Cathode Follower Mic Output Z

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

skipwave

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
1,422
Location
Los Angeles
I've been wanting to build one of these ever since I read zebra's post: THREAD. An mxl mic just landed in my lap and it wants modding.:wink:

On Zebra's website he specifies that the output transformer should be step down between 2:1 and 4:1 ratio. What is the actual output impedance of the 5840 cathode follower?

I get roughly 2.8k using the formula: Zo = Rp/(1+u). However, the values are taken from the resistance coupled amplifier table, which uses a plate resistor, not present in Zebra's plan. How to calculate this without a plate resistor?
 
What MXL microphone?

If one with the transformer I would use the stock transformer.

I built a CF and used the stock mxl transformer 2:1.
I used a AKG type c60 circuit (different tube and resistor values)and a capsule voltage of 70V if IIRC. this is different than the Royer circuit.

I have a changed my thinking a bit with the the china 2:1 transformers they can work.
 
MXL v57m. I was just going to steal the capsule from it and use my ioaudio mic housing.

I will have a look at the c60 circuit, but I think the royer circuit is right for this build. Nice and simple.
 
The capsule grill of the 57 is like the 2001 I have a few. Not a bad grill for that microphone capsule.

Look for the tape op SD article the Jensen number is given so I would look up the information about the transformer at jensens site.
 
Do not do that!

At change of places composed the sum does not vary. Anyway your follower has to drive cable capacitances, and maximum current it may use to discharge that capacitances can't be more than it consumes through that cables, while charging them ti may support much more. The result is rectified highs, very harsh sound, "broken glass", signature of last Marshall microphones!

Use transformer!
 
[quote author="Gus"]The capsule grill of the 57 is like the 2001 I have a few. Not a bad grill for that microphone capsule. [/quote]

I agree, and I plan to build the KM84 circuit into the 57 body at some point. If the mxl capsule doesn't perform well in the ioaudio housing it will go back home.

[quote author="Gus"] Look for the tape op SD article the Jensen number is given so I would look up the information about the transformer at jensens site.[/quote]

EDIT: Of course! The CB schemo on jensentransformers.com. Thanks Gus. Don't know why the hell I didn't think to look there.

I think I have a JT16A to try, or the transformer I pulled from the ADK GT-2. Oh, the possibilities....
 
For the record: CountryBoy Schematic (PDF)

I have one the Chinese transformers dissected in this THREAD, and I even have a broken DuKane transformer here, so I could relam like CJ did. However, I recall reading that the relammed transformer was not great sounding either.
 
Sorry, I thought you are going to use cathode followers instead of transformer. ;)
 
[quote author="NewYorkDave"]Hey guys, how about an actual answer to the question? :wink:

It's 1/Gm[/quote]

Is it an actual answer? :)
 
Thanks Dave!

Gm = 5000, so output impedance is 200. That sounds dandy for driving a long cable, especially through the 2:1 output transformer.

This makes me wonder, does the Gm of a pentode change when it is used triode-strapped?
 
Nothing new, but here's a look at the capsule in the mxl v57m. Hopefully it sounds nice with the CountryBoy circuit.

mxl57_capsule_sm.jpg
 
Wow. Not bad.

I saw a sputtering machine down at the machine shop surplus yesterday.

$3500 so it must be pretty technical.
Denton, or something.
Used in the semi industry.
Had a small compartment perfect for capsules, it had thumbwheel milliamp adjusters on the front. do not no what those are for, maybe vaporization current or something.
Looked like it needed new seals around the chamber, but had me thinkin.

Hey, they have a photo gallery with some cool stuff:

http://www.dentonvacuum.com/Photo%20Gallery/Photo_gallery.html

Mirror_Coated.jpg
 
>>> Hey guys, how about an actual answer to the question?  
It's 1/Gm

>> Is it an actual answer? :)

> Gm = 5000


That's probably not the actual answer. Gm varies with current (Gm obviously falls to zero at zero current). 5,000uMho is measured at 10mA. That's a heck of a lot of heat in a microphone body; you more likely run 0.5 to 3mA. You can read Gm at your actual operating current by squinting at the 5840 graphs. Without knowing your design current or doing your squinting for you, I'll guess closer to 1,000 or 1,500uMho for typical mike head amp current, and 1,000-500 ohms cathode impedance.

However the real problem, as **guest** asserts, is sometimes about driving long cable capacitance (or RF filters in solid-state board inputs). As an extreme, you may be putting 3V peak in 10,000pFd at 17KHz, or around 3mA peak. So, as **guest** asserts, a simple cathode follower at low current will turn into a rectifier and splatt the highs. More realistic conditions don't actually splatt, just give rising distortion at high frequency and level.

A 1,000 ohm output impedance through 2:1 would appear to be 250 ohms. We know the 280 ohm SM-58 dynamic mike works, so this is fine, right? No. The dynamic is 280 ohms up to explosive sound pressure. The transformed tube is 250 ohms for small signals, swing 200 to 300 ohms for large signals, and will go to many K ohms when signal current exceeds tube current. We normally design condenser mikes for low output Z, ample signal current. After all, it isn't like condensers have low voltage output and we have to optimize voltage to overwhelm board input hiss.

You will generally be wanting 4:1 or 7:1 OT unless your mike-tube current is unusually large.

> does the Gm of a pentode change when it is used triode-strapped?

Hardly. Essentially it rises from Ip to Ip+Is. If Ip/Is is ~10, as in many pentodes, Gm rises 10% which is less than our overall accuracy. The 5840 has Ip/Is more like 3, so Gm rises about 33%. If we knew what we were doing, this would matter, slightly. If we just leap to the first Gm spec on the show-off datasheet and assume it applies to our actual operating point, ignoring this 33% correction is fine.
 
[quote author="PRR"]If we just leap to the first Gm spec on the show-off datasheet and assume it applies to our actual operating point...[/quote]

You know that's what I do! Gotta start someplace.

Many thanks for the insight, PRR.
 
Here's an interesting discrepancy.

In the JensenTransformer (1996) schematic Royer used a 47k cathode resistor. In the schematic published in the Tapeop article (2002?), he used a 39k. In the same article he states that the 47k, when used to provide capsule bias through a resistor provides 60V, perfect for a modern capsule.

In the schematic using the 39k, it shows 40V at the top of the resistor, thus I'm assuming 40V grid leak to the capsule. Since this plan is from years after the one using the 47k, I have to assume that Royer decided the lower capsule voltage was an acceptable tradeoff to run the tube at a better operating point. It is the balance of these two considerations that would determine Rk value.

Now apply this to my project, using a large capsule instead of small that this plan was intended for, will the 40V vs. 60V have a greater affect on the sensitivity of the capsule? I've read posts here regarding setting the capsule voltage as close to the maximum, where the diagphram sticks to the backplate, as possible.
 
I believe more voltage may mean more sensitivity that means higher signal/noise ratio. Dark side of the moon may mean more distortions, but it is a theoretical assumption, and needs to be checked experimentally.
 
Back
Top