Foreplay III New Build + adjusting listening levels + ST-70 troubleshooting

David,

Radio Shack, now just called "The Shack," sells (I almost said "stocks" but that is up to the local store) a metal film resistor assortment.  It lists the contents on the back of the blister pack.  At least they used to list them.  You will likely find what you need in this assortment.

Paul has described the installation very well.  If you need more I might be able to cobble a picture into a post.  (I have previously had problems with pictures.  The new board hosts them so I'm doing much better.) 

I might have a couple of 56k ohm resistors, or something near the value I can mail you.
 
Paul Joppa said:
OK, now we have some data .... So replace the 33K in the Foreplay with 80.6K....

Thank you both, again.  I like the notion of splitting the attenuation (and the assurance of keeping off the "noise floor" of the FP.)  Regarding the recommendation quoted, above:  Would that be the 33K ohm resistor pair on the input I am using for the CD?  (Input #1 looks the easiest terminals to access to make this change.)

Or is the intent to attenuate all the FP inputs by 6dB?  I know I have volume control on my phono preamp and my digital music player, but I'd rather have them wide open for ease of control and best sound.  Another recent thread was discussing attenuating all the FP inputs with a resistor between each Sweetest Whispers and the selector switches.  This seems a simple mod, but

Even if so, I think I should try the series resistors in the ST-70 first and listen again for a while. 

Granger,
Thank you for the offer of resistors.  I have some leftover from the HagermanRipper build, so I'll check around for what I have and get back to you via the forum's p-message feature, if that's best. 
 
I was suggesting you change the CD input only, as in the manual.

Once that is done, you can use the level controls on the other sources to match all levels. It may take several albums to find the best-matching compromise, since album signal levels are not exactly constant (!)

Once THAT is done, you can (if you like) maximize one of them, and use the Foreplay controls to bring it back in line. Since the Foreplay controls are 3dB per step (except for the first 2 or 3) you can then estimate how much attenuation you want on that source, and implement it in the Foreplay. Repeat as necessary. Yes, it;'s a lot of work, but you only have to do it once.  :^)
 
David,

The volume controls on your phono stage and digital music player are the equivalent of padding each input on the FP III between the input and the selector switch.  But using the volume controls would be much faster.

I'll assume that dropping the level of all inputs has already been explained since you mention that in your second paragraph.

Just send me a PM if you need the resistors and I will look to see if I have some.
 
I'm attaching two diagrams of the suggested modification to attenuate my ST-70 amplifier (one channel only is diagrammed.)  I have the blank diagrams I can post if someone wants to start from scratch.  If I'm close, please let me know, or if I got something wrong.
 

Attachments

David,

In both diagrams you need to swap the positions of the two resistors.  Edit: I looked at it backward.  Both sketches are right. That is, the input feeds one end of the 470k ohm resistor, the other end is soldered to one end of the 47.5k ohm resistor and the other end of the 47.5k ohm resistor goes to ground.  The input wire that feeds the circuit board at eyelet 17 is attached to that eyelet and to the solder joint that connects the two resistors.

Yes, that is the 10 ohm resistor that you can jumper out and see if it eliminates noise or causes it.  It seems to be a crap shoot as to whether it will help in an ungrounded house.  I bet it has a lot to do with whether you use a grounded power cord too.
 
The sketches look correct to me, though a little hard to unscramble mentally. Grainger's description is of course correct, it just looks to me like you have in fact sketched what he wanted.
 
Paul, I was looking back at this post, maybe I should take another look at the two sketches:

Paul Joppa said:
OK, now we have some data to work with! Two above silent is -27dB, so a 27dB reduction will give you a full range. A good split would be -20dB in the ST-70 and -6dB in the Foreplay. So replace the 33K in the Foreplay with 80.6K; that will reduce the Foreplay sensitivity by 6dB and keep its signal levels well above the noise floor.

Then reduce the ST-70 by 20dB, which is a 10:1 resistance ratio. Grainger is probably better suited to describe this since he has an ST-70. I'd suggest you keep the stock 470K resistor at the center of the RCA, and from the other end (the junction) use a 56K or something near that value to ground, i.e. the outer connector of the RCA jack. Then take signal from the junction to the circuit board input. The outer connector of the RCA jack is connected to ground, I gather this is through the 10 ohm resistor that Grainger says you may want to replace with a piece of wire, but this is the part of the circuit I'm having a hard time visualizing.

I like quality metal film such as the Vishay/Dale RN series resistors, but in this application with no DC current carbon film can be an excellent performer as well. Most listeners seem to think it is a bit warmer sounding.

Yup, both sketches are right.  My brain was in reverse.
 
