guzziguy Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 What was the thunderbolt I? The Republic P-47, a great plane once they got to the D model with paddle-blade propellors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morphsci Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 Still think he should have gone with a different name as the A-10 is also known as the warthog. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guzziguy Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 Still think he should have gone with a different name as the A-10 is also known as the warthog. Yep, I've already referred to the amp several times by that name. I have to admit that I hate the fact that Ray is co-opting the names of military aircraft to sell his products. It must be the old USAF brat in me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luvdunhill Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 just curious, does Ray normally publish internal pics? Just surprised to see that he plans to on this one... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirumu Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 I'm wondering about the tube complement. On the middle tube I can make out "ECC" and "3" in one of the photos so I'm guessing a ECC83/12AX7 variant. The output tubes (I'm guessing that's what the two larger ones at the rear are) look vaguely like the 6L6WGA/5932, but I certainly can't read a marking anywhere. I'm no electrical engineer by any means, but from the tube specs I wouldn't have thought those would be capable of driving something like the O2 as well as something like the BHSE's EL-34s. I do notice that he only shows Sennheiser stats in the photos though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon L Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 The output tubes (I'm guessing that's what the two larger ones at the rear are) look vaguely like the 6L6WGA/5932, but I certainly can't read a marking anywhere. I'm no electrical engineer by any means, but from the tube specs I wouldn't have thought those would be capable of driving something like the O2 as well as something like the BHSE's EL-34s. I do notice that he only shows Sennheiser stats in the photos though. Could it be a hybrid with SS output stage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guzziguy Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 I wonder how grossly overpriced this amp will be? We won't know under after John Amato does his hour by hour review of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knuckledragger Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 The Republic P-47, a great plane once they got to the D model with paddle-blade propellors. FTMFW. I'm more interested in how it sounds and whether it will have reliability issues due to Ray's lack of experience designing stat amps. <snip> And without killing himself. In all seriousness, this is my main concern. Given the ...quirks in Ray's previous dynamic amp designs (toasty PSUs, etc.) what is the chance of a malfunctioning stat amp fucking killing you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirumu Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 Could it be a hybrid with SS output stage? If so then that's an awful lot of tubes in the pre-amp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beefy Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 If so then that's an awful lot of tubes in the pre-amp. I'm still trying to work out why he would put a preamp and electrostatic amp in the same box. Surely there can't be that much shared circuitry to make it worthwhile? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asr Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 Certainly has an interesting look, though I do vastly prefer the simpler sleeker look of the BHSE. And I admit I like how the amp is designed to stack with the PSU, though it doesn't seem like there's enough heat ventilation for the amp. I look forward to finding out how much it'll cost... I don't really understand why it has 5 inputs either (3 single-ended & 2 balanced), seems totally unnecessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peanutbutterjam Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 I don't get why he put the output of the power supply and the input to the amp on opposite sides, though. I guess it would make sense if Ray intended the user to put the PSU at the right of the amp. But that contradicts his efforts in making them stackable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archosman Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 Yep, I've already referred to the amp several times by that name. I have to admit that I hate the fact that Ray is co-opting the names of military aircraft to sell his products. It must be the old USAF brat in me. At least it's not called a M247 Sergeant York. Don't care for the gold/brass. Other than that I like the chassis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smeggy Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 Finally!! At last, someone has made a decent stat amp. About time too, who else but Ray can we trust this monumental task to. I think I came in my pants looking at it. Now I need to head off and drool in Rays thread and give him a good online virtual bj before everyone else beats me to it. I feel the floor in there is going to get rather sticky... