Quickie as cathode follower help needed
- Thread starter cpaul
- Start date
More battery experience with this amp, though I seem to recall posting something like this elsewhere for the Quickie too. I started hearing some distortion yesterday and thought it might be because my filament batteries had drifted below 1v. The last I'd checked a few days before the 9v B+ cells were fairly strong at over 8v. I checked the D cells and one was about 0.9v and one just under that. But after replacing them I was still hearing distortion. Ultimately I checked the B+ batteries again and found 3 at essentially 0v and one at just over 8v. I was still getting reasonable music out but definitely distorted. Hard for me to fathom that the amp could run that low but it did. I replaced them and it's working fine now. I kept the newer D cells in but may try the old ones just to see what happens at 0.9v or less.
I was recently given a pair of Paramour amps to try out. They are on loan with a pair of Fostex speakers in reflex boxes because I'm thinking about new amps and speakers. So far I've only tried the CF version with the Paramours but I'll be trying out the standard Quickie soon. I had to pillage the stepped attenuator of Quickie because the conductive plastic pot/attenuator I had in the CF version was suddenly making all kinds of static noise when adjusting it. So it awaits a new volume pot.
Anyway, it all sounds terrific. Even the tiny line transformer output of the Paramour sounds great with robust bass (probably because it's parafeed?).
Cheers,
Carl
Anyway, it all sounds terrific. Even the tiny line transformer output of the Paramour sounds great with robust bass (probably because it's parafeed?).
Cheers,
Carl
Yes, parallel feed output splits the duties handled by a typical series feed capacitor into two individual components (the plate choke and the parallel feed output transformer). In testing the Kaiju plate choke and the Stereomour output transformer together, I am down about 2dB at 6Hz.
Yikes!I had to rob Quickie of the 100k stepped attenuator for a volume control for the CF version, so Quickie was unavailable for a while. But I finally got a "Blue Velvet" attenuator (unfortunately quite possibly a Chinese knock off as I've learned) and installed it last night. So now I'm listening to Quickie with the Paramours. I've even done a little A/B testing, definitely not even blind much less double blind!
After some listening I now think Quickie with the PJCCS outpaces my CF version. It is somewhat more pronounced and "tight" on the low end, and may have a touch more sparkle on the top end. Not drastic but noticeable. Mids are pretty similar I think. In any case, it's quite nice! And given the gain situation, the microphonics aren't bad at all when driving the Paramours (and other tube gear). Glad to have both of them back.
The real benefit of the CF version is lower microphonics and other noises, which are terrible in the Quickie when driving solid state gear. With that in mind I look forward to hearing the CF version drive my Marsh A200 and the Maggie 3.3r speakers in the barn man cave sometime next year when it warms up again!
After some listening I now think Quickie with the PJCCS outpaces my CF version. It is somewhat more pronounced and "tight" on the low end, and may have a touch more sparkle on the top end. Not drastic but noticeable. Mids are pretty similar I think. In any case, it's quite nice! And given the gain situation, the microphonics aren't bad at all when driving the Paramours (and other tube gear). Glad to have both of them back.
The real benefit of the CF version is lower microphonics and other noises, which are terrible in the Quickie when driving solid state gear. With that in mind I look forward to hearing the CF version drive my Marsh A200 and the Maggie 3.3r speakers in the barn man cave sometime next year when it warms up again!
Built one myself! But with chokes.
Quickie with PJCCS is better, but as cpaul wrote CF is the way to go with high sensitivity power amps (if you don't want to pad the standard Quickie output, which is the cheapest option).
Some shots attached.
Thank you all for the super fun project!
Quickie with PJCCS is better, but as cpaul wrote CF is the way to go with high sensitivity power amps (if you don't want to pad the standard Quickie output, which is the cheapest option).
Some shots attached.
Thank you all for the super fun project!
Attachments
Nice looking amp, Bonzo, and thanks for the post. I see what looks like Hammond 156C, which looking at the specs seems like the choke of choice (including the price!). 150Hy and 3700R with 8mA. I will definitely look into using that. I suspect it will be better.
Finally got a chance to hook the CF version to my Marsh A-200 and it sounds terrific with almost no microphonics. The gain (or loss really) isn't ideal as I can't get full output from the Marsh (then again, no distortion either). But at 100wpc, even my Maggie 3.3r are quite loud with the CF version, too much for me. The other solid state amp I've tried it with is a DIY LM3886 chip amp, which also sounds quite good with no microphonics. In short, this was definitely a successful experiment.
BTW, I didn't try padding the output of Quickie but padding the input did little or nothing for microphonics in my case. Hence my looking for another approach.
Finally got a chance to hook the CF version to my Marsh A-200 and it sounds terrific with almost no microphonics. The gain (or loss really) isn't ideal as I can't get full output from the Marsh (then again, no distortion either). But at 100wpc, even my Maggie 3.3r are quite loud with the CF version, too much for me. The other solid state amp I've tried it with is a DIY LM3886 chip amp, which also sounds quite good with no microphonics. In short, this was definitely a successful experiment.
BTW, I didn't try padding the output of Quickie but padding the input did little or nothing for microphonics in my case. Hence my looking for another approach.
)