micaddict
Well-known member
@ granger.frederic.
My MK47 is not noisy.
I agree with your remark regarding dynamic mics BTW.
My MK47 is not noisy.
I agree with your remark regarding dynamic mics BTW.
Melodeath00 said:Hi Matador! Thanks! This indeed helps, but I have a few questions. You said "If you keep the B+ the same, this reduces the slope of the line and makes it "flatter". Quiescent current will drop." Doesn't keeping B+ the same, but reducing the plate resistor increase the negativeness of the slope of the load line, not make it "flatter"? I thought quiescent current will go up, not drop. If I used 50k Rp instead of 150k, my mA at 0V would be 2.4mA instead of 0.8mA. The load line has gotten more negatively vertical, not flatter, and at -1V grid, we're now at a higher current than when we used 150k. Again, I may be misunderstanding how to use/read these graphs.
Melodeath00 said:What resistor do you change to adjust a fixed bias? The plate resistor? What exactly is the purpose? Does the plate output impedance increase as the tube ages?
Thank you! So since I can't use the EF80 chart for the EF802... If I want to try to lower the output resistance of the tube, should I just try lowering the 51kohm resistor connected to the plate? Are there any other considerations to be aware of? I have read that the more negatively vertical slope of the load line also results in greater 2nd harmonic distortion. More "tube sound" saturation, I guess, but increased frequency range and transient response from the better impedance match with the transformer?Matador said:Sorry yes, you are right. I was thinking in terms of plate resistance, not 1/plate resistance which is the actual slope. Reducing the plate resistor indeed tilts the load line "more negative" (e.g., more towards vertical). Sorry if that was confusing!Melodeath00 said:Hi Matador! Thanks! This indeed helps, but I have a few questions. You said "If you keep the B+ the same, this reduces the slope of the line and makes it "flatter". Quiescent current will drop." Doesn't keeping B+ the same, but reducing the plate resistor increase the negativeness of the slope of the load line, not make it "flatter"? I thought quiescent current will go up, not drop. If I used 50k Rp instead of 150k, my mA at 0V would be 2.4mA instead of 0.8mA. The load line has gotten more negatively vertical, not flatter, and at -1V grid, we're now at a higher current than when we used 150k. Again, I may be misunderstanding how to use/read these graphs.
Melodeath00 said:Thank you! So since I can't use the EF80 chart for the EF802... If I want to try to lower the output resistance of the tube, should I just try lowering the 51kohm resistor connected to the plate? Are there any other considerations to be aware of? I have read that the more negatively vertical slope of the load line also results in greater 2nd harmonic distortion. More "tube sound" saturation, I guess, but increased frequency range and transient response from the better impedance match with the transformer?
Do I have any other options besides changing the cathode voltage? Going lower than 1.1V could be "dangerous" if it gets close to 0V grid, and increasing the cathode would seemingly just raise the output impedance.
Matador said:Melodeath00 said:Thank you! So since I can't use the EF80 chart for the EF802... If I want to try to lower the output resistance of the tube, should I just try lowering the 51kohm resistor connected to the plate? Are there any other considerations to be aware of? I have read that the more negatively vertical slope of the load line also results in greater 2nd harmonic distortion. More "tube sound" saturation, I guess, but increased frequency range and transient response from the better impedance match with the transformer?
Do I have any other options besides changing the cathode voltage? Going lower than 1.1V could be "dangerous" if it gets close to 0V grid, and increasing the cathode would seemingly just raise the output impedance.
What is it you are trying to accomplish with the change? Are you looking for a different sound? More/less gain? More or less distortion?
Melodeath00 said:My goal is simply to lower the tube output impedance. Visually, it looks like the EF80 (and likely its family of tubes) has a higher plate output impedance than the VF14 based on the slope of the tangents at the operating point. Once I can manage that, then I would probably do some tests and see if it was actually audibly different from how it's set/biased now
Matador said:Melodeath00 said:My goal is simply to lower the tube output impedance. Visually, it looks like the EF80 (and likely its family of tubes) has a higher plate output impedance than the VF14 based on the slope of the tangents at the operating point. Once I can manage that, then I would probably do some tests and see if it was actually audibly different from how it's set/biased now
Ahh ok, good!
The simplest way is to lower the plate resistor. The output impedance of any common-cathode tube stage is roughly the plate resistor in parallel with the plate impedance (rp). Lowering the plate resistor will reduce this parallel quantity.
Once you sub in the new resistor (assuming that you also didn't change B+), you would then select a new bias point. If you want the cathode voltage to stay the same (1.1V I think), you may need to trim some of the other resistances. Gain will also drop, however bandwidth should increase. Damping factor will also increase (wrt. the output transformer).
So for a U47 application, you will likely end up fiddling with/lowering the 29 ohm resistor. Also, keep in mind the passive nature of the U47 supply: you will be drawing a higher idle voltage, which means the series resistances in the passive supply will be dropping more voltage, which means that your 105V may drop. You may need to resize those resistors downward to compensate the B+ back up to 105V.
Matador said:Ahh I see.
In reality, the U47 is essentially "fixed bias", since it takes a big current change to make the voltage across the 29 ohm cathode resistor change. Even if you doubled the current, it's small compared to the heater current already flowing through that resistor. So to the tube, it looks like it's fixed bias.
So yes, in reality, even if you halved the plate resistor and doubled the plate->cathode current, it probably wouldn't change the 1.1V very much (each additional milliamp makes the cathode voltage increase by 29mV).
Damping factor can be hard to describe audibly with any certainty: this can be best seen with square wave response, but that's not a real audio signal in any case. The resonant frequency of the RLC combination doesn't change when changing output impedance (e.g., the low frequency resonance), but the peak magnitude as resonance does change.
In any case, give it a try and let us know what you think.
Melodeath00 said:Matador, is it the load line and cathode/grid that determine the plate voltage? In other words, if you raise the cathode to 2V (grid becomes -2V), do you follow your load line right and down to where it intersects with the -2V grid line, then go straight down, and that is where idle plate voltage will be? I don't know why I find this so confusing/incomprehensible.
granger.frederic said:we can't even use most of the specs in the datasheets
usual tube theory design is not relevant in microphones
ruffrecords said:...The method used in the U47A avoids the large capacitor but minimises the negative feedback.
The M49b is quite very similar but the current due to the heater voltage is much smaller and the grid voltage is tapped off the divider rather than the cathode voltage being tapped off. To be honest, the values for R6 and R7 don't make sense to me....
o3misha said:The best way is when the cathod is grounded. Its most noiseless way. For example: U67.
Enter your email address to join: