# The Official Werewolf Audio Amplifier



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

We need:
A big 6 channels that is staggered for full active set up for DIYMA community. 
1. Affordable
2. Built is great (we know it will)
3. Quality parts
4. Looks good
5. Easy control knobs access.
6. Affordable.
7. Sounds guuuuud. BB, Wifa, Op-amps, you name it, lol
8. Did I say affordable? 
9. Sexay guts...
10. Casing like a long DLS amps? No crossovers needed? what?

2 X 50 + 2 X 150 + 2 X 250 will be great.

Additional channel for sub duty will be phenomenal!! 1 X 500?

*Oh, and it's got to be class a/b!*
Sorry d class lovers... 

Who's with me????? 

NPDANG, please make this a sticky! 

I call it Werewolf Audio Active 6/7!


----------



## Mazda3SQ (Nov 11, 2006)

I call dibs on field testing it


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

I'm with you dual700....


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

Truthfully guys... an amplifier like this would be a God-Send for the members of this forum...

I do actually like the idea of a modular design if it could be realistically pulled off...

J


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

how about just making it an 8 channel like the Xetec
4x65 + 4x200 with the rear 2 channels being able to bridge to 500

then if you really want passive you would looking at something like 
2x175 + 2x500


----------



## rekd0514 (Sep 24, 2006)

sign me up!


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

fredridge said:


> how about just making it an 8 channel like the Xetec
> 4x65 + 4x200 with the rear 2 channels being able to bridge to 500
> 
> then if you really want passive you would looking at something like
> 2x175 + 2x500


That amp doesn't do that, unfortuneately. There's no 7 channel configuration. 

It's 4x83+2x260 in 6 channel..or...4x83+1x330([email protected]) for the sub in 5 channel...or...260x2+330/520 in 3 channel. 

If "The Wolfie" is built, can I get a fan to keep my soundz kool Eng?? 

**Edit** Sorry, I just realized you were saying LIKE the Xetec...not posting its specs. :blush:


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

Tn_Audiophile said:


> I do actually like the idea of a modular design if it could be realistically pulled off...


That's where I was gonna go with one.

Here's my plan, and maybe werewolf will endorse it.  6-channel, class G working off three taps on a huge ass transformer. First two channels have full power (200x2 into 4 ohms?), but operate in class G mode on three taps. Second two channels about 100x2 (4 ohms), class G off two taps. Third pair of channels 50x2 (4 ohms).

Separate boards for each channel. Pop a channel? Then screw in the replacement board.

How hard would it be to get TO3 cans for the outputs?

Input will consist of a single op amp gain adjustment, put in a DIP socket so you anal retentive modders can put in your own op amp of choice.  Watch out for chip creep. 

I put together a small proto switching power supply last year just because I got a great SMPS book and wanted to give it a go. It might be time to get back on it.

Who works in a machine shop to take care of the chassis/heatsink?


----------



## skylar112 (Dec 8, 2005)

I'm so down for an amp like this, with a good focus on everything especially #6. I'm poor  , but love good sounds


----------



## ATB (Aug 30, 2005)

Sounds excellent. One option that might be useful is crossover for just the sub channel(s) with a remote level controller and _maybe_ a 1 channel para eq. This way, we could use a deck or processor that was only 3-way capable and still be able to run 3way front + sub.

What about the shape? I think one long amp might be hard to fit for many of us. Possibly stackable like the PDXs, but the legs transfer power so power wires only need to be connected to the bottom unit. I actually thought that this was the way the PDXs worked when I 1st saw them and was disappointed when I discovered the big cylindrical legs were just cosmetic.

An also design it (if this makes sense) for the midbass channels to put out power into an 8ohm load to support the SLS/etc users of the world


----------



## eqsandleds (Mar 22, 2006)

Yeah, but would it be affordable?


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

this is easy. this kind of performance can be bought easily through multiple amplifiers.

what you guys all _really_ want is an all-in-one solution in one chassis.

naturally, YOUR needs are different than mine. so whats the solution?

cake. its a modular design. you buy the modules you want. Say, 50 rms, 100 rms, 200 rms, 500 rms, and 1000 rms. Whatever you really wanted. you can go very simple or very complicated depending on what the designer wanted. maybe you wanted to sell the set 15 rms class A, 100 rms, and 500 rms. possibilities of design are endless.

each PCA would have its own mini power supply, inputs and outputs.

to "build" your amplifier, you pick a combination of boards. six 50 watt boards and a 1000 rms board. six 1000 watt boards. five 500 watt boards. whatever floats your boat.

next, you buy the heatsink. This will also be cheap because itll all be extruded from the same machine. the "designer" would recieve blanks cut at a given length, say 4 feet, then cut them up to the desired length of the customer order.

the side plates would all be the same no matter how many amplifier channels you wanted. unpopulated spaces would jsut remain unpopulated. Only one size input wire would be used so only one part need be stocked.

everything as similar between models as possible. The assembler should only have to cut the heatsink to length and screw in the desired amplifier boards.

power is daisychained from amp to amp via internal plugs. Right down the like. Signal is patched to the side caps in the same way.

Controls are "set it and forget it" style. pots on the boards themselves. This makes design cheaper and easier, allowing the "designer" to pass on the savings to you.

ask for a heatsink 12 inches longer than you need, and you can add your own bracket to install your 701 or other processor internal to the amp and have ONE chassis that holes both signal processor and all amps. one set of ins, one set of power, and then all the high level outputs from one big fat chassis.

-----------------

Doesnt matter if the end user wanted small power, big power, seperate sub amp, all-in-one solution, 2 way stage, 3 way stage, high efficiency for horns, big power for big drivers. The designer can do it. All from modular parts.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

I think it should be modular and bus based. I like Mark's PS idea, I was thinking the same thing on the drive home (how to implement 1PS on a bunch of amp configs)

I would add a class D sub channel to the lineup of possibilities and even maybe a FR class D channel, sorry eng. But that's the beauty of modular, it fits the user. If we had, say an 8 channel frame or maybe 10, the stock frame would have switches/jumpers to do channel input assignments. But we could also have a DSP module the size of a channel to take the place of hte assignment module. This could have a remote head to the front running, say, RS422?

I think the overall trick is to make it future-proof, hence the bus design. Drop in whatever you want, the limiting factor is the PS which I believe there should be different wattages available. For example I'm happy with a mere 500W in my car, that won't cut it for others! So I'll take the 750W PS 

Modular construction allows for quick swaps, leaves a resale for modules and the original wiring stays with the exception of attaching the speaker to the module. Upgrades are fast, failed modules can be replaced while the system limps during repair or a spare is used. In fact repair should be flat rate, you buy a new module for repair and get money back when the old one arrives (core charge) the old module is rebuilt and back in action for another user. Ensoniq did this with their keyboards and it was GREAT!.

I'll think of some more


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

Whiterabbit said:


> cake. its a modular design. you buy the modules you want. Say, 50 rms, 100 rms, 200 rms, 500 rms, and 1000 rms. Whatever you really wanted. you can go very simple or very complicated depending on what the designer wanted. maybe you wanted to sell the set 15 rms class A, 100 rms, and 500 rms. possibilities of design are endless.
> 
> each PCA would have its own mini power supply, inputs and outputs.


The problem with modules in that sense is that the PS has to support it. You have to design the power supply based on what the amplifier is going to look like.

That's why I like the class G idea. You can design the PS knowing in advance what will be drawing off each tap. That way you don't have to spend hundreds of dollars on a single transformer ready to deliver a zillion watts of output if you only need 200x2, 100x2, and 50x2.

And if we start talking about individual power supplies, you're starting to lose efficiency, space, and drive up the cost.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

I like the idea like ol Blade 6.100 that I had
It consists of 3 modules, a/b (sorry Chad )
6 X 100, 3 separate power supplies, 3 separate power/ground/remote connections, yes it will drive cost a little more but it actually simplifies the design by housing 3 modules under 1 common heatsink.
I recall it was quite small and skinny...


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

unfortunately alpine probably nailed it best with the stackable PDX amps. all the connections off the back, all the controls off the front. The only thing that is missing is the H701 looking the same, allowing it to be integrated into the stack.

one BIG rat tail coming off the back. Which can be managed very effectively.


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

I agree... i like the idea of basically having multiple amplifiers in a single heatsink... or using the Class G multi-Tap platform...

Both make sense...


----------



## 02bluesuperroo (Oct 31, 2006)

God this idea is sickeningly good.


----------



## low (Jun 2, 2005)

as long as this thing costs an arm and a leg.......

















wwhaaaa?? if it costs something very astronomical the better right???? kekekekkee...


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

Scroll down to see Blade SE6100. There were SE6175 and SE6250 before! 
http://www.sounddomain.com/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/35211/page/1/fpart/6


----------



## tristan20 (Nov 28, 2005)

Lemmie do some testing on it, I had every single blade SE amp except the illusive 6250 yummy, blades are one of my all time favourite amps


----------



## 3.5max6spd (Jun 29, 2005)

I'd buy one, i's support such a project. 

I do remember last time on eca when people had Steve Mantz working out the details for such a 6ch and when final cost numbers came around and preorders everyone headed for the hills.


----------



## JAG (May 6, 2006)

500 watts is NOT EVEN enough for the sub channel .... It needs to be at least 1000w at 4 ohms .... Not everyone likes " lost in the music , pansy ass SQ bass "   
Modular is THE way to go , or stackable modular units .... Because literally EVERYONE will have different power needs.
I won't give my mid-bass , or midrange drivers under 300w/ch for example .... It's called dynamic headroom out the ying-yang !  
Oh yeah , it's not worth buying if it's not class A/B  
Continues stirring the nest with a stick


----------



## NaamanF (Jan 18, 2006)

How about we make it a DIY. Have all the boards made and then we can populate them ourselves. Then users can choose what parts to use. Of course the parts are cheaper when bought in bulk but I only want Black Gate caps in mine so it would cost more than the guy who wants standard nichicons. This could get complicated


----------



## thadman (Mar 1, 2006)

AVI said:


> 500 watts is NOT EVEN enough for the sub channel .... It needs to be at least 1000w at 4 ohms .... Not everyone likes " lost in the music , pansy ass SQ bass "
> Modular is THE way to go , or stackable modular units .... Because literally EVERYONE will have different power needs.
> I won't give my mid-bass , or midrange drivers under 300w/ch for example .... It's called dynamic headroom out the ying-yang !
> Oh yeah , it's not worth buying if it's not class A/B
> Continues stirring the nest with a stick


I would be down, power is greeeaaaat Just an idea, maybe we could have alternate heatsinks for home audio use. I'm not too worried about efficiency (if Class A could be managed ) or uber low impedances (8ohm is fine) if a significant cost rise is associated with improvements in those areas. I would be seriously interested if the amps were true performers and had better bang/buck than the current array of amplifiers available. Would these be able to compare at all with Nelson Pass's designs?


----------



## Se7en (Mar 28, 2007)

The Theta Dreadnaught (home amp) uses a modular design that has open slots for up to 5 amplifier modules. The cool thing is that the modules can either be 2 channel @100 wpc or single channel @ 225wpc allowing for almost infinate configuration up to 10 channels of amplification. 

link:
http://www.thetadigital.com/product/dreadnaught2/prod-info.htm


----------



## NaamanF (Jan 18, 2006)

How about gainclones for the car.


----------



## backwoods (Feb 22, 2006)

3.5max6spd said:


> I'd buy one, i's support such a project.
> 
> I do remember last time on eca when people had Steve Mantz working out the details for such a 6ch and when final cost numbers came around and preorders everyone headed for the hills.


 
ding ding ding... not too mention this is a forum populated by people looking to diy to save some cash. 

I'm sure there's more then enough intellegance in here to design a top tier amplifier, but I don't see many putting up the dough. 

In all honesty, whats the point in building it? Your not gonna beat the price/watt that people are buying the fosgates, blaus and buttkickers for unless you can fill a VERY large order. And that won't happen in a modular design, there won't be enough of any ONE configuration to get a good enough discount.

Now, if you guys wanted to do it as a kit, then you'd be on to something. 

You just come up with parts lists, and then plug & play afterwards, then the price would come down enough to be attractive, and still fit with the diy attitude...


----------



## thadman (Mar 1, 2006)

backwoods said:


> Now, if you guys wanted to do it as a kit, then you'd be on to something.
> 
> You just come up with parts lists, and then plug & play afterwards, then the price would come down enough to be attractive, and still fit with the diy attitude...


Yeah...I'm with this guy


----------



## dodgerblue (Jul 14, 2005)

YES - KIT KIT KIT !! OR PARTIAL , AND EXTRA FOR A BUILT UNIT !


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

thadman said:


> I would be down, power is greeeaaaat Just an idea, maybe we could have alternate heatsinks for home audio use. I'm not too worried about efficiency (if Class A could be managed ) or uber low impedances (8ohm is fine) if a significant cost rise is associated with improvements in those areas. I would be seriously interested if the amps were true performers and had better bang/buck than the current array of amplifiers available. Would these be able to compare at all with Nelson Pass's designs?


The power supplies are obviously going to be different for home audio. You can go straight off 60 cycle, but then you're talking a HUGE (expensive) transformer. Or you could make it a switcher too, which would be less of a departure from the car one.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

backwoods said:


> ding ding ding... not too mention this is a forum populated by people looking to diy to save some cash.
> 
> I'm sure there's more then enough intellegance in here to design a top tier amplifier, but I don't see many putting up the dough.
> 
> ...



