NYTC transformers

Help Support GroupDIY:

FarisElek

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 26, 2019
Messages
394
Can't find any information on them. Are they any good? Found some input transformers for a decent price 600:50k and they're the closest I can find to what I'm in need of.
 

rackmonkey

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2016
Messages
906
Location
Texas
NYTC = New York Transformer Co.
NYT = Nytronics

Both of the above show up occasionally in pro audio equipment, but I’ve never found any catalogs or data sheets for either one. Some of the units I’ve ended up with tested well, but others were obviously made for communications or similar use that only requires the middle of the audio spectrum.

So it’s a crapshoot.
 

FarisElek

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 26, 2019
Messages
394
rackmonkey said:
NYTC = New York Transformer Co.
NYT = Nytronics

Both of the above show up occasionally in pro audio equipment, but I’ve never found any catalogs or data sheets for either one. Some of the units I’ve ended up with tested well, but others were obviously made for communications or similar use that only requires the middle of the audio spectrum.

So it’s a crapshoot.

Thank you for the info this is exactly what I'm afraid of.
 

FarisElek

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 26, 2019
Messages
394
Seller insists they sound great and that the primary and secondary imply full spectrum. The only thing that makes me worry is the 300cps-2700cps text. Seems to imply that this transformer is for speech, but maybe that's some weird reason for why their is a CT. I don't know much about transformers outside of datasheets.
 

Attachments

  • cdfluk5tzn6ta18xpwzv.jpg
    cdfluk5tzn6ta18xpwzv.jpg
    43.2 KB · Views: 20

abbey road d enfer

Well-known member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
12,661
Location
Marcelland
FarisElek said:
Seller insists they sound great and that the primary and secondary imply full spectrum. The only thing that makes me worry is the 300cps-2700cps text. Seems to imply that this transformer is for speech, but maybe that's some weird reason for why their is a CT. I don't know much about transformers outside of datasheets.
CT indicates they are for POTS applications, so yes, expect rather limited frequency response. CT allowed creating a third phantom line from 4 wires.
 

FarisElek

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 26, 2019
Messages
394
abbey road d enfer said:
CT indicates they are for POTS applications, so yes, expect rather limited frequency response. CT allowed creating a third phantom line from 4 wires.

Thank you for clarifying. I almost bought into "I picked them over UTC in tube preamp applications"....
 

rackmonkey

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2016
Messages
906
Location
Texas
FarisElek said:
Seller insists they sound great and that the primary and secondary imply full spectrum.

That makes zero sense. There’s nothing about “the primary and secondary”  that you can tell from outside the can (I assume the seller is talking about nominal impedance) that implies anything about bandwidth. Telephone applications used 600 ohm lines and had tube grids involved, as did intercom systems and other speech applications. So “600:50,000” is worthless as a clue to frequency response.

FarisElek said:
The only thing that makes me worry is the 300cps-2700cps text.

That tells you all you need to know. 300Hz - 2.7kHz. Speech units.

Caveat: Occasionally, military transformers (indicated by the TF... identifier at the top of the printed text) will have wider bandwidth than specified on the can. The bandwidth the military requires for the application will be printed on the can, per the rules for mil suppliers. As long as the transformer meets or exceeds those specs, it’ll fly. Check any UTC or Chicago catalog, and you’ll see statements to the effect that mil-spec units listed actually exceed their specified bandwidth. But this is by no means the rule. It may be that these fall into that category. But you’re taking a risk. Maybe ask the seller if he/she will take a return if the transformers don’t pass your bandwidth tests.
 

FarisElek

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 26, 2019
Messages
394
rackmonkey said:
That makes zero sense. There’s nothing about “the primary and secondary”  that you can tell from outside the can (I assume the seller is talking about nominal impedance) that implies anything about bandwidth. Telephone applications used 600 ohm lines and had tube grids involved, as did intercom systems and other speech applications. So “600:50,000” is worthless as a clue to frequency response.

That tells you all you need to know. 300Hz - 2.7kHz. Speech units.

Caveat: Occasionally, military transformers (indicated by the TF... identifier at the top of the printed text) will have wider bandwidth than specified on the can. The bandwidth the military requires for the application will be printed on the can, per the rules for mil suppliers. As long as the transformer meets or exceeds those specs, it’ll fly. Check any UTC or Chicago catalog, and you’ll see statements to the effect that mil-spec units listed actually exceed their specified bandwidth. But this is by no means the rule. It may be that these fall into that category. But you’re taking a risk. Maybe ask the seller if he/she will take a return if the transformers don’t pass your bandwidth tests.

Yeah they're supposed to be mil spec so there is a chance they workout but the slim chance I have to return them isn't really worth the trouble as it's an International purchase.

Thanks for the help. Ill eventually find what I'm looking for.
 

rackmonkey

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2016
Messages
906
Location
Texas
If you can give more detail on your project and what you’re looking for, I might have some input transformers for you. I have so many I’ll never use them all and was about to start thinning the herd.
 

emrr

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
7,851
Location
NC, USA
Anything with a minimum spec like that needs a measurement plot to confirm full range claims.  It's very easy for the ear to tell you something like that sounds great and full range in a vacuum.  Remember 200-3K response was considered full range, and all you needed......90 years ago......
 

Latest posts

Top