Does anyone care to ask an amplifier designer a technical question? My door is open.


I closed the cable and fuse thread because the trolls were making a mess of things. I hope they dont find me here.

I design Tube and Solid State power amps and preamps for Music Reference. I have a degree in Electrical Engineering, have trained my ears keenly to hear frequency response differences, distortion and pretty good at guessing SPL. Ive spent 40 years doing that as a tech, store owner, and designer.
.
Perhaps someone would like to ask a question about how one designs a successfull amplifier? What determines damping factor and what damping factor does besides damping the woofer. There is an entirely different, I feel better way to look at damping and call it Regulation , which is 1/damping.

I like to tell true stories of my experience with others in this industry.

I have started a school which you can visit at http://berkeleyhifischool.com/ There you can see some of my presentations.

On YouTube go to the Music Reference channel to see how to design and build your own tube linestage. The series has over 200,000 views. You have to hit the video tab to see all.

I am not here to advertise for MR. Soon I will be making and posting more videos on YouTube. I don’t make any money off the videos, I just want to share knowledge and I hope others will share knowledge. Asking a good question is actually a display of your knowledge because you know enough to formulate a decent question.

Starting in January I plan to make these videos and post them on the HiFi school site and hosted on a new YouTube channel belonging to the school.


128x128ramtubes
gpgr4blu 12-12-2018:

I have enjoyed posts by Ralph and Ramtubes on this forum. They are both highly qualified as designers and manufacturers. They both provide answers to technical questions about gear. Sometimes, they include opinions based on their understanding of the science behind gear. Nevertheless, their posts are almost always informative to the membership here. Occasionally, they are self referential....

... I suspect the line should be drawn somewhere in between the services provided by Ralph and Ramtubes and the disservice provided by [redacted by Al, only because it is not relevant to this thread]. Might I add that Ralph and Ramtubes are not close to that line IMHO.

+1. Well said, gpgr4blu. And to the extent that Roger or Ralph might ultimately derive some pecuniary (monetary) benefit from their contributions here, IMO it would amount to a win-win. A win for the members here who benefit from the knowledge they share with us, as well as for them.

Roger, I have a sincere question. What specific technical considerations lead you to be so negative about Ralph’s paradigm paper. Obviously suitability for use with a wide range of speakers is not a priority with his amplifier designs, as you’ve stated it is with your designs. But the only other relatively minor issue I’ve ever perceived in his paradigm paper is that as worded it might lead **some** readers to believe that the high output impedance and other characteristics of his amplifiers (and various other tube amplifiers) would result in precisely constant power delivery into varying load impedances. (In fact I’ve seen one or two posts by members here who do not have significant technical backgrounds in which that belief has been stated). Whereas the reality is simply that they will come considerably closer to accomplishing that than an amp which acts as a voltage source. To a greater or lesser degree depending on the amp’s output impedance and on how the speaker’s impedance varies as a function of frequency.

I also think it’s noteworthy that some of Nelson Pass’ First Watt amps have even higher output impedances, and consequently "poorer" output voltage regulation, than Ralph’s. In some cases vastly greater output impedances than Ralph’s designs. But it seems to me that in both cases that doesn’t mean their amps are flawed in either concept or execution, it just means that they are intentionally designed such that they are suitable for use with a relatively small subset of available speakers.

Best regards,
-- Al

P.S: @Marqmike, thanks very much for the nice words in your post yesterday.
But the only other relatively minor issue I’ve ever perceived in his paradigm paper is that as worded it might lead **some** readers to believe that the high output impedance and other characteristics of his amplifiers (and various other tube amplifiers) would result in precisely constant power delivery into varying load impedances. (In fact I’ve seen one or two posts by members here who do not have significant technical backgrounds in which that belief has been stated). Whereas the reality is simply that they will come considerably closer to accomplishing that than an amp which acts as a voltage source. To a greater or lesser degree depending on the amp’s output impedance and on how the speaker’s impedance varies as a function of frequency.
Thanks Al, and spot on.