I understand that, but have you thought about how much mark up they do on the products?
From manufacturing markup to them, their own markup to the distributors, dealers, then to shops?
I was told that some of the "big" amp manufacturer's cost of manufacturing is ridiculously low compared to what they sell on ebay. 
You'd be very surprised..


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

backwoods said:


> ding ding ding... not too mention this is a forum populated by people looking to diy to save some cash.
> 
> I'm sure there's more then enough intellegance in here to design a top tier amplifier, but I don't see many putting up the dough.
> 
> ...


I don't see price as the major obstacle here. I don't think it will cost as much as you might think, especially if you're buying reasonably large (>10) quantities. I think the most expensive part will be the heatsink. The transformers in SMPSs are reasonable unless you use a crazy high switching frequency and need to wind with litz wire.

Personally, I think the biggest obstacles are 1) time; and 2) putting it together. First, you need someone to machine a sink/chassis that fits the board and look nice. Then it's a lot of soldering and etching to do multiple amps unless you have a build house do the whole thing.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Man, if you guys knew Jeff, you would know that an amp with his name on it would have to be TUBE amp.

If you wanted DIY, I built some Nelson Pass inspired mini Alephs for the car that used the power supplies from my Monolithic 501As. Even at about 18-20 watts each, running real class A, they got HOT...I mean dumb hot. The Monolithics were high biased A/B and they would get so hot that you could smell them after about 30 minutes...and these get hotter than that.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

MarkZ said:


> I don't see price as the major obstacle here. I don't think it will cost as much as you might think, especially if you're buying reasonably large (>10) quantities. I think the most expensive part will be the heatsink. The transformers in SMPSs are reasonable unless you use a crazy high switching frequency and need to wind with litz wire.
> 
> Personally, I think the biggest obstacles are 1) time; and 2) putting it together. First, you need someone to machine a sink/chassis that fits the board and look nice. Then it's a lot of soldering and etching to do multiple amps unless you have a build house do the whole thing.



Design that thing and get "approved" by our experts..
heck, maybe even Stephen Mantz can "prove" it for some cost.
Look for amp manufacturers in Taiwan/Korea to have it built over there, then send us 1-2 prototype that can go around forum members to be tested. (just don't send it to 89grand,   Kidding!)

Getting a generic design, un-patented heatsink like dls style is much cheaper than designing our own specific heatsink, but how uncool is that?


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2007)

thehatedguy said:


> Man, if you guys knew Jeff, you would know that an amp with his name on it would have to be TUBE amp.


so true ... but only because i'm older than methuselah 

these little transistors are still too new-fangled for me


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

Speaking of Nelson Pass...

What if we used a fairly generic heatsink and put in the middle of the amplifier, ala Adcom... or placed along one side of the amplifier, ala Sinfoni and PG M-Series...

This would allow us to save on a custom tooling for the heatsink and allow for the amplifier enclosure to be either steel or aluminum and hopefully much cheaper...


J


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2007)

Seriously guys ... the issue is not an absence of design expertise on this board. Hell ... the number of variations in Class AB design can be counted on (less than) one hand. The real issues, most already touched-on, are these :

1. Time and energy for those willing to be involved in the design.

2. Cost to produce, if i/we am/are not already an established design/production house.

3. Can't get even three people to decide what they want ... number of channels, power, features, size, etc.

Seriously ... if there were substantial agreement on what to make, and reasonable buy-in (with understanding of cost and committment), i'd bet we could convince an existing small-ish house to make one (Genesis comes to mind). But by the time you wind through these issues, again we have to face the reality that there probably already exists something close to what is wanted, no?


----------



## sqkev (Mar 7, 2005)

the last time someone asked for a nicely built 6 channels, everyone got hyped up but nobody committed to buying (maybe there's a few, but I never heard anything about it)

there's no such thing as quality = affordable. Quality heatsinks aren't cheap.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

Now THIS is what the DIYMA community was made for! Guys, this is a great idea, just needs some tuning, tweaking, and a little K.I.S.S. implementation to make sure it turns into reality instead of a tweaked out dream.

About going modular:

I LOVE the idea of a modular setup. Some of us have 2-ways + sub, 3-way + sub, etc. There are a few ways to go modular, of course. One way is to have a shared heatsink, with removable, swappable modules. Another way is to have a stackable design implemented, where modules could be self-contained, but have a nice flowing design. There are many different ways I could see this working out just fine.

I think the biggest advantage of modular design is the possibility of an amp costing quite a bit, yet being built piece by piece! Example: Say someone wanted, 7channels of audio, and essentially all the bells and whistles. Great! Plug in a (2) 50Wx2 modules, (1) 100Wx2 module, and (1) 1000W mono sub channel module set, and then add the digital X-over module. Sure enough, each module, costing about $50-100 or so, that amp would be a behemoth. For the other side, say someone has a simple 2-way front w/ a small sub. Great, just plug in (1) 25Wx2 module, (1) 50Wx2 module, and (1) 250W sub channel module, and that would run about $600. Just like Guinness....Brilliant!


About design basics: 

I think most of us agree that the majority of amps sound similar, because they are built upon well proven foundations of quality and performance. It is pretty much universally agreed that the HARD PART is the switching power supply. The rest of the design just relies on good quality parts, a good layout, zero corner-cutting, and a _little_ bit of math . The other hard part is finding someone who will make your amp for you, at a fair price, exactly the way you want it to be.

If we go with a Shared Case design, then essentially everything will fit in like a PC does in a case. We have limited space, but we can choose exactly that limitation. I love the Xtant idea, that is a good one. The beloved Xtec design also really has potential. 

I propose a Stackable Case design. The primary reason why I suggest such a thing is because we all have different needs. If the system can stack (side by side, up and down, whatever) then we have a potent, capable, growable system, one that theoretically has no limit, other then space available in a car. I view it in my mind like a set of ribs. We can add or subtract ribs as needed. OR, imagine an A/D/S/ powerplate design that would be sliced up into 6 pieces, all easily connectible. We can then have simple end plates tooled up for the ends of whatever the middle contained, making this kind of modular design very easy to change and redesign, based on vehicle needs.

Power Distribution:

I think power delivery could be as simple as a power-module, with a buss-type connection throughout the amp modules. This would let the power distribution be about as smooth and flawless as seemingly possible, and let the amp owner pick where the power and ground wires pop out of the amp stack. It could be possible to plug the P.D. module in at the left end, right end, or somewhere in the center, all based on the design needs of the customer. A connectible buss design would allow for a lot of power to flow through multiple amp modules, since solid buss bars can take a lot of current. I envision it would be a snap to plug in other modules.


