henry4841

This is my last build which I chose to have the option of using either SS or tube for a rectifier. One thing I like with SS is the increase in voltage. There is a considerable voltage drop across a rectifier tube. You can lower the extra voltage if desired with a resistor or you can use the extra voltage to increase the current through the output tube for more plate dissipation or lower the current, if for a cathode biased circuit, by increasing the resistance. I am running the EL-34's on this build around 20 watts for tubes rated at 25 watts. In other words 80% which most consider the best way. With a few value changes I can move a few wires and use a rectifier tube if desired. I may or may not do some bias adjusting for the audio tubes depending on what the numbers are. The SE EL-34 amplifier below is currently wired for SS rectification.

I am curious on what your point is. Do you design your tube builds with tube rectification and are against SS?

A little secret. Tubes still rule when it comes to sound. How you rectify AC voltage tmaking DC really should not be a serious discussion but that is what happens on a social forum. If I were like Seti, having many rectifier tubes in stock, I would be using rectifier tubes as well. Moot point actually, whether tube or SS rectification. Both do the job and that is all that counts. I only SS rectification in my tube builds now. Why not. Most say quicker and better. At least most of the new designers of tube circuits.

Especially when you add a decent sub into the mix. When buying my LS I figured out that I really do not have the room required for K-horns. With LS you suffer some bass loss over the K-horn but the bass it does make is pure horn bass. Something that is very rare in speakers. Love K-horns and always desired a pair years ago but now happy with LS and good sub.

I do not understand how favoring SS rectification in a tube amplifier has anything to do with class D and yes I do have many class D amplifiers but seldom listen to them. For me it is mostly class A either tube or SS amplifiers of which I have many along with some class A/B throwed into the mix. I do not understand how your post has anything to do with favoring SS rectification in a tube design. Sorry no offense meant but your statement makes no sense to me.

I say better being SS does the job as good if not better at a much cheaper cost. I probably favor SS rectification being involved in SS amplification for most of my life and not tubes. Just started working with tubes recently, 10 years ago so I see no need to go to the expense and trouble designing an amplifier using tube rectification. Face it guys tube rectification is old school. This is not to criticize the diehard tube heads who still favor tube rectification. I respect and admire them for stating there opinions and have to admit an extra tube sure looks nice in an amplifier. I would say half of my dozen or so tube amplifiers use tube rectification but I would not design a new amplifier using a tube for rectification. Why bother. Sure a tube might bring some flavor into the mix but it was not designed to do so. It was just all the old timers had for rectification way back when. I went a step further in my last build and used a SS PS section along with a SS constant current source for my input tube. The problems associated with SS over tubes for rectification can be easily worked around with working solutions. George Anderson in his SSE amplifier saw no problem offering the option of building either way. Anderson is a very respected guy among tube fanatics.

I learned decades ago that big horn speakers are impressive on the showroom floor. To adequately review any speaker would take more time than one day in a showroom listening at a dealer though. Not to diminish what I am sure is a very impressive sounding speaker but just being honest. One thing for sure, impressive looking speakers. Just seeing them in person would be an experience to remember for any audiophile. Like most cannot afford them or have a room big enough to listen to them in but still I am impressed with what Klipsch has done with a new Heritage speaker. Among the elite speaker companies Klipsch has set a high bar to meet with the introduction of the Jubilee speaker.

Once told a woman at work one morning that she was looking nice today. Got almost the same back, "what I do not look good all the time." Learned quickly to not talk to females at work any more than necessary.

Musk also changed his Twitter bio to read "Chief Twit Just saw this early this morning. Got a laugh about members here criticizing Roy's handle when reading this. Telling it like it is.

Not to get involved too much in this conversation but I would re-bias the tubes or lower the voltage somewhat with some resistance when installing a SS device where a circuit is designed for a tube rectifier. Most conservatively designed amplifiers could safely handle the extra voltage you get from SS rectification but there are probably many that would not like it. In this day and age I see no benefit designing a tube amplifier with tube rectification when SS is better and cheaper. Call me a heretic.

Interesting info on the details of operation. I bet it does sound really good coming from Western Electric. That is if their R&D is anywhere as good as it once was. Probably should consider it an investment if purchasing one. Should hold it's value but only time will tell. Out of my league price wise but interesting.

With just a quick search the consensus that I found is the Topping uses a TPA 325X chip which was developed by Texas Instruments. I have two TPA-3255 amplifiers with linear power supplies. Great little cheap amplifiers for anyone wanting to hear what all the fuss is about with class D. Topping is trying hard to keep the chip a secret but some are digging into the circuit at diyaudio. Well worth the price for a taste of class D. Link is for those that like to dig into circuits. https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/topping-pa5-tpa325x-is-a-modification-worth-it.380233/

I just thought I would add and also submit for members to judge themselves exactly what the guy is talking about. The power supply electrolytic capacitors in the Phase linear 400 were 5,600uf and he is talking about adding a 1/10th of 1uf film cap to the 5,600uf and it making such a big difference. This is in the filtering network and not in the audio signal. Most EE consider this just plain BS. That are those guys have some of the best hearing in the planet. Which part is going to contribute to the sound most, the 5,600uf electrolytic or the .1uf film cap. The top amplifier designers now living do add some value of film cap across an electrolytic on occasion but only to make buyers happy. Just how much effect does your common sense tell you that adding 1/10 of 1uf film cap is going to contribute to the sound in a power supply. Could be the guy doing the test increased the volume a touch without telling. Now that would have the effect the poster is talking about. So much BS talk when it comes to capacitors on social media forums. Back in the day 5,600uf capacitance was considered a lot. The last PP SS amp I built has 45,000uf capacitance on each rail. That equates to more reserve power for those deep bass notes with inefficient speakers. 10,000uf per rail is probably enough for a clean power supply circuit for a BJT SS amplifier. The extra is for reserve when and if ever needed.

Seen debate on that before on this forum. To me it seems they are mounted correctly in the picture being I would think you would want to suppress the sound vertical and not horizonal if that is what the butt cheeks do. Just my thoughts.

Interesting but one must remember this is one mans opinion. Most EE do not put so much emphasis on the name on a capacitor but rather read the data sheet. Two identical data sheets by two different brands should and probably sound very much the same. Audiophiles and not electronic engineers argue on brand of capacitor to be used in a circuit. The subject of a low value film cap added to an electrolytic PS cap is considered by most EE as BS as for as improving the circuit. When it comes to a crossover cap a good polyester cap is plenty good enough and some may even say better sounding than a polypropylene. Dielectric absorption is slightly better in a polypropylene but the dielectric absorption is plenty good enough in a polyester cap to be used as a crossover cap or coupling capacitor. If someone says different I say show me the numbers and not some flowery words many are full of when talking capacitors.