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spritzer Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 That thing has to be one of the ugliest amps ever made. Does Ray even know what subtle means? I like the way the sides look with those parallel bars. That's something I don't think I've seen on an amp before. There are quite a few that have also done this besides Chord. I'm wondering about the tube complement. On the middle tube I can make out "ECC" and "3" in one of the photos so I'm guessing a ECC83/12AX7 variant. The output tubes (I'm guessing that's what the two larger ones at the rear are) look vaguely like the 6L6WGA/5932, but I certainly can't read a marking anywhere. I'm no electrical engineer by any means, but from the tube specs I wouldn't have thought those would be capable of driving something like the O2 as well as something like the BHSE's EL-34s. I do notice that he only shows Sennheiser stats in the photos though. The tube names are silk screened on the chassis but I can only make out the 12AX7 for that center tube. It's hard to tell but the output tubes could even be 6SN7's and then Ray (who is probably running the whole thing off one filament supply) is going to enter a world of pain. The SR-007 not only needs a lot of voltage swing but more importantly current. For that you need a massive CCS on the output tubes with the necessary heatsinks and that's far, far beyond Ray's capabilities as an "engineer". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smeggy Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 *new thread* 'Let's buy Krmathis an A-10 Thunderbolt ll' Though I'm a little confused about when the 'I' came out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaizada Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 The output tubes that are on the right are 6SN7 tubes. They are for the preamp section only. Also, the reason this amp has 3 single ended and 2 balanced inputs is because it is a full function preamp as well. Pretty much like the B52. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirumu Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 The output tubes that are on the right are 6SN7 tubes. They are for the preamp section only. Hmmmmm, so then the power stage would have to be solid state then? Still seems like a lot of tubes for a preamp. I'm looking forward to these interior shots he mentioned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin gilmore Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) Pair of balanced input tubes, likely 12ax7 or similar. Pair of cathode follower output tubes, likely 12ax7 or similar. Balanced outputs. a cathode follower tube for the unbalanced outputs. pair of balanced gain tubes for the output stage, likely 12ax7 or similar. 6sn7's as the output tubes. Likely capacitively coupled. Single filament supply for the whole thing which is ok for this circuit. Speaking of which this circuit has been published many times before. Its possible that the small tubes in the back are single triodes instead of duals which means they could be phase splitters instead... Restricted output voltage swing, max 500 p-p. Low current outputs. 68k or higher plate resistors... Yep, typical ray. Edited March 30, 2009 by kevin gilmore Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin gilmore Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 so on closer inspection i will modify my analysis. Pair of balanced input tubes, 12ax7. Left back. Same place as b52. followed by 4 section volume knob. followed by 4 srpp gain sections, 5687's Used to drive output stage and preamp output. So basically identical to 2 x raptors, or 1 x B52. extra 12ax7 as unbalanced ouputs. 6sn7's as electrostatic outputs. Capacitvely coupled, same as aristaeus. A pair of 300 volt power supplies stacked. Outputs at +300 and +600. Same +600 supply used as bias output. Whether or not it is actually dual, dual supplies (i.e. dual mono) is unknown, unlikely. So its either 4 wires, of possibly 8 wires in the umbilical cable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duggeh Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 have you read krmathis's demands on this? It must also be the same size as the Pico, which can't even fit a Stax jack on the front panel, creating difficulties. Thats because he's a fucking idiot. sorry for the off-topic, but to give an idea of the size required to make a decent stax portable, figure about 5W which allows +/-300V and 1mA for each output stage (compared to BH which is +/-400V and 20mA output bias). That would be a life of 27 minutes if you used a 9V nimh battery Can't you compensiate with moar blackgates? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dreadhead Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 Thats because he's a fucking idiot. Unfortunately that doesn't mean people don't listen to him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin gilmore Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 have you read krmathis's demands on this? It must also be the same size as the Pico, which can't even fit a Stax jack on the front panel, creating difficulties. It can still be done. It just ain't cheap. The prototype was 600mw per channel. 1.2 watts total. Output connector can be a flat connector just like the stax portable. Converts to a round connector a foot later. You can get about 6 hours out of a honkin-large Lithium battery. Or do it with miniature transformers, then it is real easy. And cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morphsci Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 The SR-007 not only needs a lot of voltage swing but more importantly current. For that you need a massive CCS on the output tubes with the necessary heatsinks and that's far, far beyond Ray's capabilities as an "engineer". According to Ray he did not voice it for the SR-007. He voiced it for the HE-90 and the Jade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 So the A10 is aimed at competing with the Aristaeus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.