advertisement


Attack of the Redbox Preamp

So, the LPA5 features in more detail:

First the Naim vs Bootstrapped topology.
Look at the air guitariste LPA1 schematic and the LPA3 funk monster. So the redbox LPA5 is designed to switch easily between these topologies.
For Classic Naim topology, on the LPA5 remove R16 and cut track B.
For Bootstrapped topology, insert R16, Remove R29, ensure track B is intact, and cut the track at point A.
Simples, urch.
Obviously I'm not going to go around cutting tracks, so I designed what I termed 'link pads'. Essentially an smt component footprint, with the pads very close together. A blob of solder bridges the pads easily to connect the tracks. A quick dab with desoldering braid and its removed again. Easy peasy. Though ahem, the pad design has to be of a certain shape to work well as I found out. So lets say very easy to middling easy, doh. Ive learnt. The point of this is I wanted to be very clear in my head about the differences between both topologies- i've been using bootstrapped for over 10 years but in truth can't remember the differences that clearly anymore and the games is now at such a different level that I'd like to revisit it. This whole redbox preamp project was really about consolidating my learning and understanding of a lot of the modding and reading I've done in the last few years, so its a development board as well as an astonishingly good preamp, so far.

1) Input transistor Q11 is a jfet not the usual BC550c. Its a very nice little part, the J304, with an Input capacitance of 2.2pf which is VERY low and can handle to 30V. In practice it is a refined, detailed, smooth and 'beautiful' sounding part compared to a BC550c which sounds a bit coarse in comparison. But... I felt the BC part was more ballsy. A tradeoff- do you want to go dancing with a ballerina or one of the fine ladies from Legs & Co? In the grand scheme of things its a trivial difference; I'd rate it as a 1/10 bang for buck, ie just cognisable.

2) BUT the point of Q11=jfet is to allow C12 the input coupling capacitor to drop to 0.22uf instead of 3-10uf without rolling off the freq response early and killing bass response. And THAT means you can try Teflon Vcaps for example.... which are still insane at around £70 each but better than £500 for a 3.3uf part or Duelund stacked copper foils at £1000+. If you want.
At present I'm using an 0.22 FKP1 film and foil from wima which I'm very happy with. Idly looking for an FKP3 0.22, but not found one in a couple of years of browsing.

**** On coupling caps:
I've used tants, oscons, BCwhatevers, blackgate, polyesters, polystyrenes, MKP4s, mkp10s, SMRs etc etc and really don't worry about this much anymore. They all have a slightly different character but the real win is moving up from tants / electrolytics to film. I do avoid wound film capacitors though and stick to Wima/Evox as I've found the wound caps can often have a weird sound, especially the audiophile ones, which I attribute to high inductance or tailoring for audiophile sensibilities. Yuchhh.
In general folks make a big drama about differences in coupling caps but I suspect more because its an easy mod that builds confidence. In the grand scheme of things, when you really start sorting out the power and grounding and other big stuff, its trivial. A polystyrene/foil Multicap RTXs failed to really impress compared to a wima for example. At some point I want to try a Vcap to see if THAT is actually significant but I very much doubt it from all the other caps I've tried.. The cost puts me off so it will be drunken impulse no doubt more fuelled by curiousity than expectation. I feel I have a good sense of the size of the ballpark and it aint that big. And don't diss tants, They're not actually that bad, certainly not a deal breaker ***

Anyway I designed space on the LPA5 board to try anything from a 5mm to a 50mm pitch component in all the standard capacitor pitches e.g 22.5mm, 37.5mm etc. should I ever want to.

3) the input transistor biasing string VR1, R14, R20, R28.
R20 is traditionally 1meg with jfets and this works fine.
R28 is another 50k to form a filter with C15 and trim off any lingering very high frequency noise getting through the regulators. C15 is a small polypropylene wima, ground planed for high frequency performance. The decoupling is right next to the lead of R20- ie the part it is supposed to be decoupling, not 6 inches away or on the regulator board. If you're going to decouple, do it properly.
C8 is another small polypropylene decoupling cap that combines with VR1 as a high frequency filter again.
R14 +VR1 form the top half of the biasing string. Why VR1 at all? Well because then you can trim the output DC offset to zero. And THAT means you can get rid of the output decoupling capacitor C13 all together. (C13 does need to be at least 10uf and big caps tend to perform worse than small uns in terms of most performance parameters. They're also more expensive. I use a polyprop for this again). In practice VR1 needs to be adjusted to around 600k to zero off output dc offset with the J304. Other parts will have other values. Note these values do not work with BC550s where Naims 330k values are appropriate.
R19 is a gatestopper resistor for the jfet just in case. Its almost 100% not needed and can be bypassed, but its there in case until ive confirmed the fact. Easy to bypass, not easy to build in if needed.

