25W using four 6080 per channel (that's eight triodes in push/pull).  It took two 5AR4 rectifiers per channel.  I forget, but I think it also took two power trannys per channel.  It pulled 280W out of the wall.  I might still make one, see if it can power some Maggies. 

So this was a Class-A parallel push-pull configuration? Triode output, and no negative feedback? Wow.

Man, 25W per channel of this sort, in conjunction with an active crossover (SS for the woofers) would keep me happy for years. Also would've warmed my house all winter!

As it stands, I'm replacing the driver board in my ST70 with this new-ish design by K&K Audio. Turns the Dynaco into a Class-A push-pull in either a triode (10W pc) or ultralinear (about 20Wpc) output stage. Uses input transformers and a regulated power supply.

I mention this because an active crossover is about the only way I can make this work (for the time being), so that's what I'm looking into.

Best,
Brinkman

[bluesky]

I have been doing some more thinking on the Cymbals and believe the power should actually be more than enough for most people.

Awhile ago I did an upgrade on a 3 watt tube amp for a friend and when I tested it out on my 87dB Aksonics speakers I was really surprised a how loud it played.  The clincher though was when I was disturbed by my eldest son playing some sort of heavy metal music at painful levels in his room.  I stormed in to have "words" when I discovered he had snaffled this little tube amp to play his music on some even less sensitive home theatre speakers!

Most people believe you need a lot of watts when we really don't use any where near the rated power output, after all the "first watt" statement exists for a reason.  There is a general consensus that tube watts equate to at least double solid state watts and my experience verifies this statement.  Lastly, there is also the possibility of biamping, Rod Elliott on his ESP website is a big proponent of biamping and states that an amp driving a single driver is equivalent to four times the power.  All this shows that the Cymbals are not underpowered despite what many people may perceive and that such a set up would provide the equivalent of over 60 watts compared to a standard intergrated solid state amp.  Next up, Jim also mentions that there is a facility to have some sort of sub out in the Cymbal, this is fantastic feature now that I realise this. 

So...............I am rapidly talking myself into building a set of cymbals!  Ideally I'd like to use the tried and tested parts formula of Kiwames, Obbligatos and Russian teflons but I could also source cheaper parts from the internet or through friends as I don't have much of an income, but, where there's a will there's a way.  I have developed a network of friends, mostly retired chaps, whom I regard as mentors and these guys have their garages full of "old junk" and are usually happy to give me stuff, which pleases their long suffering wives no end to clear some of this stuff out!  If I could source a lot of the parts for fre or at least very cheaply this project may get off the ground one day.

So, here's an idea, build some Cymbals and make my own chassis rather than use the Lansing, firstly because I can make one for nothing through my local woodworking club and also to allow me to juggle the size with big caps like those Russkie teflons.  I am even toying with the idea of a separate power supply, or at least housing the transformers and large Obbligato power supply caps (if I can afford these).  I'd also look at placement of the tubes to "look pretty" on the chassis with some cheap gold plated tube cages I got ages ago as "payment" for the upgrades done on those 3 watt tube amps.  Would it be possible to attach the tubes to the top aluminum panel and then keep hum at bay by use of the usual tricks regarding hum, ie twisted pairs of hook up wire, enclosing this wire in copper braid which would have a grounding wire to earth using the start grounding principle?  There are also several proprietry shielding materials but heavy duty aluminium foil can be sourced at my local supermarket, I've used this before with good results by using several layers held together with craft type spray adhesive to hold it together and this could be used to help shield tubes etc from stray hum as well as having some distance betwen the TX's and the main PCB.

Input on any of these ideas would be greatly appreciated, I am a big Aksa amp fan and I am building some Aksa 55N+'s for a friend at the moment and use Aksa components but I have always had a desire for some tube amps as well.  I could use the 55's for the sub as well as with my more "normal" system I intend to buy the Aksa V Sonics speaker kit and these are rated at 90dB and would allow use of both the Aksa and Hagtech amps.  My audio mentor insists that any audio fanatic should have two audio systems, one to listen to and one to work on.  I have actually found this to be true and I could not think of a better two systems than an Aksa solid state and a Hagtech tube based system and I can play around with tweaks to my hearts content.   One to listen to, one to play with and improve, excellent thinking!! 

Bluesky       

[heartm8]

I own the cymbals, and they are more than enough power with the Klipsch LaScala speakers. They are also amazingly high S/N ratio, dead quiet. I wonder what they measure.  More than 40% on the volume knob will make your ears bleed.  They sound great, but I had one channel die, and I'm waiting for the other channels tubes to burn out before I send back to Jim for a fix, because I want him to replace all the tubes at once. My only comment is there's no bias knob, but I bet Jim has a reason for that.

[bluesky]

Hi

Great to hear of a Cymbal builder!  Can you tell us more about your set up, what parts you used and the sound?  I would particularly like to hear what you found in the frequency extremes, ie the bass and treble response, very good I expect!

Bluesky