Arkless Electronics
Trade: Amp design and repairs.
...or you could just use an op-amp...
Paradise phono stage: which carts do you use?
- Thread starter Rosewind
- Start date
Arkless Electronics
Trade: Amp design and repairs.
I was being facetious Si... in as much as noting that the Paradise is all discrete (other than servo) but yet you use an all op amp preamp and a power amp that uses op-amps and "power op-amps"...
So is the all discrete output buffer in the Paradise important? Or could it be replaced with an op-amp buffer?
sq225917
Bit of this, bit of that
Largely, the magic is in the Input stage and current mirrors, one could roll output stage to suit. I've thought about trying a set of the Weiss discrete opamps but never got round to any serious investigation.
From a purely numerical pov, an opamp stage could suffice but I wouldn't sully a build that way
From a purely numerical pov, an opamp stage could suffice but I wouldn't sully a build that way
Arkless Electronics
Trade: Amp design and repairs.
FWIW I thought a discrete output buffer sounded slightly better when I tried both in the similar Arkless Transconductance phono stage... it was fairly subtle though...
sq225917
Bit of this, bit of that
Incremental gains.
Of course there is this.
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/ven...sal-buffer-achieving-140-dbc-0-00001-thd.html
Of course there is this.
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/ven...sal-buffer-achieving-140-dbc-0-00001-thd.html
Arkless Electronics
Trade: Amp design and repairs.
Which adds even more op-amps! The LM4562's there will do very close to that low on their own (0.00003% in fact).... It will almost certainly be an op-amp within the feedback loop of another op amp.. Jung style.
I consider it a "wild red herring chase" to be going after THD lower than say 0.005% as by that low it can be considered completely inaudible (or can it!??). Engineering is always the art of compromise, balancing one criterion against another, and there will be other attributes compromised by aiming that low I've little doubt.
The raison d'etre of a discrete buffer is that it can do the job with excellent specs whilst having maybe only half a dozen components in the signal path, and achieve this by the inherent linearity of well chosen devices and topology, plus a good dose of class A standing current, rather than by the probably 50+ components inside the op-amp and the use of vast amounts of negative feedback.
Two very different methods of achieving the same aim...
But which is better???
Now that's the basis of a discussion on hi fi that could go on for 40 pages.... But as it doesn't involve a cable of some sort and a lot of pixie dust
Happy New Year!
misterdog
Not the canine kind
I have recently rebuilt my Quad 989's with the panels fitted to a 60x20mm box steel frame rather than the the 10x10 x 1.6mm aluminium angle.
As a result I have had to reduce the cartridge loading on my Paradise by 20%.
I have all values of Dale resistors in 100R increments and thought I had the sweet spot before.
Never say never.
Happy new year to all.
As a result I have had to reduce the cartridge loading on my Paradise by 20%.
I have all values of Dale resistors in 100R increments and thought I had the sweet spot before.
Never say never.
Happy new year to all.
Arkless Electronics
Trade: Amp design and repairs.
I can go with that yes... different damping and resonances in frame changes frequency balance of speakers slightly and counteracted by change in carts sound through loading change.
sq225917
Bit of this, bit of that
Once you get past immeasurable distortion is there really any difference?
Mostly when I do A/B tests I cant hear a difference. In most cases sitting forward on my seat dwarfs the effects.
Anyway, parts are ordered, matching will take place, brilliance will be built.
Mostly when I do A/B tests I cant hear a difference. In most cases sitting forward on my seat dwarfs the effects.
Anyway, parts are ordered, matching will take place, brilliance will be built.
misterdog
Not the canine kind
I thought I had just broken them at first...
Someone on here posted that Peter Walker knew what he was doing and had designed the Quad 63 to be lossy.. PW. had no input into the 989's that I know of, so they just stretched the design with 2 additional panels, the additional moving mass making matters worse.
Had I known better I would have made the change years ago.
Someone on here posted that Peter Walker knew what he was doing and had designed the Quad 63 to be lossy.. PW. had no input into the 989's that I know of, so they just stretched the design with 2 additional panels, the additional moving mass making matters worse.
Had I known better I would have made the change years ago.
misterdog
Not the canine kind
Thing is 20 % is not a slight change.
The ability to easily alter the loading as things progress is important.
Arkless Electronics
Trade: Amp design and repairs.
I regard that as a fairly slight change only to loading... Nth degree stuff. Of course carts vary in there sensitivity to this.
Loading plugs have always been my choice for load changes. Infinitely variable if you've got the patience (not limited to a few switched selections) and good contact area.
Arkless Electronics
Trade: Amp design and repairs.
Jinx!
mickyricky
pfm Member
I’m using a Koetsu Rosewood Signature with great results .Simon updated my Paradise ,it’s now beyond Paradise!!!
337alant
Negatively Biased
Mick I really liked your Paradise 301/Koetsu at the last NEBO sounded excellent, and credit to Simons build quality, superb job Si
Alan
I've had great results using a Shelter 9000 into a four box beautifully built by Simon. Si, you should hear my system now. The Voyagers have been upgraded to Voyager 300s and, after 30 years, the SBLs have been replaced by Magico A3s. Its a stunning combination that made me realise just how good the Paradise is.
Tony
Bigman80
Bigbottle Owner
Are you suggesting using these on the output?
Forgive me if that's the wrong idea, I am still getting my head around it all