4) The input cascode we've already looked at above.
 
So its friday night, I'm completely smashed!! After a shit week , more than some beers too many, just stagggered home like a Thunderbirds puppet and listening to The Roots, Things Fall Apart. Not normally a huge fan of rap but bloody awesome album, thanks Txabi. Pizza is 2 minutes away, and for christ's sake, get these shouty fools out of my apartment before the neighbours go nuclear, start hammering down the door and call the cops! Utterly brilliant. Firm though obscure recommendation.
Cheers Ced
 
Hi B, yeah bit too good. Bit dusty today, hooo.

Onwards:
5) The VAS. Q6 is the VAS transistor and Q3 its cascode.Q14, Q15, R30 are the CCS to drive the zener U1 etc. Its just the 'upside down' PNP version of the NPN input cascode. Again C9 is a small value polypropylene wima to trim off any lingering very hi frequency noise, again ground planed, used to kill off any intermodulation from the Q3, U1, Q14 etc part of the biasing string.

6) feedback network R21/R25/C16 is 12k/2k/22uf not the usual 12k/1k/47uf. This lowers gain to around 7 instead of the usual Naim 12-13. I'm sure this has been discussed many times before but here goes again. Naim preamps are able to provide far more gain than line level sources require. A buffer is indeed not a bad proposition to look at and the B4 testifies that some folks happy this way. Thus the volume control hardly needs to move from 0 (7 o'clock) in normal operation. The range was useful with some cartridges for phono replay though but its more a hangover from the 80s. But anyway, loosing gain ain't a problem in general. It also gives you a tiny bit more play with the volume knob. Not half as much as you might think though, Perhaps an extra 1/2 - 1 hour on the volume. If you measure the resistances on your pot at normal listening levels, you'll understand why.
The highest I ever used to play was up to maybe 9.00, now I get to 10.30 including shunt volume pot with 20k shunt before its too loud. But every little bit helps. Anyway changing R25 to 2k or thereabouts does it. I think I use 2.2k as that's the Caddock TF020 resistor that I had.

***An aside on resistors:
so normal resistors are the Vishay Dale RN60s. They're fine little workhorses and good for most of the circuit. An upgrade on Naims BCC SFR25 though again i'd put it in the 1/10 bang for buck range on the mod scale. Cognisable but not a game changer. But for the signal path I wanted the best of the best. So I did the resistor test a while back. I modded my alps pot to shunt topology and tried out a few pass resistors from the Parts Connexion common audiophile stock.

28 shunt pot.jpg


IMO the most audible way to get a handle on the sound of resistors. Tantalum, carbon, Vishay SJ102 (VTA package), caddock TF020, Vishay RN60. The only 2 that clearly stood out were the caddock TFN and the Vishay. The rest were much of a muchness IMO. Now the caddock I thought was quintessentially Naim- bold, lean, even, detailed but in a balanced not overemphasised way. The Vishay I hated. It was that weird audiophile bass and high end + stage depth type sound again. Very solid bass, a weird midrange valley that made everything sound a bit reverb/big hall, and a very detailed treble. I can imagine some people are swayed by that presentation but completely turns me off. As a metaphor; Caddock is the Captain of the Assassins- lean, powerful, clear of purpose and up front, vs the Vishay, curator of the art gallery- yappy, intellectualised, overly dramatic and annoyingly in your face. I know who I'd rather have at a dinner party though you may differ. Well actually neither to be honest, but sonically the Caddock without question. I also use the Caddock MP915s/ 930s in the poweramp and love em for the same reason. Now the only other resistor of repute out there is the Vishay Z-foil resistor (aka. Texas Components TX2575 aka Charcroft CAR). They're pricey and my heartfelt suspicion is it will be more of the SJ sound. It seems to have more mainstream repute and my impression is the SJ102 sound is a more mainstream audiophile presentation/sound too. My completely unfounded opinion of no worth anyway. One day I'll try em and know. Anyway Caddock also do the USF which is a higher tolerance version of the TF020.
Technically also the caddocks are non-inductive whereas most axial resistors are formed by spiral grooving, ie making an inductor:

http://www.learnabout-electronics.org/resistors_08.php

non inductive construction
C0558-Figure1.gif


Inductor in signal path = nein nein nein. I want to reduce parasistics, so perhaps a technical reason the caddocks sound good?

