Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
mcp6453[_2_] mcp6453[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 749
Default Lundahl Transformers

I read this information on http://www.lundahl.se/faq.html and thought it was
funny for a commercial site.

"One of the LL1674 seems to be off-spec, the secondary static resistance should
be about 605 ohm and 3 of the transformers do indeed measure 600-608 ohm. The
fourth one measures 560 and 600 ohm for the two secondary resistances, this
would lead to an off-balance surely? Gain matching and CMR would not be so good.
Difference in copper resistance is due to difference in wire gauge. It is
possible that we used wire from different runs or from different vendors.
However, the number of turns should be correct. (I say "should be" as ****** do
happens, even at Lundahls. But if the number of turns was not correct, the
difference in copper resistance should have been around 100 ohms for the LL1674
(representing two full layers).) "
  #2   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Scott Dorsey Scott Dorsey is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,853
Default Lundahl Transformers

mcp6453 wrote:
I read this information on http://www.lundahl.se/faq.html and thought it was
funny for a commercial site.

"One of the LL1674 seems to be off-spec, the secondary static resistance should
be about 605 ohm and 3 of the transformers do indeed measure 600-608 ohm. The
fourth one measures 560 and 600 ohm for the two secondary resistances, this
would lead to an off-balance surely? Gain matching and CMR would not be so good.
Difference in copper resistance is due to difference in wire gauge. It is
possible that we used wire from different runs or from different vendors.
However, the number of turns should be correct. (I say "should be" as ****** do
happens, even at Lundahls. But if the number of turns was not correct, the
difference in copper resistance should have been around 100 ohms for the LL1674
(representing two full layers).) "


They are really cool people.

This sort of thing is what you get when you have companies actually run by
engineers, and driven by engineering requirements. People actually say
honest things about their products instead of listening to what the marketing
department wants them to say. And it's hard not to have a bit of a sense of
humor when you do such things.... witness the "Write Only Memory" and the
"Polish Operational Amplifier" datasheets that somehow made their way into
published data books.

If someone asked a major line transformer vendor about different value
resistances on coils, they would mostly have got a line of garbage about
how everything is fine. Lundahl is honest.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
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
The lost Lundahl chapters Jon Yaeger Vacuum Tubes 5 November 13th 07 01:58 PM
Lundahl Retailer west[_3_] Vacuum Tubes 1 May 11th 07 11:03 PM
FS: Lundahl transformers LL1660S and LL1620/PP shane ceglar Vacuum Tubes 1 June 12th 05 09:01 AM
Lundahl LL1623SE impressions. Patrick Turner Vacuum Tubes 14 March 28th 05 03:26 PM
RIP dearly beloved Lundahl LL1635 Lord Valve Vacuum Tubes 0 December 21st 03 08:16 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:18 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"