|
Reader Comments
| Posted by
Dave |
November 01, 2024 - 10:46 pm | |
Hi Ron -- Thanks for catching the Step 34 error -- that will be corrected at the next review/correction upload.
The reason for the apparent confusion regarding the grid stopper resistors is due to the fact of the origin of the modifications involved.
The PC-10A board that I sell was originally developed by George Ronnenkamp of Audio Regenesis, which he designed to be a drop in replacement for the original Dynaco PC-10 board. Because George's board is designed to directly accept the alternate 6GH8A/6U8A driver tubes, some slight modifications were required so as to produce the same performance from the alternate tubes that the original 7199 did. One of these changes was to add a 10KΩ; grid stopper resistor to V6 and V8. As you likely know, the original PC-10 did not use any grid stopper resistors, because none were needed with the rather low Gm performance of the triode section in the original 7199 driver tube. But because the triode section of the alternate driver tubes has a high Gm value, some additional resistance is required in the cathode driven leg (only) of the push-pull circuit so as to maintain stability in the output stage under conditions of elevated power output. However, the discussion so far is for scenarios where the original PC-10 boards are being swapped out for PC-10A boards.
Independently of George then, I developed the EFB™ biasing concept, which (in part) converts the output stage from operating with cathode bias, to one that operates with fixed bias. To prevent any blocking distortion that fixed bias is otherwise susceptible to, I specified the output stage to then include 1KΩ; grid stopper resistors for all four tubes, as well as 100Ω; Screen Stability resistors to ensure stable operation of the tubes under all operating conditions. Importantly however, my EFB modification with these output stage modifications is based on using the orignal Dyanco PC-10 boards.
So what happens when you combine the new PC-10A boards with the EFB power supply board? Then you end up using 10KΩ; grid stopper resistors for V-6 and V8, and 1K grid stopper resistors for V5 and V7, as well as adding the 100Ω; Screen Stability resistors at all four tubes.
When George and I connected, he began including my EFB biasing arrangement in his power supply board, creating the new EFB Power Supply Board. Then a few years later, George stopped selling the boards, so I picked them up and continue to offer them today.
At this point, most people are electing to replace the original PC-10 boards with the new PC-10A boards, and are now installing the EFB power supply board all at the same time. The EFB biasing method is known world wide now, so as this package replacement effort becomes more the rule rather than the exception (early on, only PC-10A boards were being initially replaced, with the EFB power supply board purchased later), then the instructions can be rewritten to reflect that reality, but for now, the assumption is still that some folks just change out the amplifier boards, while others just add the EFB power supply board, which can then lead to confusion based on each person's individual project.
I apologize for the confusion, but hopefully you now have a better understanding as to the why behind it, and how to now proceed with your project as a result.
Good luck with it, and I hope this helps!
Best regards --
Dave |
| Posted by
Ron Lee |
October 31, 2024 - 03:16 pm | |
Dave,
There seems to be some confusion on the grid resistors on pin 2 of the EL34/6BQ5 tubes. The PC-10A Installation PDF says to connect a 10K 1/2 watt resistor between pin2 of V8 and eyelet #8 for both steps 32 and 34. I believe step 34 should reference V6 as it does in the original SCA-35 manual. Given that correction, that would only add a grid resistor on V6 and V8 and not V5 or V7. Is there any particular reason why you wouldn't want grid resistors on all four output tubes. The SCA-35 EFB Installation PDF shows all four outputs with 1K resistors. I understand the change in value as explained in the PC-10A Installation PDF. I assume that adding the 10K resistors to V5 and V7 was an inadvertent omission.
Can you confirm this is the case?
Thanks,
Ron |
| Posted by
Dave |
January 06, 2024 - 07:22 am | |
Hi Sam -- I'm glad your SCA is performing so well for you now! It starts life with such a strong foundation, but its economy status really took a toll on the remaining potential it still has. The modifications presented can really turn it into a world beater, making it a huge "sleeper" for real improvement.