http://www.caddock.com/Online_catalog/Mrktg_Lit/TypeTF.pdf

As this is what I look for in capacitors too, here's the wima construction method:
http://www.wima.com/EN/selfinductance.htm

to be honest I'm sure materials, construction method etc also all play a part in determining the sound of a component, but hey, its a rule of thumb I use. I try to look for parts that make a musical difference rather than just tuning or tonal changes***

*** as another aside on parasistics- inductance is largely a function of track/component length, not width etc. Therefore I tried to keep tracks lengths down to the shortest physically possible, most critically within the active part or heart of the circuit. On the LPA5, it was a beeatch to lay out within several other constraints***

Back to the feedback network. The main reason for reducing gain with R25=2k is to allow C16 to be 22uf. And that means I can use a sane sized MKP. Very hard to get hold of (again I had to invest in a £££HUGE make-to-order) but blows away anything including polyesters, be they MMKs or whatever. A completely deeper level of musical access- detail, coherence, tonality, musicality, communication etc. El dorado- a simple whopping no brainer mod. Its the same jump again as putting MMKs into a naim pre in the first place.

more shortly
cheers
Ced
 
And quietly; I can let folks have some of my stock of 22uf non inductive box MKPs at cost if anyone wants the considerable pleasure of a couple in their pre. Just drop me a PM.
Ced
 
Ah 22MKP4 got some free samples from Wima they were by a country mile in feedback in my Pre's
 
Indeedy, he he. Problem is the amount I have used so far gets you a big no no on the samples front.
 
Yea you do seem to have a bit of a fetish for those red box's but I can't blame you have a box full of them myself:)
 
And onto the final leg.
So other resistors that merit the Caddock treatment are those in the direct signal path: R18, R19, R15, R16. As a stop gap I'm only using 3, and the rest are Vishay Dale PTF which are precision versions of the RN60s. R19 can likely be bypassed with wire, and the other 6 I will buy some time when the madness hits me. Only Michael Percy seems to stock a decent range of this item in the whole world and he is awkward ordering from. Again you need to put this in context. A resistor is not a game changer. However, for the very best, a 0.5% improvement here and another 1% there begin to add up.

8) Other transistors are BC550c/560c.

9) Apart from the VAS transistor Q6, and the other cascode transistors. These are the low capacitance 2s2705s/2sa1145s which have a lovely meaty sound and I like a lot. (1/10 to get this in perspective). Great in the VAS and with a very low output capacitance Cob of 1.8pf which makes them ideal as a cascode transistor.

10) C10 is the little 5.6pf capacitor to help stability. I haven't had to use it on this pre so far, with no ill effects, but I designed it in as a safety measure in case there was a hint of oscillation or that creeps in on cascoding for some reason. A little backup as it were.

11) The cascoded CCS Q16/Q17/R32 along with the biasing R27,U4,U5 R3, R4 etc. Ive thrown a bit of circuitry at this, basically isolating the cascode biasing string u4, d6, r27, r3 etc from the CCS biasing string U5, R4. I did it as sims indicated a very tiny improvement in current regulation and I had a couple of rails going spare. Whether its sonically significant, i dont know and don't intend to experiment to find out. C7 and C6 are just small decoupling capacitors again for hi frequency decoupling.
Why is R27 there? As a base stopper resistor for the cascode transistor to prevent possible oscillation though I don't use capacitors to decouple the bias reference- tried it, made no difference. Jonathan Carr again, I found the post I was looking for:

Indeed, a cascode can behave like a Colpitts oscillator. The oscillation frequency can be very high (hundreds of MHz), which makes this not so easy to spot unless you have the right equipment. I reckon that this is one reason why some posters claim that they don't like the sound of cascodes, not knowing that the circuit that they have built may possibly have been oscillating.
A stopper resistor is a good counter-measure, and in general, having too-low impedance on the base is risky practice. This can be a mine waiting to ambush the unwary, particularly if you are using a capacitor to shunt out the noise of a cascode bias reference. Sometimes you can get away with this, sometimes not. If you encounter problems, heavier load impedance on the output of the cascode can sometimes be of help.


and in fact that was such a good post, one of those little gems easy to gloss over among general noise on forums, that I'll quote the rest of it:

I would like to point out that this is absolutely an issue of physical construction (PCB layout) as well as the schematic. The type of schematic that can be used without problem, and the types of oscillation countermeasures and phase compensation that are needed, can be different according to the individual builder due to the differences in structural practice and technique.
As I have mentioned on numerous occasions in the past, the schematic is only a rough guide to the circuit, the real circuit is what is on the circuit board, including lead inductances and various parasitics. To look at the schematic only is a recipe for potential trouble (or over-compensation).
It is important to be able to recognize when and how an innocent-looking circuit fragment can easily metamorph into a potential trouble-maker, given the non-obvious electrical elements which can be added by the physical structure of the circuit, or things like environmental RF.
My own philosophy is that the schematic and physical layout should be designed together - the schematic should be designed and modified in consideration of the physical layout, and the physical layout should be designed and modified in consideration of the schematic.


Kinda way above my league, so I plumb for overengineering and playing safe.
Anyway, U5 is an LM329. Low noise and much lower dynamic impedance than an LED but gobbles huge voltage headroom. I can afford it because I run at +/-17V rails. D6 obviously required because the cascode Q16 needs to sit above Q17. I guess I could use a lower voltage and performance LM336 for U5, LM329 for U4 and bypass D6 but to me the Vbc of Q17 is the critical one as this is the actual current sink transistor. Is this better than just Leds? Hmmm.

12) Why is R3 and R4 there? Why not just make R1 and R2 16k? Because polypropylenes, while absolutely SUPERB decoupling capacitors, are complete bichos for setting off oscillation. One has to be very very careful, and when they go, they ain't subtle. There is also the 'grey zone' where they make the sound edgy which is harder to pick up. The only happy way I have found of dealing with this is damping with a resistor.
Directly in the current path as with C6, my experience is you want more than a hundred ohms either side of them. I tried a similar stunt with a poweramp and only 47 ohms for R4, and had to dive for the off switch as soon as I turned it on. So splitting a resistor into two and throwing a polyprop in the middle works very nicely where the situation allows (you can't just go throwing resistors in willy nilly).
Other situations eg C5, this is not feasible. Gyrators/circuit fragments (not so sure which) have also gone nuts on me if directly decoupled with polypropylenes. My strategy in this instance is to damp the cap with a 10R resistor between it and the current path. I tried various values and settled on that, though one can go a bit lower and be ok. One has to try and listen to each implementation. This is not ideal from a technical standpoint, but boy it pays sonic dividends. This is a safe rule of thumb I've developed through a bit of trial and error that works for me. Probably if you arse around with a scope endlessly and check each and every implementation you can get away with no damping in some situations. My strategy delivers the goods and I'm happy with that.

13) So the decoupling strategy for the LPA5?
polypropylene caps. Everywhere. I've implemented 18 per channel.
Not unusual in tubes but not so much with SS (apart from that pratty little token bypass cap on 10,000uf psu electrolytics- please! And there's a story to that if you start spluttering. I'm afraid size does count gentlemen, ask any lady; one crappy little microfarad film cap does not impress. IME anyway), maybe because the currents are much larger? Anyway, with polypropylenes, the sound is fantastic. Basically I'd say it lightens the sound somewhat; improves clarity and spaciousness. That would be drifting dangerously close to audiophile sensibilities, but most importantly dynamics go through the roof and boy does bass pack some slam. That mid bass is just so solid and tight and punchy its an absolute groove monster. Boogy factor really goes for your throat.
The single biggest niggle I ever had with original Naim gear was that coitus interruptus feeling of not quite getting there whatever I listened to. Perhaps the source of legendary Naim upgradeitis? Music just needed a tiniest bit more impact, however much I upgraded. Exactly the same feeling I get with... ahem... Robbie Williams's Feel- he builds up to a vocal/emotional crescendo and then somehow just pulls back at the last moment. Bad production? I dunno. A sneeze left unsneezed. A sense of slight letdown. Look everyone's got a dirty pop secret ok? Anyway polyprop decoupling = "naim upgraditis is yesterday's problem be'atch." I'll put that more in context in listening notes.
So C1-C5 and C17-C23. Are a mix of small uf and large uf polyprops, and large uf electrolytics bypassed with polyprops. What I use depends on the ac current component for any given rail. Thus I refer you back to the significance of simming current usage:

http://www.naimmods.com/2 Attack of the Redbox Preamp/20 Air guitariste LPA1- currents.pdf

Basically to keep the rail voltages stable to the uV range, I have opted to slug voltage noise with capacitors.

