Forwards and backwards.
I saw the initial sketch and other comments, which is what got me interested.
Just wondered if you had updated anything while experimenting?
(Some of us just need a bit more help than others.
)
build guide for v-fet or iron pre PCB
stefan
Will do both ��
Forwards and backwards.
I saw the initial sketch and other comments, which is what got me interested.
Just wondered if you had updated anything while experimenting?
(Some of us just need a bit more help than others.
Decidedly Odd for someone who actively sells 'Class A' kits of his Own (?) cobbling?
could we ask for pcb sizes or issit too early? I definitely want to make a nice (or at least custom ) case, nicely prepared by lasercutterservice and this takes some time.
But don´t know if it is too early for me too, cause i want to start with F6 transformer + ordinary pot (when Vfet is in the former F6 case) and maybe upgrade with Zen-(or other "brand")Autodonut what could change the case layout....
anyway, looking forward, definitely my winter project..
kind regards,
st.
) case, nicely prepared by lasercutterservice and this takes some time.But don´t know if it is too early for me too, cause i want to start with F6 transformer + ordinary pot (when Vfet is in the former F6 case) and maybe upgrade with Zen-(or other "brand
")Autodonut what could change the case layout....anyway, looking forward, definitely my winter project..
kind regards,
st.
sorry , too early
for Store iteration (pot-buffer (plus shunt reg) -Jensen) , I'll probably send pcb files in a week or so , but ZM's Ultimate iteration(buffer (plus shunt reg) -AVC) it's way too early
You could always make the ultimate version first!!
sorry , too early
for Store iteration (pot-buffer (plus shunt reg) -Jensen) , I'll probably send pcb files in a week or so , but ZM's Ultimate iteration
And the rumored SUSY version? Or, is that your "ultimate iteration?"
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
will the store version contain also input relay pcb like the pcbs shown earlier here on the above´s product manual?
tnx
stefan
because there aren´t any if you won´t offer them
however, would be great to add them (or, if you dont´mind, share a pdf to home-etch)
here it is, pdf and Eagle files
mind that I didn't made friendly pad names , for now ...
it's made for XLR (direct soldering, no need for mounting studs, one pcb per channel) , but also applicable for RCA (mounting on studs , short signal wires ) ,so one pcb for both channels
edit : in case you don't have Eagle , let me know and I'll upload pdfs for parts populating etc.
mind that I didn't made friendly pad names , for now ...
it's made for XLR (direct soldering, no need for mounting studs, one pcb per channel) , but also applicable for RCA (mounting on studs , short signal wires ) ,so one pcb for both channels
edit : in case you don't have Eagle , let me know and I'll upload pdfs for parts populating etc.
Last edited:
I have been working on the IRON PRE concept the last month or so.
I see the pcbs are not too far into the future but since they were not available I went ahead and made mine point to point.
My buffers end up being almost ball shaped to keep leads to a minimum. I have the two FETs facing each other and taped together to keep them at similar temperatures. I have no idea if this is good or bad so would appreciate ZM's guidance.
This is how I have it set up - DAC to SLAGLE AUTOFORMER ATTENUATOR two outputs one to the SIT 1 and the other to a buffer which then drives the 1:5 SLAGLE autoformer within the J2 to equalize levels between drivers and a YAMAHA crossover (old one using PCM63s).
I initially had the buffer between the DAC and the attenuator and thought it sounded good. My initial impression was that the bass was improved by a good margin and the rest was left untouched. I then returned to no buffer and noticed that the buffer was not as transparent as I had thought. I then went with the scenario first described and I am getting the best of both worlds.
Could it be that ANYTHING added to the signal path going to the SIT 1 (in one stage mode) is harmful? It is not a diminution of high frequencies but a general reduction in resolution. It sounds fine until you go back and hear what is missing. Textural details are what is missing, as if some unwanted smoothing has been applied.
I had planned to use buffers before the attenuator and after. The cable to the SIT 1 was never to be after the second buffer, as an aside. But now I guess I only need one before the 1:5 autoformer ...
UNLESS my buffer construction is responsible for the unwanted smoothing in the range above 500 hz.
With my buffer all grounds are brought to a single point. I am not using the ZM shunt supply. I am using a JUNG super reg for each buffer. I am wondering: is that reg the problem or is it my construction method? I know I am bordering on apostasy with my reg choice. Have to say below 500 hz the thing sounds incredible. Bass viol and guitar have a harmonic wholeness - the upper range tones and lowest range tones are in balance - there is real impact that is not limited to just bloat in the lowest registers and the real tonality only coming from the mid bass. If that tortured sentence can be decrypted.
I am asking for hunches not answers since I know there is not enough here to give an answer.
I do plan on trying the shunt reg on another set of buffers since it seems like a good idea to buffer the output of the SOEKRIS DAC raw output and the attenuator.
I had read many times that this buffer is not particular about how it is powered so I thought the JUNG would be fine. I know I will only know when I try shunt regulation.
ZM - are you still recommending the regulator in the POOR SERBIAN MAN ...COOKBOOK?
Take care,
I see the pcbs are not too far into the future but since they were not available I went ahead and made mine point to point.
My buffers end up being almost ball shaped to keep leads to a minimum. I have the two FETs facing each other and taped together to keep them at similar temperatures. I have no idea if this is good or bad so would appreciate ZM's guidance.
This is how I have it set up - DAC to SLAGLE AUTOFORMER ATTENUATOR two outputs one to the SIT 1 and the other to a buffer which then drives the 1:5 SLAGLE autoformer within the J2 to equalize levels between drivers and a YAMAHA crossover (old one using PCM63s).
I initially had the buffer between the DAC and the attenuator and thought it sounded good. My initial impression was that the bass was improved by a good margin and the rest was left untouched. I then returned to no buffer and noticed that the buffer was not as transparent as I had thought. I then went with the scenario first described and I am getting the best of both worlds.
Could it be that ANYTHING added to the signal path going to the SIT 1 (in one stage mode) is harmful? It is not a diminution of high frequencies but a general reduction in resolution. It sounds fine until you go back and hear what is missing. Textural details are what is missing, as if some unwanted smoothing has been applied.
I had planned to use buffers before the attenuator and after. The cable to the SIT 1 was never to be after the second buffer, as an aside. But now I guess I only need one before the 1:5 autoformer ...
UNLESS my buffer construction is responsible for the unwanted smoothing in the range above 500 hz.
With my buffer all grounds are brought to a single point. I am not using the ZM shunt supply. I am using a JUNG super reg for each buffer. I am wondering: is that reg the problem or is it my construction method? I know I am bordering on apostasy with my reg choice. Have to say below 500 hz the thing sounds incredible. Bass viol and guitar have a harmonic wholeness - the upper range tones and lowest range tones are in balance - there is real impact that is not limited to just bloat in the lowest registers and the real tonality only coming from the mid bass. If that tortured sentence can be decrypted.
I am asking for hunches not answers since I know there is not enough here to give an answer.
I do plan on trying the shunt reg on another set of buffers since it seems like a good idea to buffer the output of the SOEKRIS DAC raw output and the attenuator.
I had read many times that this buffer is not particular about how it is powered so I thought the JUNG would be fine. I know I will only know when I try shunt regulation.
ZM - are you still recommending the regulator in the POOR SERBIAN MAN ...COOKBOOK?
Take care,