Thanks for your comment on the use of a floating ground system. The design of the amplifier uses a single point chassis ground (at the high level input jacks) except for the return of the common output terminals, which I suggested correction for. With this system, I was getting hum and noise levels in the phono circuits of my development pieces down into the realm of that generated by the power transformer's magnetic energy being introduced at various levels throughout the steel chassis, which was well below any objectionable level at any volume control setting. A floating approach would be an interesting idea to try. By floating I assume you mean the chassis is held at AC ground potential, while the audio ground is completely isolated from it.
Thanks again for your comments, and good luck with your SCA-35!
Best regards --
Dave |
| Posted by
sam basile |
January 03, 2024 - 03:34 pm | |
| hi. i've completed the restoration of my sca-35 with the EFB and man, what a difference. cleaner highs & lows, mellow, "TUBE" sound and ZERO hum and noise on the hi-level inputs. the phono has NO hum when the tone controls are switched on and a small residual hum when the tone controls are switched out of the circuit. i'm guessing the phono stage is amplifying stray ac voltages. my only suggestion is to use a floating ground for reasons i won't go into here. i'm very satisfied with this product. |
| Posted by
Dave |
October 14, 2022 - 04:46 pm | |
[Editor's note: This was sent as an email and is published here with permission.]
Hi Sam — Thank-you for your comments and interest in the SCA-35 EFB Power Supply Board. Feedback and the time taken to provide it are always appreciated. Regarding your comments, I can provide the following:
1. The basic power supply circuit on the EFB Power Supply Board does in fact follow the design of the original Dynaco power supply quite closely, and quite intentionally. There are some improvements made by way of more than doubling the value of all the filter caps employed after the first filter cap, adding film bypass caps across the caps used at all supply points for the audio circuits for improved HF decoupling, and using higher PIV and current rated rectifiers -- but beyond that, the basic power supply is as Dynaco designed it. The effort was not to take the design out of the realm of Dynaco’s original offering, but simply to add practical improvements where they could be made. This was largely made available by the smaller physical size of today’s components versus that of similar or even smaller value components at the time this amplifier was designed and produced.
2. Turn on in-rush current surge is always a significant consideration when solid state rectification is used. To date, there have been no concerns noted from the increased power supply capacitance values used on the EFB Board. Over the years, the original 2A Slo-Blo fuse as well as the original power switch specified for the amplifier have been shown to take the increased values in stride with no noticeable impact on the life of these components. Using even large value power supply caps could introduce problems however, that an NTC device can help mitigate. Most often however, they are best placed in the AC wiring for the primary winding of the power transformer, as then the device will also help control the surge created by cold tube heaters at turn on which can also be significant, as well as the surge created by use of solid state B+ rectification.
3. The use of two 2.2K resistors (two π filter sections in series) again goes back to the component availability to which Dynaco had access back in the day. Two filter sections were needed to achieve the reduction in ripple needed for quiet power combined with the limited voltage drop desired to properly support the small signal stages. Granted, a single resistor and double value filter/decoupling cap could also likely work well. However, with all else being equal, the dual π network approach used will be slightly more effective since the networks are connected in series, so the ultimate effect on noise reduction is greater than just a simple doubling of the noise reduction that each section could theoretically provide on its own. Again, there was no desire to change the configuration of Dynaco’s original design, so the dual dropping resistor configuration remained in place on the power supply board.
4. If 6U8A/6GH8A tubes are simply substituted in a given circuit by way of socket adapters, the results are often very much as you describe. Sound can become harsh, and hum often increases — but most often this is not the fault of the tube, but that the circuit was not designed for the alternate tubes. The 7199 was designed from the get-go as an audio tube, and has very definitive characteristics that allow it to be a superior performer in classic direct coupled AF Amplifier/Cathodyne Phase Inverter circuits — and especially those that directly drive the output stage. In particular, the triode (inverter) section has a much lower Gm than the alternate tubes do, which tends to promote a higher output impedance drive being presented to the cathode driven output tube. Since the plate impedance inherently presents a much higher drive impedance than the cathode drive does, the 7199 tube then tends to minimize the drive impedance in-equities from the inverter, that the alternate tube actually tend to promote. The effect of unequal drive impedance levels promotes uneven clipping as the amplifier approaches and reaches the onset of clipping.