***NOISE: In my head I don't like to think of load dependent rail voltage variation as 'noise' though, as that implies it's somehow random and externally induced.
The high bandwidth gryrators have stripped out what I would call noise, which is line noise; all the random gunk coming in via the psu and mains and RFI pollution.
This however is the voltage sag on the rails due to the circuit drawing current while amplifying the music signal because the gyrators have a frequency dependent high output impedance. Or if you like, their filtering is not exceptional at very low frequencies- another way of looking at it. Literally the rails are singing along to the music.
My conclusion is this is not really a problem in terms of sound quality at all, not even dynamics. The voltage sag if you run gyrators on the output transistors of a poweramp is huge, volts, and that doesn't sound bad at all. On a pre, I can ruin gyrator load regulation by running a low current gyrator with a very low F3 filter instead of a darlington, but thereby increase the bandwidth and still everything sounds better- dynamics, communication, bass etc. A complete no brainer.
Furthermore this load 'music noise' is relatively low frequency as we saw from this previous graph.

20 minus 3db points Air guitariste.JPG


Music signal is going to be max, not much over 20khz and the amp itself rolls off -3db around 150khz and dead as a dodo by I guess 500khz. Good modern electrolytics can handle this sort of frequency range. My jury is still out however, on whether one can improve dynamics even more by slugging even this relatively small rail sagging. ***

Anyway, as you can see below, the LPA5 doesn't really need much capacitance technically on most of the rails. There are only 4 rails where there is significant ac and therefore voltage 'wiggle'.

So heres the LPA5 rail voltages WITHOUT on-board decoupling, Classic Naim configuration:

http://www.naimmods.com/2 Attack of the Redbox Preamp/27a LPA 5, Naim, NO DECOUPLING 1khz.pdf

** +ve rails run from Vo1-Vo8, left to right on the LPA5 schematic. -ve rails run Vo11-Vo18 left to right also. Each division either 1 volt or 100uV**

And here the rail voltages WITH a decoupling regime:

http://www.naimmods.com/2 Attack of the Redbox Preamp/27a LPA 5, Naim, NO DECOUPLING 1khz.pdf

Obviously 'large' ac current variation such as the output transistor (RAIL Vo8) needs to be slugged with some hefty capacitance to get rail voltage swing down to the uV level. Its showing a voltage swing of +/- 3mv. (Though i've modeled a worst case scenario- an input voltage of 1v ac is preposterous as 6ish Volts p-p on the output of any preamp would overload a poweramp). So for example for this rail I chose around 500uf of rail capacitance, comprised of a 470uf electrolytic and a 22uf polyprop. So you can see on the 2nd set of waveforms, this rail voltage 'noise' has dropped to +/- 300uV. Real world perhaps 50uV? I'd say that's pretty good, hey? Also notable you need a hell of a lot of capacitance for a small change. Do note though it also models worse at low frequency, say 20hz.
Other rails with just a few uA of ac current variation under load are dealt with fine with a big MKP. Yet other rails where we're talking about only a couple of uA or pA, 1uf or even less is all that's needed.
but consequently they sag horribly under load. However, that sag is in phase with the music (load related) which in my experience is not detrimental to the music at all- indeed dynamics get better again with this decoupling.
In my mind there are 3 possible reasons for the large improvement in sound quality.
a) tightening up the rail regulation.
b) simply the raw naked material sound of MKP4 capacitors.
c) mopping up the dregs of very high frequency noise that getsthrough the gyrators but which a film cap will decouple- but won't show on sims. I just don't know.
Either way, even when the rails don't really seem to need decoupling from the sims (which after all don't really show that much of the full picture), ive added at least at 1uf polypropylene cap anyway- To be sure, I took a dual strategy to be sure of tightening up rail regulation with mkp4s and using electrolytics where required.
I'm leaning to the 'sound of polyprolyene/vhf noise filtering conclusion to be honest. One day I might swap the mkp4s for electrolytics instead of just adding MKP4s and see what happens. Nah, I'll never be bothered. Someone else can do so and see if they can save .... actually probably about £100- these films aint cheap.

And that really just about ties up the lines of reasoning and experience behind the LPA5 preamp.
 
FKPs dont come big sizes, I think the max FKP4 is 1.5uf so its kinda irrelevant for that position. But I use FKP1s for coupling. No big difference tbh.
cheers
ced
 
I use Wima FKP 100pF in the entry filter (Solen filter ?) of the 321s, 729s and 322s, instead of the Naim styroflex, with good results.
 


advertisement


Back
Top