Thanks again, and again!  I'm following this, scratching my head, and seeing what we all see, now.  I'll let you know once I've completed the addition.  New RCA's should arrive tomorrow. 
 
When I rebuilt my ST-70 I removed the stock RCA jacks and the Stereo/Mono switch.  I put one input where the stock ones went and one where the switch went.  Good ones will not fit where the stock inputs are.  I just used the screw holes for the switch to anchor the plate that held both inputs.

Doesn't really look elegant, but works.
 
The padded "CD" input has balanced the inputs to the preamp nicely.  I used, as recommended by P. Joppa, the 80.6K resistors provided with the kit for this.  Phono and digital levels are very close to the CD now.

Regarding padding input of my ST-70:
I have installed a 47.5 K ohm metal film resistor on each input of the ST-70 as in the diagrams I posted above in this thread (where the 56K is shown.)  The result is that I have attenuated the input beyond what I would like with this modification.

Can someone explain to a lay person how these two series resistors work with the input wire taking off from the joint between them?  Is the 470 K between the  RCA input and the wire doing the attenuation?  If previously the stock wiring had no resistor there where there is now a 470K could I reverse the two resistors so I lessen the attenuation?  Suggestions are welcome, or if I should take this to an ST-70 board just let me know.  (I am having an issue with my ST-70 that I have posted to the dynacotubeaudio forum at http://dynacotubeaudio.forumotion.com/basket-f2/st-70-channel-cutting-out-t379.htm )

Suggestions for driver board updates are welcome, as it may come to that soon. 

Thanks!

 
In looking at your diagram, you are basically making what is known as a "Voltage divider" where the signal Voltage gets "divided" proportionally between the two resistors in series.  Then, you are extracting the signal at the dividing point to feed the input to the amplifier.

If I understand the manner in which you have constructed your divider correctly, the lion's share of the signal Voltage is being dropped by the larger resistor with the leftover Voltage being developed across the smaller of the two.  This ratio follows the ratio of the two resistance values, so, very roughly speaking, you have created a 10:1 divider with the smaller part of the signal being input to the amp.

So, if the result is that the signal attenuation is too great for you, the solution is to make that ratio smaller; this means, of course, either replacing the smaller resistor with something larger, or replacing the larger resistor with something smaller.

If you are able to, I would suggest trying to rig a way to clip-lead various values into place before making one permanent.

In reading the linked thread about your ST-70, since the issue is a temporary imbalance between left and right, the first question that comes to mind is whether you have swapped tubes from left to right to see if the issue stays on one side or follows the tubes.  Swapping the 7199s from left to right would be the first step, I think.

I also note that you have mentioned the tube sockets, and I can only say that in my 1959 vintage ST-70, that is the second thing I replaced, after the bias diode.  I can certainly imagine one of those old funky 50s vintage plastic sockets being the cause of many an issue.  "Freeze-mist" of some sort or another is often helpful if you think that there is a thermal issue with some part or solder-joint, but you will need to be careful with it when working around hot tubes; you don't want to spray a coolant on hot glass!

I really can't say much about the replacement driver boards available for the amp; I have only ever heard one of the variety available, and I really wasn't sufficiently impressed to call it any kind of "improvement" in sonics.
 
Thank you J.C. for the description of how these resistors are working.  It has some intuitive logic, which helps.  Does that mean that before modification, when there was only one resistor (470 K ohm) to ground after the input wire in the schematic (both soldered to the center conductor of the RCA in fact) that essentially 100% of voltage went to the input wire?  If that is the case, and now I have approximately 10% of the voltage then I have an idea of where to go.

I might try a 50-50 split by two series resistors of the same value in the "voltage divider".  I'm also wondering about your suggestion on using clip leads.  Can I clip lead a smaller resistor across an in-place larger resistor to simulate replacement?  Or should I remove the resistors (all) and use clip leads and resistors on both legs of the divider?

I'm also wondering about creating a mute switch to lower the levels when desired for fine adjustment at lower levels.  I enjoyed that feature on a previous integrated amp.  Maybe I should first do some research on the pros and cons of a mute circuit.

I will try swapping tubes across the channels again, but I did this some time ago and it did not change things at that time.  I replaced only the driver tube sockets.  I have not tried probing with a pencil eraser yet.  Thanks again for the input.
 
"...Can I clip lead a smaller resistor across an in-place larger resistor to simulate replacement? "

That's what I would recommend. Parallel the existing 470K with leftover resistors from the Foreplay (360K, 180K I guess?) and see what works best. You can in fact just solder the winner in place, which might be easier than replacing the 470K completely.
 