No amp is a true power source. But if the speaker load (which can be quite variable and that's OK) is high enough then the amp can be **relatively** constant power on that load.

When you graph the amp's power vs load impedance curve, it looks very much like an airfoil profile in cross-section. There is a maximum power output, and at lower impedances the output power falls off rapidly as more of the power is simply dissipated by the output section itself. Above that maximum, power falls off very slowly as load impedance is increased. For example our M-60 is only a few watts less at 30 ohms as compared to 16.
While this is not constant power, its pretty close as the difference is less than 1/2 db.

With transformer coupled amps (VAC comes to mind) you have the ability to select the most ideal winding to push the amp more towards a voltage source or more towards a power source- depending on how the power tubes are thus loaded and the resulting output impedance. We use the ZEROs for that same purpose- years ago we used to use our Z-Music autoformer for that same reason, before the ZEROs existed.

Along with VAC, Music Reference amps provide multiple impedance (transformer winding) taps; in the RM-200 Mk.2: 1, 2, 4, and 8 ohms; in the RM-10 Mk.2: 4 and 8 ohms; in the discontinued RM-9: 4, 8, and 16 ohms. 

Hi Everybody,

I’ve got a question for the tube amp designers. How much of a difference does the power transformer make in a tube amp design? Is the output transformer more critical or the power transformer or both? I’ve read that the output transformer is absolutely critical and I know that they can be very expensive. However, how much would it degrade a good design to just go buy an Edcor power transformer, which I’ve heard are decent transformers, and use it with a high-quality output transformer?

Thanks,

Utrak
@atmasphere
Ralph, while I respect your opinions and body of work, another fine line can easily be drawn between marketing and advertising. You have mentioned to me in the past Audiogon is where you spend most of your marketing efforts. I have a degree in marketing and have been in product marketing most of my professional career. In this age of Internet technology and online consumerism branding is important. You may not agree with this, but your time here sharing your expertise, providing assistance, and yes, mentioning your products, has promoted your brand, which is YOU. Let’s look at these links as an example which are a couple you frequently drop into your posts, including on this thread which is where I pulled them from:

http://www.atma-sphere.com/Resources/Common_Amplifier_Myths.php

http://www.atma-sphere.com/Resources/Paradigms_in_Amplifier_Design.php

If I click on either of the links above I am taken to your site. Simple marketing 101 these days, drive eyeballs to your site. Not only can I read the material, I can then click on a number of links to stay on the site, one of which is products. One might come to the conclusion that it is veiled advertising, but I am not going to get into a pissing match on that one. Suffice it to say in my opinion, and I’m sure I’m not alone, you promote your brand here, albeit respectfully, in a gentlemanly manner, but also in ways that are not overt. Nonetheless though it is promotion and marketing.

Here is another example. You often mention how feedback causes harmonics that the ear/bran can interpret as brightness and provide references you feel back up this point. Again, you are educating people here that in your opinion and listening experience amplifiers employing feedback are colored, but you are also alluding to the fact, which can easily be looked up by anyone inclined to do the research, that your amps don’t provide this coloration because of their minimal or lack of any feedback. You don’t have to mention product names to effectively market or promote them (and yes you cause some diversion because you reference SET amps as well when discussing this).

Now about Roger. Yes he is a friend and I work with him. Yes he has strong opinions about people who based on his knowledge and body of work have not done justice to the science of amplifier design and he calls them out. I can see where his personality might ruffle some feathers or turn off some folks, but let’s also note, which you failed to mention, that he has praised folks like Peter Walker, Julius Futterman, Saul Marantz, Sid Smith, Nelson Pass, and James Bongiorno.

Lastly, as you know I encouraged you at first to continue contributing to this thread as I believe you have valuable things to say. Unfortunately, the self promotion accusation bit has changed that. I have an idea. Why don’t you start a thread of your own and every time you see something here you disagree with or wish to comment on you reference it on your thread and hold a discussion there, and for future reference this will be my last comment on the topic. We have diverted this valuable thread enough.