Shape and Size:

I propose the height to be quite low, since a lot of designs we build these days incorporates flush amps, or false floors. I think 2.5" aught to do it. Each module will be a bigger or smaller shape width-wise, depending on the internals. The Power distribution module will take up just the amount of space required to firmly connect good 0 to 4 gauge wire (depending on the power module you purchased, and how much power you expect to use!). Each module would have its own RCA inputs (unless someone could figure out a workable plug-in design that would also be modular!), would have its own 2 channels of output, or 1 channel output for subs. Each rib module should have its own crossover and gain. Simple X-over should do.

Say - 
25Wx2
50Wx2
100Wx2
250Wx1
500Wx1 (D class)
1000Wx1 (D class)

4 gauge power distribution (for up to 500W or so of connections)
0 gauge power distribution (for 1000W+ of connections)

If someone can figure it out, a pin-type connection (like the ones on iPod terminals, or ribbon cables) to make an RCA or even balanced-line module. Otherwise, each module would have its own rca terminals

IF someone could figure out the pin-type connection for the RCA's, then theoretically we could re-route the signal to an active x-over module. This would be VERY tricky, but possible. I'd suggest this be a "later as the money flows" type of thing.



Finally, as far as logo and design of that goes, I recommend the use of a top-center mounted, extruded channel, capable of holding a flexible, cuttable logo tape. It could slide right into the channel, like price tags slide into their plastic holders at Walmart or other stores. This logo tape could then span the entire row of modules, with a clean, smooth look. The endcaps can hide the end of them, so less then perfect cuts are OK!


My question for all of you is....Would it work?!!


----------



## ddriggers2 (Dec 26, 2005)

Quick someone call the patent office and apply for this to be patented before we see a major MFR at CES with modular amplifiers on display next year LOL!


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

forgot to mention, I like tube amps sometimes, so it would be possible to have a couple tube modules. Say 25W x 2 or 50 x 1 bridged, and 50x2 or 100W x1 bridged. Just plug them in, and you're golden (lit)


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

It would take years. I imagine the idea has not been even once put into practice. Yet, it is so simple and solid, it would WORK.



ddriggers2 said:


> Quick someone call the patent office and apply for this to be patented before we see a major MFR at CES with modular amplifiers on display next year LOL!


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

This forum has champaign tastes but wants to buy it on a Mad Dog budget.

While it's a great idea, I don't think that some of you guys have an idea what you are looking at in design costs a lone for the power supply(s). The PS is the heart of the amp...and switching mode power supplies are not cake to build- for an example of one, go to Rod Elliot's site and look at the one he built for DIY purposes. There are literally graduate level textbooks dedicated solely to the purpose of building SMPSs.

To make prices within reach, you would need to sell tens of thousands of these amps to get production costs low enough for the average person to buy one.

And who wants another amp from an unknown company?

Especially one without tubes? Not no stinking wussyassed preamp tubes, but real, manly power tubes.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

agreed, but there has to be a way to put a small to medium-sized, unregulated power supply on each module, and surely a way to build a tube module. I like pure power tubes too.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

That's great until you have to have a 200+ volt power supply for the tubes. And real tubes, I'm talking power tubes...not wussy preamp tubes that don't do anything, would need to be in the 450 volt range unloaded and atleast in the 275 volt range loaded.

Then, do you want to do push/pull or single ended? You want to use triodes, pentodes, or tetrodes? If you are going single ended, you want to use a direct heated tube or a indirect heated, going parallel tetrode or pentode strapped to triode?

Single ended, you can look at about 2 watts for a DHT like a 2A3 or about 30 watts for a paralleled set of KT88s strapped to triode operation. 

You power puts you in the push/pull category. Want to use EL84s, 34s, 6550s, etc?

Want soild state or tube rectifiers?

Where will the output transformers go? If it is going to be modular, you have to have room for some 15 pound each output transformers...

Tubes...I don't think you want to go down that road. I know, I've researched that path to death...easier and cheaper to buy a real tube amp for the car. Want push/pull, get a Milbert...want single ended, get a HSS Fidelity. I have both .



fourthmeal said:


> forgot to mention, I like tube amps sometimes, so it would be possible to have a couple tube modules. Say 25W x 2 or 50 x 1 bridged, and 50x2 or 100W x1 bridged. Just plug them in, and you're golden (lit)


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

thehatedguy said:


> That's great until you have to have a 200+ volt power supply for the tubes. And real tubes, I'm talking power tubes...not wussy preamp tubes that don't do anything, would need to be in the 450 volt range unloaded and atleast in the 275 volt range loaded.
> 
> Then, do you want to do push/pull or single ended? You want to use triodes, pentodes, or tetrodes? If you are going single ended, you want to use a direct heated tube or a indirect heated, going parallel tetrode or pentode strapped to triode?
> 
> ...


This is clearly your world of expertise, not mine my friend. Maybe we can build these modules later down the road?


I'm working in a CAD program right now on the basic design of how it _could _work, all the modular-ness. I'll see if I can get it done by tonight, and publish it.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

It's a pain in the ass to get tubes to work in the car. The amp circuit is easy- just take a home amp you like and copy it. Tube circuits are pretty easy to build and there hasn't been many variations on the subject over the past years. Probably the most popular thing now is solid state rectifiers. They seem to offer better performance over tube rectifiers and don't drastically change the sonics of the amps.

There are things like constant current sources for the power tubes and driver tubes...constant voltage sources for both, shunt regulated power supplies...building tube amps is a lost art IMO. 

Getting the HV power supply with enough voltage and current to do what you want is the booger here.

Here are some:

http://members.aol.com/sbench101/#Power

http://www.klausmobile.narod.ru/projects/pr_05_carpower_e.htm

http://www.audiohobbyist.com/diyparts/parts/kit/carpsu.htm

Not saying it can't be done...just not real easy.

The Dynaco ST70 is a popular push/pull amp to DIY, probably a "decent" amp as far as tube amps go. Tru Technology based their all tube amp on the Dynaco ST35 circuit.

Those would be easy to build..

But tubes...I love them.


----------



## slow2.2sonoma (Jul 9, 2006)

I want a 2x60+2x120+2x200+1x1200 all @ 8 ohms accept for the 1x1200


----------



## tyroneshoes (Mar 21, 2006)

Can you install a vagina on mine?


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

werewolf said:


> But by the time you wind through these issues, again we have to face the reality that there probably already exists something close to what is wanted, no?


Six-channel class G with staggered power numbers? Nuh uh!

[That's my story and I'm sticking to it.]


----------



## low (Jun 2, 2005)

okay tubes it is! 

design team (mr wolfie) go for it!


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

AVI said:


> 500 watts is NOT EVEN enough for the sub channel .... It needs to be at least 1000w at 4 ohms .... Not everyone likes " lost in the music , pansy ass SQ bass "


You are misconceived  

280w to the subs less than 80 to the mids and 80 to the tweets. It rolls out and feels the same as my live rig running 8 high excursion 18's, 4or 8 JBL eE20's, 2 or 4 JBL2245's on a DAS horn the size of my torso, and 4 or 8 modded JBL 2402's... in smallish rooms with 10-15KW.

