Re: Ping Steve Brown -- re: Seth(s) [message #10038 is a reply to message #10037] |
Mon, 17 December 2007 15:32 |
SteveBrown
Messages: 330 Registered: May 2009
|
Grand Master |
|
|
Hmm.. not sure why you can't do what you proposed, either. Guess you could experiment with a couple filament transformers to see what happens... You could also consider stacked supplies, but that does not totally isolate either of them. I had a transformer custom wound one time that did have seperate windings for each stage, plus bias supply. Turned out I way over spec'ed it and it was mamouth, and cost me an unexpected fortune. BUT, it was very nice to have the seperate supplies if for no other reason than you could work on one part of the amp without impacting the DC loading you'd already figured out for the other part. Since then, and FWIW, I've found I prefer to have things tied to the same supply for sonic reasons. For some reason it sounds better to me. Call me nuts. That includes L & R channels, too. Right now, for example, I'm running a PP EL84 amp that uses a differential driver. Both L & R channels have the same supply. Does it compress the soundstage? No, it's the widest soundstage I've ever heard on an amp - almost spooky in some respects. By the way, the soundstage on this amp is MUCH better (as is the bass) compared to my SETH. The SETH gives a narrower soundstage. I suspect if I played with the parafeed cap I could introduce some bass boost, but I've not done that yet.
|
|
|