Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Patrick Turner Patrick Turner is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,964
Default Quad-II amp info and re-building

There is no doubt some ppl would never ever change one single thing in original Quad-II amplifiers.

For those who loathe me saying old Quad-II have faults which need fixing, I suggest they bypass my website and go to
http://www.keith-snook.info/quad-ii-...amplifier.html

Now Mr Snook is an Englishman And Gentleman who Quad-II fanciers may find to be a rich source of DETAILED information on Quad-II.

Patrick Turner.


  #2   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Phil Allison[_3_] Phil Allison[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 500
Default Quad-II amp info and re-building


"Patrick Turneroid"


For those who loathe me saying old Quad-II have faults which need fixing,
I suggest they bypass my website and go to
http://www.keith-snook.info/quad-ii-...amplifier.html

Now Mr Snook is an Englishman And Gentleman



** Err - what does that make Pat ?

An Aussie ******* ?


who Quad-II fanciers may find to be a rich source of DETAILED information
on Quad-II.



** Certainly long on trivial details and fetish stuff.

But very short on anything really worthwhile.



..... Phil





  #3   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Patrick Turner Patrick Turner is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,964
Default Quad-II amp info and re-building

Now Mr Snook is an Englishman And Gentleman


** Err - what does that make Pat ?

An Aussie ******* ?

But I have a splendid pedigree, I'm a well bred Auzzie Bah Stard.


who Quad-II fanciers may find to be a rich source of DETAILED information
on Quad-II.



** Certainly long on trivial details and fetish stuff.

But very short on anything really worthwhile.

..... Phil

Such a Philesque remark !

But meanwhile, today it rained well, and none of my cycling bunch turned up where we usually start on a Sunday for a little 80km ride someplace.

OK, I get damp but not soaking wet, I go back home to shed where I do more work on MkIV amps, and I dig out a Quad-II to measure it. I replace 680r, 180r, and both 0.1uF and 25uF. It seems Hunts 0.1uF had become 400k resistors. Enough to turn on both KT66 and fuse the Rk 180r. But just how 680r Rk for EF86 fused is unknown, just some old junk fails, eh.
I set up safe mains lead. turn it on, and it came to life OK, and all Vdc were correct, although I got about 1.5Vdc across 680k after about 20 minutes..
680k had gone up to 750k, but not a problem. Vac balance from EF86 are about 7% different, about normal and KT66 Iadc are within 25%, about right for working tubes maybe 1/2 way through life.

After several hours I had a good looking graph of THD Vs Po for amp without GNFB, ie, with R10 100r shunted, and with the GNFB. OPT was set for 16r0, and load used was 16r0, so my test conditions were same as yours, and I found average gain reduction with NFB at Po less than 2 watts was -20dB, and that THD reduction at 9W, which is the maximum class A point dropped 24dB with GNFB.
I have installed the graph into my page on Quad-II re-engineering and revised the text so a decent record will exist for future.

Then I measured my MkIV Dynaco again but with load 4r0 on maximum Sec turns and this gives same RLa-a as Quad-II. There is only 14dB GNFB, but THD below 2.2Watts was 6dB below Quad-II, so I put the MkIV curve as a dashed line under the Quad curves.
I need ppl to know I seem to get less THD with less dependance on NFB than Quad.

But the MkIV with KT88 run cooler, Ea 390V x Ia 47mA, in Quad, KT66 have +340V x 65mA.

If I make Pda in KT88 = 30W, Ia = 70mA, and then I get same 9W class A as Quad with 4k3 RLa-a. Also THD would be even lower than I have now. So now I wonder just how much THD is in existing EF86, but whatever it is, maybe its a lot lower than in KT66.

The MkIV has been set up to use 8r0 speakers at the highest outlet, and when 8r0 is used, the MkIV still makes more AB1 Po than Quad-II, and as it is with low Pda, also makes 9W max class A. The higher RL makes KT88 have slightly higher gain thus increasing the dB of GNFB, so maybe much less THD than Quad-II.

Then it occurred to me you had a PP OPT used with sec as the input to drive your Quad-II output stage. But did you think of iron generated 3H? Maybe much more than your signal gene, and if a sig gene has Rout 600r, then the input Z of tranny with GOSS might need to be very high. The Iron makes 3H, and what phase is it?

If your sig gene has 0.002% THD, then which ever way you try to make a balanced voltage source of +/- say 30Vrms, it is not as easy as using an OPT you have laying about, but you must build a dedicated balanced amp complete with bagfulls of NFB and even then its THD may well be 0.005%.

Its easier to just measure THD of input / driver stage, and it should be mainly 3H, then work out what phase it is, and see how that affects what you measure with /without GNFB for the whole amp. Simple.

I should soon finish the editing with new graph and I'll let everyone know.

Amplifiers are only fully understood if they are compared.

Patrick Turner
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Quad 99 Preamp with Quad 909 Amp Using Long Quadlink Connection Peter High End Audio 4 March 31st 11 06:39 PM
FA: Panasonic Quad amp-Quad 8 combo receiver-$25 DesertBob Jr. Tech 1 May 4th 06 05:43 PM
FA: Panasonic Quad amp-Quad 8 combo receiver-$25 smokey Pro Audio 1 May 4th 06 05:43 PM
Quad FM4 Tuner Quad serviced and new battery fitted all bits Dave xxxx Marketplace 0 June 8th 04 04:41 PM
Looking for Quad-Eight MM 310-B module info, and AM-4 amplifier info...Thanks!Anyone, anyone? Stephen Anderson Pro Audio 0 May 7th 04 08:52 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:33 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"