Patrick Turner
2005-03-25 14:15:15 UTC
I took a gander at the Lundahl 1623 SE specified
by Andre for the KISS amp.
The details were a little hard to understand, with the usual
tongue in cheek way of giving information out.
However, not a bad OPT for a 3 watt SET project.
The 30H inductance seems fine, and with a load of 3k
and Ra of 800 ohms in parallel, the
-3 dB point in the LF response with 300B should be at 3.3 Hz
at low levels where the OPT will mainly be used.
I dount it will saturate at a highish F because its good for 25 watts
at 30 Hz.
The worst case HF pole is where the source R = zero ohms.
So with 3k load, and the 4.6 mH leakage L the lowest
pole is at 104 kHz, a quite respectable figure.
The insertion loss is quoted at 0.5 dB.
I assume this is voltage drop.
So if 106v is applied to the primary, 100v is across the 3k load,
with the 0.5 dB drop of 6v across the winding resistance as seen from
the primary,
so the winding R is 181 ohms.
So losses are 5.6% total.
But elsewhere when they quote winding resistances, i figured the total
losses would be
5.2% on the P and 11% on the S, for a total of 16.2%, not such a good
figure.
I wish these ppl would be clearer when they dish out the info.
There are 4 primary coils and eight secondary coils.
from the tables I could discern that that
when all P are in series, and all the S are in series,
there is a 3kohm to 3.2 ohm load match, which
converts to 5.25 : 5.6 ohms, a very healthy load match for
300B and to modern speakers, which rarely measure their 8 ohms.
I only saw one weight figure of 2.5 Kg, and I have to say that is very
light indeed
and I would tend to use more iron and less copper.
I would guess that the transformer has 2 P windings and 4 S windings
on each leg of a single C core, so that an S-P-S-S-P-S
arrangement of sections is used on each leg in two bobbins.
There are enough interleavings.
From a sample invoice, the price of a 1623 could be US$137 ex the quaint
little
factory in Sweeden.
If one ventures to the Lundahl site one cannot help seeing references to
the same trannies but with amorphous cores.
Alas this material can only take about 0.7 of the voltage for the same
Fsat
of the GOSS cores which are standard, so only 13 watts instead of 25
watts
is available.
But when one reads the local discussion group reviews of the amorphous,
it appears no effort is spared
in heaping praise on this material, but without a single technical
syllable about
why this stuff must be so much better, especially with PP transformers
whose performance isn't "dominated by the air gap" as reported.
Nobody has checked out the harmonic distortion.
In particular a big deal is made of the "burn in" qualities of the
amorphous cores,
and how, after 50 hrs of use, the sonics improve so much it makes the
sound from the standard GOSS cores like its coming from a "broken"
transformer.
Well, big fat claims indeed, when we know how good the sound of
GOSS is without resorting to amorphous.
Basically the theme of the email responses from the local "discussion
group"
tend to say its costs a lot more but its worth it.
Hmm, I'd rather just use bigger cores.....
Meanwhile I have a 2A3 project coming up,
and the client has had a bunch of Hammond iron
dumped at the door for me.
The OPTs are 4.5 Kg, with 2" stack of 1.5" tongue E&I.
It will be interesting to compare the performance I get
for these 3 watt amps.
2A3 is reputed to be even better than 300B by some audio enthusiasts.
Patrick Turner.
by Andre for the KISS amp.
The details were a little hard to understand, with the usual
tongue in cheek way of giving information out.
However, not a bad OPT for a 3 watt SET project.
The 30H inductance seems fine, and with a load of 3k
and Ra of 800 ohms in parallel, the
-3 dB point in the LF response with 300B should be at 3.3 Hz
at low levels where the OPT will mainly be used.
I dount it will saturate at a highish F because its good for 25 watts
at 30 Hz.
The worst case HF pole is where the source R = zero ohms.
So with 3k load, and the 4.6 mH leakage L the lowest
pole is at 104 kHz, a quite respectable figure.
The insertion loss is quoted at 0.5 dB.
I assume this is voltage drop.
So if 106v is applied to the primary, 100v is across the 3k load,
with the 0.5 dB drop of 6v across the winding resistance as seen from
the primary,
so the winding R is 181 ohms.
So losses are 5.6% total.
But elsewhere when they quote winding resistances, i figured the total
losses would be
5.2% on the P and 11% on the S, for a total of 16.2%, not such a good
figure.
I wish these ppl would be clearer when they dish out the info.
There are 4 primary coils and eight secondary coils.
from the tables I could discern that that
when all P are in series, and all the S are in series,
there is a 3kohm to 3.2 ohm load match, which
converts to 5.25 : 5.6 ohms, a very healthy load match for
300B and to modern speakers, which rarely measure their 8 ohms.
I only saw one weight figure of 2.5 Kg, and I have to say that is very
light indeed
and I would tend to use more iron and less copper.
I would guess that the transformer has 2 P windings and 4 S windings
on each leg of a single C core, so that an S-P-S-S-P-S
arrangement of sections is used on each leg in two bobbins.
There are enough interleavings.
From a sample invoice, the price of a 1623 could be US$137 ex the quaint
little
factory in Sweeden.
If one ventures to the Lundahl site one cannot help seeing references to
the same trannies but with amorphous cores.
Alas this material can only take about 0.7 of the voltage for the same
Fsat
of the GOSS cores which are standard, so only 13 watts instead of 25
watts
is available.
But when one reads the local discussion group reviews of the amorphous,
it appears no effort is spared
in heaping praise on this material, but without a single technical
syllable about
why this stuff must be so much better, especially with PP transformers
whose performance isn't "dominated by the air gap" as reported.
Nobody has checked out the harmonic distortion.
In particular a big deal is made of the "burn in" qualities of the
amorphous cores,
and how, after 50 hrs of use, the sonics improve so much it makes the
sound from the standard GOSS cores like its coming from a "broken"
transformer.
Well, big fat claims indeed, when we know how good the sound of
GOSS is without resorting to amorphous.
Basically the theme of the email responses from the local "discussion
group"
tend to say its costs a lot more but its worth it.
Hmm, I'd rather just use bigger cores.....
Meanwhile I have a 2A3 project coming up,
and the client has had a bunch of Hammond iron
dumped at the door for me.
The OPTs are 4.5 Kg, with 2" stack of 1.5" tongue E&I.
It will be interesting to compare the performance I get
for these 3 watt amps.
2A3 is reputed to be even better than 300B by some audio enthusiasts.
Patrick Turner.