Honda hatchback, gotta love it, and trust me I WILL play I pretty damn loud, louder than I like to mix metal Bands.

So you get the bigger PS module 

Everyone gets what they want


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

NaamanF said:


> How about we make it a DIY. Have all the boards made and then we can populate them ourselves. Then users can choose what parts to use. Of course the parts are cheaper when bought in bulk but I only want Black Gate caps in mine so it would cost more than the guy who wants standard nichicons. This could get complicated


even if it came in kit form... ala old dynacos.

and if you want the caps left out then the code word is "hold the pickles"


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

I think even a kit would be worthwhile...


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

Also, back to the monster amplifier Mr. Mantz was going to build... I was right there with everyone else...

I think there was a misconception of what the pricing was going to be. Most people thought the amplifier was going to be between $600-$800... Then he came out with $1200.00 and a lot of people ran...

I believe if we keep the lines of communication open and those who are interested make a monetary commitment... ALL WILL BE GOOD... The key is to agree to a basic idea...

My 0.02$

J


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

fourthmeal said:


> agreed, but there has to be a way to put a small to medium-sized, unregulated power supply on each module, and surely a way to build a tube module. I like pure power tubes too.


Output transformers are too heavy for a modular design IMHO. It would be rough on the connectors


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

thehatedguy said:


> That's great until you have to have a 200+ volt power supply for the tubes. And real tubes, I'm talking power tubes...not wussy preamp tubes that don't do anything, would need to be in the 450 volt range unloaded and atleast in the 275 volt range loaded.


^^^^^
voice of reason


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

i didn't read the whole thread but i feel a 6-channel and then that same 6-channel with a sub channel added in a slightly bigger chassis would be perfect for the 3-way and 4-way people. on the 6-channel let it be something like 100x6 with each pair of channels bridgable. then for the 7-channel have the sub channel be like 300rms at 4 ohms and 600rms at 2 ohms. for most, one of those power configurations would be the perfect setup.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

Here is an extremely quick, simple amp shell I CAD'd (is that a word?) together in about an hour.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

thehatedguy said:


> The Dynaco ST70 is a popular push/pull amp to DIY, probably a "decent" amp as far as tube amps go. Tru Technology based their all tube amp on the Dynaco ST35 circuit.
> 
> Those would be easy to build..
> 
> But tubes...I love them.


MKIII's on the mid/bass, ST70 design triode on the tweets.   

hammond has "remakes" of the output trannies... have you tries them yet?

me likey the tubes too


----------



## MiniVanMan (Jun 28, 2005)

Great dream guys. I've been thinking about this all afternoon since I first saw it posted. I come back and voila, the idea has exploded.

So, here's some rough numbers. $10,000 to design, and prototype, the another $25,000 to get enough production units to drive costs down to be competitive with existing products. So, $35,000, and that's being optimistic. 

All we need is 100 people to send Werewolf $350.00 so that he can do this. Then those 100 people agree on a design after driving Werewolf crazy for 6 months. Then when all is said and done and a production model comes out, the initial investors get a discount, then we try to market the product, and end up with a bunch of kids frying their amps because they don't know what they're doing, and our credibility gets creamed. 

Sorry, I'm a bit pessimistic. I would love a modular designed amp, but just don't know how practical it is.

You guys figure it out and you have my investment dollars.


----------



## poochieone (Aug 25, 2005)

Here's my 2 cents...
I'm looking at this as a simple one unit/piece full system amplifier. 
i'm also assuming this would not be mass marketed but rather aimed at 
i)a diy crowd such as the one frequenting this forum
ii)perhaps small/independent shops that can see the benefit of providing their customers with a simple clean install that is space/design efficient while providing enough power and versatility that would run 90% of systems on the road.

as such, aside from the features initially mentioned on this thread (quality parts, excellent SQ, modular design, affordability etc), i think three other critical issues need to be addressed:
1) availability of both 6 and 8 channels, having a pair of channels being bridgeable. here's the reason why: most cars have front and rear speakers and most users that would want a product such as this would most likely have some sort of subwoofer added on, thus at least needing 6 channels. for those fanatic enough to do a 3 way front plus sub, well, there you go, an 8 channel that can feed your front end plus bridge to your sub or run a pair in stereo with hopefully ample wattage.

2)Crossovers... not sure what how to best incorporate and i think a digital network would be hard to implement, but i'll leave that to the design experts, but the key point is to a bandpass crossover for each module. reasons are simple... eliminates the need for external crossovers ( and well, how many 8 channel crossovers exist out there that people are just wanting to throw cash at?) and aids with those wanting to get rid of their passive crossovers to take advantage of their multichannel solution.

3)Size. I've always been a fan of big amps with sexy guts... not BOSS or Pyramid with a 70% empty chassis though... i mean big sexy stacked-can't-fit-anything-else-in-there-beasts like the PG MS1000, the Blade 6100, Mcintosh MC4000M, you get the drift. Problem is, these aren't the most practical amps...super long, sometimes wide and damn heavy when you need multiples. when the real life install issues and the limited confines of your automobile kick in, people tend to reconsider and sales will reflect such. ceteris paribus, size must be as compact as possible. A good reference point would be to easily make fit behind the rear seats, nicely stashed away vertically and out of the way of the rest of your precious trunk so loved by your wife/girlfriend/boyfriend/significant other.

constructive criticism on my commentary is more than welcome.

Marco


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

I haven't messed with any of the Dynaco stuff. The only tube amp that I've built was the little Bottlehead SEX amp...little 2 wpc SET amp. Good little kit especially for the money. Then I built the little Pass inspired Mini-As.

I haven't built anything in a couple of years, but I am getting the itch to build something new...maybe 8-10 wpc single ended. Found a nice little amp based on single ended EL34s that does 8 wpc and should cost about $700 to build. Course the Bottlehead Paramours are about the same price, but use a 2A3 but half the power...would need a preamp too. And until I get my Benchmark DAC1 back, I don't have a means to a preamp.

I love tubes, but the solid state single ended stuff is so much cheaper to build. I have amp and PS boards for another Mini-A left...probably could build one of those for $150-200 or less. Seen some mods for a J-fet front end that I would like to try. Now, an all J-fet amp would be nice too...and the J-fet curves mimic single ended triodes really well...a couple transformers on the outputs, and you might have a pretty good "triode" sounding amp.

Wish there was a nice cheap OTL amp kit on the market...always wanted to try the output transformerless tube amps.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

MiniVanMan said:


> Great dream guys. I've been thinking about this all afternoon since I first saw it posted. I come back and voila, the idea has exploded.
> 
> So, here's some rough numbers. $10,000 to design, and prototype, the another $25,000 to get enough production units to drive costs down to be competitive with existing products. So, $35,000, and that's being optimistic.
> 
> ...