Yes, you are on to it!  When only the 470 kOhm resistor was there from "signal hot" to ground, then the entire signal voltage being fed into the amp was developed across it and thus fed the control grid of the pentode.  When you added the smaller resistor from the previously grounded end of the 470 k, you created the divider and the Voltage across the smaller resistor became the one fed to the grid.

Here's an easy experiment which may give you a ballpark to work from: If you obtain another 470k resistor and clip it across the existing one (parallel to it), you will essentially cut its value exactly in half to ~235k.  This will change your Voltage divider ratio from roughly 10:1 to roughly 5:1.  In other words, it will reduce the attenuation to about half of what it is now. If that moves things closer to where you want to be, then you can measure the resultant paralleled resistors with your Ohmeter (approx. 235k), and clip a similar value across the combination.  The typically available values of 220k, 240k, or even 270k will be close enough for this third parallel.  Anyway, you will have reduced the Voltage divider ratio (and, the attenuation) by approximately half again.

Once you find the combination you like, then you can measure everything with your Ohmeter again and easily calculate the Voltage divider ratio you like.  Once you've done that, you can decide what you want to do about making the divider permanent.

Two things to keep in mind are:  First, the total resistance of this Voltage divider to ground is essentially the input impedance of your ST-70.  While the original spec calls for 470k, you can get away with quite a bit of deviation around that value, providing that you don't lower it so much that you overload the output of your preamp.  IIRC, the output of the Foreplay is around 600 Ohms, and the general rule of thumb is that you want to drive at a minimum 10 times that, so 6000 Ohms is your lower limit for input impedance, and I seem to recall that Mr. Joppa wouldn't mind something higher.  The upper limit is pretty arbitrary, but you can go higher than 470k for sure.

The second thing is that this input impedance is where the signal is developed for your amp, so it never hurts to make this a nice-quality resistor or combination of resistors.  Metal-films are my favorite for this duty, but carbon-film could work very well, too.

As far as your other issue is concerned, I wonder if this gain imbalance is a condition you can create on demand?  Can you make it happen and keep it that way long enough to take measurements?  That will make it a lot easier to hunt down, I'm thinking.

 
JC and PJ have given very good advice.  If you use jumpers across a larger in place resistor you are paralleling the two values.  The resulting equivalent value is the product of the two divided by the sum of the two.  It is always smaller than the smalest resistor.

R1*R2/R1+R2

Right now as of the Reply #31 above, are you not able to get enough volume at the highest volume setting on the FP III?  It is fine to use all of your volume control, probably best to use it all.


 
More problems have arisen in the ST-70 after installing the voltage dividers to attenuate the inputs and the new tube sockets.  I have been posting to http://dynacotubeaudio.forumotion.com/basket-f2/st-70-channel-cutting-out-t379.htm#1944 where I got (along with, of course, advice to get a new driver board) a suggestion to replace the 1.5 MOhm resistors on the PC board, and checking them I find they have drifted high. 

I found some encouragement to stick with the stock board on the Old Bottlehead Forum site from a Gary Kaufman who has some good dynaco resources on his site http://www.the-planet.org/.  Since the original PC board is in pretty good shape, even after I have re-soldered most traces and connections and replaced the 7199 sockets, I am getting new parts to rebuild it following the Van Alstine recommendations from 1982 now posted at http://www.avahifi.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=149&Itemid=172&74a0ad6b5f7a1df0ef4ab98b8fffbb41=6ba9f832ffb94d9aa84ef8d686e656ca

Any advice from this forum is most welcome.
 
The problem you describe on the Dynaco Tube Audio board sounds like a problem with the preamp.  That is easy to figure out just by swapping your input cables at the input of the ST-70.  If it moves then it is not in the ST-70.  But you have probably done that.

A component going thermal makes no sense.  But a solder joint that is "ohmic" is more likely.  I suggest you first inspect every solder joint you made under a magnifying glass.  If you find nothing obvious, like one with no solder on it, then rewet  all that you have gone over.  If this is every solder joint on the driver board, don't do all of them in the bad channel at the same time.  Give the board a rest.  Do some on the board, do some at the inputs, drink a Coke, then proceed.
 
Today, now that I have ordered new components to the tune of $40 - the system sounds normal - good!  I appreciate your opinion of the "component going thermal" idea.  Well, when I complete the rebuild I will know it is all it can be.  The new FP3 preamplifier is still working correctly as the switching of inputs from that have no effect.  There still may be some imbalance between channels in the ST-70 since the old 470K resistors padding the ST-70 inputs have some variation between them, likely directly affecting this?  While I wait for the new parts I think I'll continue experimenting with the input voltage divider to allow more signal through.
 
Back
Top