[tubegarden]

Hi RATs!

Filter networks herein are to allow AC to be delivered to a tubed audio
circuit as DC.

Commercial implementaions are chiefly tuned to minimum parts count and
easy production.

Those among us who only need a few systems to feed our unnatural
hungers may pursue more arcane topology and construction techniques.

If you are in the quick and dirty sell them a gazillion end of the
game, you may read, but, please, do not pretend you are into exquisite
personal listening, as well. Whores are not always great lovers, just
quick charmers They all think they are great lovers, but, doesn't
everybody, just?

There are three types of noise to be filtered, subsonic, it is too low
in frequency to hear, sonic, it is easily heard, and supersonic, it is
too high in frequency to hear. Discussions of which source is in which
spectrum are exciting to swap insults in, but do nothing to improve
one's personal audio system. Let us assume less noise, in any
frequency, from any source, is a good general goal.

As a basic idea, the less noise on our theoretical DC, the more
noticeable the signal being amplified will be. We do intend to notice
some signals and be entertained.

Any after effect of a previous signal in the amplication chain is just
more noise. Sorry, I cannot cleary discuss intentional reverb tanks or
circuits - in this context, nor in any, as I think on it

A simple network is a diode and a capacitor. This removes half the AC
component and smooths out the remainder. Not exactly clinical flatline,
but less noisey than the signal direct from the wall socket.

Happy Ears!
Al

[Eeyore]

tubegarden wrote:

Hi RATs!

Filter networks herein are to allow AC to be delivered to a tubed audio
circuit as DC.

Actually you mean " to allow rectified AC to be delivered to a tubed audio
circuit as DC. "

The rectification is critical in this task.

Graham

[Peter Wieck]

tubegarden wrote:

As a basic idea, the less noise on our theoretical DC, the more
noticeable the signal being amplified will be. We do intend to notice
some signals and be entertained.

To this end, I have always thought that given the nosebleed prices of
some components, a pure-battery supply for A+, B+ and C- currents
should be both practical and cost-effective. It could be charged during
off-hours. At a guess, to deliver say.... 8 continuous hours of power
at 1000 watts, using modern NiMetalHydride batteries for C- & B+ and
sealed lead-acid batteries for A+, the package would be about the size
of a medium-sized ottoman in total volume.

In the realm of cost, for those who spend $1000 for a single
interconnnect, pennies. My guess would be around $1500 w/charging
system and the appropriate switching to make that practical. But there
would be A LOT of stored energy in that little box....

No, don't write of computer-type UPS systems. They are inverters
converting DC to AC (usually very noisy square-waves at that), and not
hardly the same thing. Also, don't write of leaving any sort of charger
connected, even via relays or zeners for in-use charging. Any such
device will impose noise. Not also that most battery chargers do not
smooth the DC much. Apparently batteries charge better under pulse than
with a smooth current.

No, I have no plans to make one anytime soon. But it has always been a
thought that would seem to settle a lot of discussions with a simple
and direct solution.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[John Byrns]

In article . com,
"Peter Wieck" wrote:

tubegarden wrote:

As a basic idea, the less noise on our theoretical DC, the more
noticeable the signal being amplified will be. We do intend to notice
some signals and be entertained.

To this end, I have always thought that given the nosebleed prices of
some components, a pure-battery supply for A+, B+ and C- currents
should be both practical and cost-effective. It could be charged during
off-hours. At a guess, to deliver say.... 8 continuous hours of power
at 1000 watts, using modern NiMetalHydride batteries for C- & B+ and
sealed lead-acid batteries for A+, the package would be about the size
of a medium-sized ottoman in total volume.

In the realm of cost, for those who spend $1000 for a single
interconnnect, pennies. My guess would be around $1500 w/charging
system and the appropriate switching to make that practical. But there
would be A LOT of stored energy in that little box....

No, don't write of computer-type UPS systems. They are inverters
converting DC to AC (usually very noisy square-waves at that), and not
hardly the same thing. Also, don't write of leaving any sort of charger
connected, even via relays or zeners for in-use charging. Any such
device will impose noise. Not also that most battery chargers do not
smooth the DC much. Apparently batteries charge better under pulse than
with a smooth current.

No, I have no plans to make one anytime soon. But it has always been a
thought that would seem to settle a lot of discussions with a simple
and direct solution.

Batteries have a problem, they are too "Slow" for use in stereo systems
where a "Fast" power supply is needed.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[Eeyore]

John Byrns wrote:

Batteries have a problem, they are too "Slow" for use in stereo systems
where a "Fast" power supply is needed.

For the life of me I really can't tell if that's meant to be a joke or not.

Graham

[tubegarden]

Eeyore wrote:
tubegarden wrote:

Hi RATs!

Filter networks herein are to allow AC to be delivered to a tubed audio
circuit as DC.

Actually you mean " to allow rectified AC to be delivered to a tubed audio
circuit as DC. "

The rectification is critical in this task.

Graham

Hi RATs!

OK, I include the rectifier in the filter network. My example of simple
network displayed this.

PSUD2 is wonderful fun, BTW.

The results between the model, given measured values of components in
use, are pretty close to the voltages measured in the real system. And
lots less soldering

Happy Ears!
Al

[tubegarden]

Eeyore wrote:
John Byrns wrote:

Batteries have a problem, they are too "Slow" for use in stereo systems
where a "Fast" power supply is needed.

For the life of me I really can't tell if that's meant to be a joke or not.

Graham


Hi RATs!

Good Grief, you really are British!

Happy Ears!
Al

[Eeyore]

tubegarden wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
tubegarden wrote:

Hi RATs!

Filter networks herein are to allow AC to be delivered to a tubed audio
circuit as DC.

Actually you mean " to allow rectified AC to be delivered to a tubed audio
circuit as DC. "

The rectification is critical in this task.

Graham

Hi RATs!

OK, I include the rectifier in the filter network. My example of simple
network displayed this.

PSUD2 is wonderful fun, BTW.

The results between the model, given measured values of components in
use, are pretty close to the voltages measured in the real system. And
lots less soldering

You're discovering the value of CAD modelling ! Good Man ! I rarely breadboard
anything these days. CAD is an invaluable tool

Graham

[Patrick Turner]

Eeyore wrote:

John Byrns wrote:

Batteries have a problem, they are too "Slow" for use in stereo systems
where a "Fast" power supply is needed.

For the life of me I really can't tell if that's meant to be a joke or not.

Graham

That's because the definitions of fast and slow vary depending
on who you talk to, so if something seems inconguous about a given power
supply,
it may make us smile, and make another man cry....

I like lots of capacitance, mimimal chokes, and I don't hear ANY
difference with
tubed rectifiers vs SS diodes.

I prefer not to sell any amps with tube rectifiers because tubes may
have
good voltage amplifying abilities, but really, they are pretty awful as
rectifiers.

And I would initially refuse to supply anyone with 40 x 12V car
batteries for the
+480V B+ unless they paid me very well.

Patrick Turner.