Eh, I'm doing my own anyway. Been planning on it for over a year, and should be able to get it done for less than $500. Transformer is the expensive part, and maybe the output devices if for some crazy reason I go with something not readily available.

The problem for me is and always has been the heat sink.

Hopefully this thread will convince me to get my ass in gear this weekend and start putting stuff on a breadboard.


----------



## Arc (Aug 25, 2006)

On the PS issue. Is there anyway to rate each module for a certain number of points. Say a 1000x1 board is 10 points and a 200x2 is 4 points, and a 50x1 is 1 point. You have a total of 15 points. Then have 4 of 5 different PS's that can go up to 10, 15, 20 and so on. 
This way you make the PS a module as well that is replacable. 

Make everything a module, PS, processing...everything. That way it can cost as little or as much.

Kit form is great. You can chose to have the standard parts or sans parts. Also, maybe the option to be assembled for a price.


----------



## Weightless (May 5, 2005)

MarkZ said:


> Eh, I'm doing my own anyway. Been planning on it for over a year, and should be able to get it done for less than $500. Transformer is the expensive part, and maybe the output devices if for some crazy reason I go with something not readily available.
> 
> The problem for me is and always has been the heat sink.
> 
> Hopefully this thread will convince me to get my ass in gear this weekend and start putting stuff on a breadboard.


Is that $500 with or without the heatsink?


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

Arc said:


> On the PS issue. Is there anyway to rate each module for a certain number of points. Say a 1000x1 board is 10 points and a 200x2 is 4 points, and a 50x1 is 1 point. You have a total of 15 points. Then have 4 of 5 different PS's that can go up to 10, 15, 20 and so on.
> This way you make the PS a module as well that is replacable.


I don't see how that would work. At least not efficiently. If you buy a 400 watt amplifier module, you'll need a certain rail voltage to make it work. The 50 watt module will need a smaller rail voltage. And so on and so forth. If you use a power supply that has multiple rail voltages available, then you need to know how many channels will be drawing from it so it can be sized appropriately. This is not trivial, nor is it cheap.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

SQ_Baru said:


> Is that $500 with or without the heatsink?


Without.

And personally, I think it'll be a lot cheaper than $500. But again, this is because I'll be doing everything myself. If we did something in bulk and had to get a build house involved (at least just to fabricate etched PCBs), then that's probably a significant additional expense.

But yes, the heatsink remains a major issue. I'm still waiting for a machinist to step up and say "no problem!".


----------



## Arc (Aug 25, 2006)

MarkZ said:


> I don't see how that would work. At least not efficiently. If you buy a 400 watt amplifier module, you'll need a certain rail voltage to make it work. The 50 watt module will need a smaller rail voltage. And so on and so forth. If you use a power supply that has multiple rail voltages available, then you need to know how many channels will be drawing from it so it can be sized appropriately. This is not trivial, nor is it cheap.



Ahh see this is where I claim ignorance. I don't know much about how exactly amplifiers work. Just an idea.



MarkZ said:


> And personally, I think it'll be a lot cheaper than $500. But again, this is because I'll be doing everything myself. If we did something in bulk and had to get a build house involved (at least just to fabricate etched PCBs), then that's probably a significant additional expense.


You could ask Brian from chipamp.com. He has etched PCB's and they aren't expensive from him. Ask who he uses.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

Keep it simple and clean guys, no mumbo jumbo super eq/ta/x-over, etc.
Basic x-over is ok, but at diyma community, we all run active, correct?
Stick with a plan, 6 channel? 7 Channel? Obviously we can't accomodate everyone.
For you tube lovers, here is an idea, make channel 1 - 4 hybrid? Just a thought.. I do not like tube amp on my midbass or sub, do you? just an opinion.

Heatsink like adcom won't work/hard to do.
For a long amplifier, you'd want heatsink like DLS/Genesis/PG Titanium.
If you put rca on one end, power, speaker wire, gains on the other, we are talking what, 40" long?

A simple 6 channel amp + simple heatsink, can be done below $500...

The problem with Leviathan is again, $1200 price tag like tn_audiophile pointed. I am sure at $600, you will get people buying like mad men 
Besides, it will have a cool werewolf logo on it, who wouldn't want them?


----------



## Arc (Aug 25, 2006)

I like the Genesis/DLS/Next heat sinks.
Lets make it as small as a PDX


----------



## VaVroom1 (Dec 2, 2005)

i got somewhat skeptical after zed's leviathan and kronos tease.

how about an 8 channel amp? with a small foot print to boot:
http://ampguts.realmofexcursion.com/Xetec_Gravity_8G-1000/

but a wolfie batch will top that.


----------



## sqkev (Mar 7, 2005)

Hmm..this thread started out as a built amp now going off to diy amp kits.

From the business standpoint, there's a liability concern releasing finished products. Much more is involved, including: Design, engineering, r&d, product cost, labor cost, factory cost, shipping cost, overhead cost, cost to start the business, etc. When it comes down to it, a built amp will surely cost much more than a few hundred dollars. 

The diy amp kits sounds like a better idea (cheaper), but I don't think many will benefit from the project. The chipamp kits have been around for awhile with enough documentations, how many of you actually built a working chipamp?


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

So is it safe to say, "Zuki". should be commended for what he has achieved thus far?


----------



## VaVroom1 (Dec 2, 2005)

Hic said:


> So is it safe to say, "Zuki". should be commended for what he has achieved thus far?


imho all legitimate ventures are commendable, including zuki although his marketing strategy of "mystery" may be bordering on controversy.


----------



## Infinity (Jun 28, 2005)

I love the ideas. I will add that the modular idea has been done before. Monolithic had modular car amplifiers in the mid-late 80's. They were big, expensive, powerful, and absolutely gorgeous. Unfortunately, I can't even find pics on Google. Someone help me out. I know it had a good listing in CSR's directory with good pictures one year.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

thehatedguy said:


> Wish there was a nice cheap OTL amp kit on the market...always wanted to try the output transformerless tube amps.


Me too, never built one  I have most of the stuff to whip up an OTL headphone amp that I had always wanted. I need to get a set of amps done for my brother this winter before he slits my bag and runs my leg thru it (been dragging my feet) and then maybe I'll get back on that. The OTL amp has been sitting on the back burner for 4-5 years now  

The Dynaco stuff is easy to work with and their OP transformers are great if you can get your hands on them. I ran across a bunch a few years ago and am now down to I think 4, 2 of which are my brother's for those amps. I do change the front end around sometimes on the ST70/MK3 designs, but, sometimes I leave it stock. I have a 6AN8 design I may want to try as opposed to the 7199's in the Dynaco's. The 6AN8 is a larger (still 9 pin) tube performing gain and driver for the power tubes. I don't know how they will work witht he KT88's as they are normally paired with 7591's (popular HH Scott designs)

Here's an old 299 I was tinkering with, it's rather rare as it's labled a C but contains a lot of circuit design from the 229, 7591's and does not match any 299 schematic. I've been told it was produced whant hey were changing the lineup fro the 299C and 299D. I was lamenting on my struggles on the interwebz and I immediately had some VERY tempting offers to sell it, needless to say. Simple cap job/cleanup.


























And yes, the Telefunken 12AX7's are still in there 

Chad


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Chad,
That's, simply beautiful !!


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

Damn, I leave the forum alone for a few hours yesterday and this thing blew up. This thread probably has to be the boner of the year alert, except that I think it's all our pipe dream and will never happen. I'll sit with my popcorn and watch though.


----------



## Mazda3SQ (Nov 11, 2006)

http://cgi.ebay.com/Custom-made-ZAP...hZ019QQcategoryZ39732QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem...?


----------



## backwoods (Feb 22, 2006)

you need to track down the old orion heatsinks that they were selling bulk a while back, from their experiment with water cooling...


----------



## 99IntegraGS (Jan 18, 2007)

Mazda3SQ said:


> http://cgi.ebay.com/Custom-made-ZAP...hZ019QQcategoryZ39732QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem...?


Let's see if this link works better....

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=290131982988

JD


----------



## Mazda3SQ (Nov 11, 2006)

99IntegraGS said:


> Let's see if this link works better....
> 
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=290131982988
> 
> JD


Damn I suck...

lol, thanks for correcting the link.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

I see this thread is going chaos like Leviathan thread by Zed Audio  
Focus people! 6 channel amp! Cheap!


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

This might help? http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7286&highlight=channel+amp


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

dual700 said:


> I see this thread is going chaos like Leviathan thread by Zed Audio
> Focus people! 6 channel amp! Cheap!


Well I'm a sucker for good old fashioned heatsink cooling, but I know that is one of the most expensive parts. I hate fan cooled, but how else can you keep it cool, not a huge footprint, but still be able to get all the simple gooides inside at an affordable price?


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

I think if we get focused and come to a general consensus... this project may become a reality...

J


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

dual700 said:


> I see this thread is going chaos like Leviathan thread by Zed Audio
> Focus people! 6 channel amp! Cheap!


Why 6? 6 is limiting, 7 or 8 is great.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

I'll continue to CAD up a few ideas. Not one person commented on the ones I made a few pages back, so I don't know what you want. Check back, and post comments (good or bad)


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

chad said:


> Why 6? 6 is limiting, 7 or 8 is great.


Hey, as long as they are not class D, I am down.   

Here is an idea, what if we put like a metal tubing filled with coolant, as part of the heatsink..


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

fourthmeal said:


> I'll continue to CAD up a few ideas. Not one person commented on the ones I made a few pages back, so I don't know what you want. Check back, and post comments (good or bad)


CAD is a bit premature right now. We need big hunks of anodized aluminum at rock bottom prices first.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

fourthmeal said:


> I'll continue to CAD up a few ideas. Not one person commented on the ones I made a few pages back, so I don't know what you want. Check back, and post comments (good or bad)


I did..

_Heatsink like adcom won't work/hard to do.
For a long amplifier, you'd want heatsink like DLS/Genesis/PG Titanium.
If you put rca on one end, power, speaker wire, gains on the other, we are talking what, 40" long?_


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

Maybe zuki has a good chunk of alu-minuim since he has the super duper secret mystery amps left over from the custom amps he built for his customer as refered to in the ECA thread.


----------



## backwoods (Feb 22, 2006)

personally, I still think it's best by just doing a kit of some sort. 

Make all the modules with their own PS, and capable of doing [email protected] 4 ohm and that it is 2ohm stable. If you need more then [email protected] 2ohm, then purchase a dual 2 sub, and run a module to each vc. Now they have 600 for it.

Find a buildhouse that will sell generic heatsink like old soundstreams...etc..

See if they can sell by the foot. Now each person can buy a heatsink in whatever increment they need for however many modules they want to run.

Only gonna start out with two, but plan on running 8? Then purchase enough heatsink for all 8 modules. If you decide later on that you want to split the 8 modules between two amps, not a big deal. Just take your heatsink in to a local shop and have it cut.

Benefit of doing this, the only up front cost is someone to diagram out and cut the circuit boards. And, if someone wants to make money, they could offer to assemble them as well.


----------



## AUr6 (Apr 10, 2007)

nevermind...


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

MarkZ said:


> CAD is a bit premature right now. We need big hunks of anodized aluminum at rock bottom prices first.



I like CAD, its probably one of the things I'm good at compared w/ all the rest of things that make this project so tough.

You need big hunks of aluminum that you can dip in anodizing baths. Right now, we just need billet. Thing is, Billet ain't so bad. Another thing we could do, is use an existing heatsink.





Finally, has anybody thought about using collective negotiation with a good amp maker, asking them to build it for us?


----------



## kappa546 (Apr 11, 2005)

ok... my $.02: no xovers/eq nothing. if you really want something besides a pure gain block the first on the list would be a variable phase knob ala zed made lanzar opti amps.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

Here is what I am thinking...
Copy DLS A3's design and multiply it by 3 in the same heatsink   
150 X 6, can be bridged to run at 1 ohm mono at 1200 watts, lol. j/k.

We need to come up with a solid design.
Then find a build house in Korea/China/Taiwan and have them bid.. That's the easy part.


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

plenty of nice simple heatsinks out there, what about the ones massive audio uses. My 800.4 did not seam that heavy at all and I don't think it ran really hot.. didn't push it a ton though.


----------



## STI<>GTO (Aug 8, 2005)

If it's gonna be built here, or in kit form, I have a customer that gets their extrusions from here. Supposed to be good peoples.

Unless you're talking about a prototype, you don't want to machine billet - that's gonna get real expensive and waste a lot of expensive material. Get a design down (DLS Ultimates  ) and have extrusions made. Or, like was already mentioned, buying an existing design would be economical.

Build it! Build it!


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

dual700 said:


> We need to come up with a solid design.
> Then find a build house in Korea/China/Taiwan and have them bid.. That's the easy part.


I see it the other way around. The design is already more or less done. No need to reinvent the wheel. Amplifier research isn't exactly in its infancy. There are zillions of good designs out there that need very little modification. The problem that faces all manufacturers is cost, and when you add bulk into the equation, then it adds another layer of complexity into the cost problem.

Of course, no piece should be done in isolation. The design itself is going to depend a lot on the heatsink and the machining required to get it to work with the PCB. Conversely, the heat sink is going to rely on how much heat must be dissipated (ie. the design). If this is to be a quality amplifier, the heatsinking strategy should not be taken lightly (no pun intended). IMO, one of the most important aspect of an audio amplifier has to do with the heatsink. It ain't just there to look pretty. 

