Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Small Amp Design for Cleans

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    No big deal, we use Latin all day long, often with the words slightly modified so we don't recognize it as such.
    Easier to recognize for us who use Latin derived languages, of course, but let me tell you that with a firend we are having long discussions about re-classifying English as a Latin language too, instead of a Germanic based one, go figure.
    He finds new , not only Latin but straight Italian words in it, which is not surprising since in the 1600's the technical and cultural advanced Country in Europe was Italy.
    He surprises me everyday with seemingly "only in English" words, such as :
    "cook" , from the Italian "cuocco"
    "ink" , from "inchiostro" (ch is pronounced K)
    "bank" from "banca"
    "pen" from "penne" (feather)
    and a thousand others.
    In fact I'm encouraging him to write all that as a dictionary.
    It's a small world indeed.
    Juan Manuel Fahey

    Comment


    • #17
      English is a different language.
      Kind of like a potpourri.
      What i find interesting is the way root words are taken & 'simplifiied'.
      If you look at a map of Italy, in English, every name is changed.
      WTF.
      Italia.
      Roma.
      Venicia.
      Fiorenza.
      That is there name.
      Where does the English language get off changing them.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Jazz P Bass View Post
        If you look at a map of Italy, in English, every name is changed.
        ...
        That is there name.
        Where does the English language get off changing them.
        It's just that we so respect our leaders. In the immortal words of William Jefferson Clinton, it all depends on what your definition of "is" is.
        Amazing!! Who would ever have guessed that someone who villified the evil rich people would begin happily accepting their millions in speaking fees!

        Oh, wait! That sounds familiar, somehow.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Chuck H View Post
          A couple of things with the new design simplify the build. Like the fact that you no longer have plates drawing through the choke. So your choke can be MUCH smaller since it only supplies the screens and preamp. And I don't think you'll need to totem pole the caps beyond the main filter. The screen and preamp tube filters should be fine as a single cap.
          I stuck with a larger choke because the smaller ones are only rated for 400V. I could probably use a single 450V cap for the screen filter, but don't electrolytics tend to die quickly when run near their max voltage? The preamp is at 466V, which seems like it'd be cutting it close even for a 500V cap.

          Originally posted by J M Fahey View Post
          What's wrong with building a tried and trusty classic amp which already does what you want?
          Designing something really new usually (as in 99.99% of the time) means loooooooong time building, testing, not liking, rebuilding, modding, tearing everything down and starting with a clean slat, repeating the first 3 or 4 steps with *something* changed, etc.
          Repeat ad nauseam , which in good English means "repeat until you throw up just *thinking* about it".
          There's nothing wrong at all with using a time-tested circuit; I just want to try something different and learn along the way. I find design work much more engaging than analyzing an old amp. It's entirely plausible that my ideas won't work and I'll have to revert to a proven circuit; I wouldn't be terribly bothered. I've already realized that my initial 10W goal was unrealistic and have been puzzling over how much output I'll actually need. What do you guys think; would going straight to a push-pull power amp be my best bet?

          Comment


          • #20
            It would be nice if you would define "clean'.
            If you want absolutely undistorted clean, then the wattage 'maximum' does not matter, does it?
            I guess that is what you are calling 'headroom', huh?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Jazz P Bass View Post
              It would be nice if you would define "clean'.
              If you want absolutely undistorted clean, then the wattage 'maximum' does not matter, does it?
              I guess that is what you are calling 'headroom', huh?
              Haha, I forgot just how subjective the idea of a "clean" amp can be. Sorry.

              The ideal clean sound I have in mind is something along the lines of 60's Fender circuits and Sunn's amps. The best example I can think of off the top of my head are the sounds on The Who's first album, particularly "Circles" and "The Good's Gone." I'd prefer to choose relatively low power primarily for convenience; 100W amps sound great, but it seems like a waste to build an amp which will draw 300W or more and will be too heavy to move around much.

              Comment

              Working...
              X