Also, since the alternate tubes were primarily designed to be RF Amplifier/Oscillator tubes, their pentode section has internal capacitance levels between the various elements that promotes extended HF operation, so their use invalidates the HF tailoring and response performance built into the SCA when using 7199 tubes, that is required to produce proper stability. Without appropriate compensation, the results can then be an added harshness to the sound produced and even outright unstable operation. In the SCA-35 as designed, some examples of the alternate tubes cause immediate instability (outright oscillation), rendering the tube useless in the amplifier. Part of this is because many of the alternate tube examples that exists today and not genuine items, but some common tube that has been used and rebranded into many tubes it was deemed to replace. The other part is simply because the circuit was not designed around the characteristics of a true bogey alternate tube.
And then there’s the hum issue. The alternate tubes will always produce more hum in an SCA-35, because their internal heater configuration requires a different heater balancing point than the 12AX7 tubes do that are used for the phono section. The result is that if the hum balance controls are adjusted for minimum phono hum, then low level hum with the volume full down will be excessive. If adjusted for minimum full down hum, then phono hum will be excessive. The 7199 was designed to be a low hum and noise tube — but what that really means is that when the tube is used with other classic dual triodes in high quality designs employing an AC heater circuit— the hum balance control will respond to the internal construction of the dissimilar tubes equally — whereas the internal construction of the alternate tubes requires a distinctly different minimum hum null point on the hum balance control.
The PC-10A boards that I sell fully address the unequal drive impedance and extended HF pentode section performance of the alternate tubes (with additional components employed to address these issues), so that the stability and response of the amplifier when using my boards is a near exact copy of the original amplifier when using 7199 tubes. Rest assured, with hundreds of PC-10A boards sold and amplifiers so modified, there has never been a single complaint about the audible performance of the alternate tubes. In fact if anything, reports have been the opposite. 7199 tubes are still available today, but at quite a premium price compared to the alternate tubes. And, the vast majority of 7199 tubes left are retreads (excessive hum and noise or other issues) that have been purchased, rejected, returned, and resold, until they finally find a home with someone who either accepts their diminished state, or uses them in an application where hum and noise is not an issue.
But these issues only touch the tip of the SCA-35’s design issues. All of the preceding and much, much more is addressed in a thread I presented on AK about bring out out the very best of the SCA-35’s performance. You can find that thread here on the Audio Karma website:
https://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/hidden-treasure-bringing-out-the-very-best-of-dynacos-sca-35.999693/
The article will be posted in full here on Tronola website very soon without the various discussion elements brought on by those with questions in-between the various postings. It’s presentation here has been delayed because after I wrapped up my work with the amplifier (an ongoing effort spanning some 20 years now), a fellow AKer stepped up and produced a fully modern new back panel for the amplifier, with provisions for modern connectors, and elimination of antiquated inputs no longer needed. I strongly recommend giving the thread a thorough read, as it will answer most if not all of any questions you might have, and introduce (among a number of other things) some new and unique solutions to the SCA’s hum issues that the amplifier is so well known for. Properly implemented, the amplifier will best the published hum and noise levels, which the original design and build of the amplifier had no hope of ever achieving when built as instructed.
Thanks for your interest in my boards and reaching out. I hope this helps! Best — |
| Posted by
Sam |
October 14, 2022 - 04:30 pm | |
[Editor's note: This was sent as an email and is published here with permission.]
i was looking at the power supply board for the sca-35 and am curious: you seem to follow the original dynaco design almost exactly. since it is a 'solid state' rectifying circuit, the first capacitor can be just about any value. if you're concerned about surge, you can move the 50 ohm resistor in front of the capacitor or put a NTC device in front of the capacitor. as for the 2, 2.2K 5% resistors, a 4.3K 1% will fit nicely. anyway i'm leaning toward ordering the board for the EFB mod. BTW i'm tired of hearing about 6U8A's replacing 7199's. i have assembled chinese power amp kits for customers and the 6u8As are harsh sounding and hum prone. the 7199s beat them every time and are still available for a reasonable cost. |
Add your comments here...
|