Also, for those of you concerned with the footprint, keep in mind that a completely modular design with independent power supplies for each channel isn't going to help matters. It's also going to considerably add to the cost and adversely affect efficiency. I seriously suggest you guys rethink that option.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

Here's a bit more refined design, note the plug-in type power rails. 









The top panel would have a removable portion, to allow for gain settings, x-over (or whatever we can come up with), and also allow for the amp to be screwed down, and wires screwed in to their terminals at the front. Once the top is installed, then the logo that slides into the channel effectively hides the screws. 

Here's a simple design of the opposite side.


----------



## GlasSman (Nov 14, 2006)

MiniVanMan said:


> Great dream guys. I've been thinking about this all afternoon since I first saw it posted. I come back and voila, the idea has exploded.
> 
> So, here's some rough numbers. $10,000 to design, and prototype, the another $25,000 to get enough production units to drive costs down to be competitive with existing products. So, $35,000, and that's being optimistic.
> 
> ...


I don't think the "average kid" would ever even REMOTELY think of buying this amp let alone coming in contact with one unless they have a friend that sells one second hand. Many top notch brands are very difficult to find and the chances of many people to come in contact with them are remote. I don't know if many of you guys live in STEREO WORLD SUPREME but I see the same stuff at most local shops. Alpine, Rockford, JL, Crossfire, Memphis, JBL, Quart, Focal, Pioneer. They'll just stick to their big box Rockfords, Alpines, etc..etc. I've only run into ONE PERSON face to face that has ever seen an internet Car Audio forum let alone knows about the top notch quality products that many of us enthusiasts use and love. 

Getting the project funded and implemented is the first obstacle. The modular buy the power you need is the best idea. 80x2, 150x2, 250x2, 500x1 makes the most sense. Maybe a 50x2 if people have very delicate tweeters that can't handle much power. And if it's not any more expensive allow the 500 watt modules to be bridged together unless theres more stability or less expensive with non bridged power.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

fourthmeal said:


> Here's a bit more refined design, note the plug-in type power rails.
> 
> 
> The top panel would have a removable portion, to allow for gain settings, x-over (or whatever we can come up with), and also allow for the amp to be screwed down, and wires screwed in to their terminals at the front. Once the top is installed, then the logo that slides into the channel effectively hides the screws.
> ...


That is a very nice drawing but again, this kind of heatsink lay out will not allow you to do a modular design.

Like I said earlier, this heatsink will be very long with clearance needed to rca, one to power/ground/speaker/ etc.

For modular design, dls/gen/pg ti model is best.

Mark, sorry for the confusion, what I meant was a solid design of an amp that we can somehow "copy"  not to reinvent the wheels..


----------



## low (Jun 2, 2005)

whats the best amp right now, we'll just copy that.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

low said:


> whats the best amp right now, we'll just copy that.


Not your amps, definitely.


----------



## low (Jun 2, 2005)

dual700 said:


> Not your amps, definitely.


what you talkin 'bout willis??? 

im about to submit my amps for copy since they *are* the best!!


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

dual700 said:


> That is a very nice drawing but again, this kind of heatsink lay out will not allow you to do a modular design.
> 
> Like I said earlier, this heatsink will be very long with clearance needed to rca, one to power/ground/speaker/ etc.
> 
> ...



I'm unsure of what you mean here. Of course thank you for the compliment, but please expound a bit on what you mean about a heatsink needing to be very long to clear...

My idea of a modular design entails having the power, ground, and remote wiring connected like a buss design. This design should give plenty of room for a circuit board (and accompanying daughter board(s) depending on the need), with capacity for some pretty good heat dissipation. 

Merely ideas to help launch that groundbreaking idea that makes this project go.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

fourthmeal said:


> I'm unsure of what you mean here. Of course thank you for the compliment, but please expound a bit on what you mean about a heatsink needing to be very long to clear...
> QUOTE]
> 
> Modular design, picture this pg titanium zx400ti or any model..
> ...


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

dual700 said:


> fourthmeal said:
> 
> 
> > I'm unsure of what you mean here. Of course thank you for the compliment, but please expound a bit on what you mean about a heatsink needing to be very long to clear...
> ...


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

Oh I know, you are half way there!  
Now move the rca and speaker connectors at the same side as the bus bars and we are all set!


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

This would be possible, but i don't know how to do it efficiently. I was thinking something along the lines of PCA style pin sockets, like the ones you find in your computer attaching a video card, for example. But, I fear this would cost quite a bit to produce, and it may cause a degradation of sound quality, wouldn't it?

Whereas the power connection is pretty simple, and easy to work with because it doesn't degrade substantially as the buss runs. 

Wouldn't the design I have now be an OK compromise between full-buss, and no-buss?


BTW, a lot of people were saying it would be hard to figure out how to attach the PCB(s) to the heatsink. My proposal is to use a double-sided, Epoxy coated PCB, attaching to the top of this module. On one side, use whatever FET's are best for the application (this is an area of design that I know precious little about), and put those on the side attached under the top, and the parts which produce far less heat (transformer, as example) can be on the other side, just hanging upside down. Then, at the bottom of the case, the buss bars will run harmlessly out of the way. Because of the way the board is suspended upside down from the top plate, quick construction is assured as long as the bottom plate is removable, which is no problem. 

Should be a very easy extrusion / punch plate combo.


----------



## dodgerblue (Jul 14, 2005)

in the early 90.s CANTON had an interesting design some of you may remember or had exp. with , it had a mainframe housing for seperate amp moduales wich allowed up to 5 amp modules the most powerful being the mono 75w module , model number for the mainframe was mf 5 the 50 w mono moduale was the m 50 ,they had other options such as a smaller 3-module maineframe -mf3 etc. ive never had exp. with one but may provide some ideas !


----------



## Thumper26 (Sep 23, 2005)

there's an eD rep that's on sounddomain some and i ran the modular amp idea by him and was shot down pretty quick. their main argument was the one made on here: there's just not enough demand.

i was pushing him to expand the nine.5 and make it a nine.7, but no luck.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

Now that is some nice drawing! 

Just throwing ideas..
How about stacking pioneer premier prs-x amps?
Small, powerful, no hiss, no pops, no bs..
Prs-x220 for ch 1 - 2
prs-x320 for ch 3 - 4
prs-x720 for the 5 - 6 ch
we "only" need to rearrange the board lay out so all the connections are on 1 side


----------



## drocpsu (May 3, 2005)

that is a nice drawing! did you have to do that by hand?


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

its googlesketch.

Freebie.

These are the two things I'm decent at, WinISD and Googlesketch.


I am a firm believer that this can happen. If not by DIYMA, by an amp builder who is willing to make it work. Given this, I'd prefer it to be DIYMA, with some corporate or individual backing. I'm not savvy on any amp building or anything like that, but I know that this concept will work. How could it not? The hardest part is trying to master the shape and sizing of the modules, and how it interlocks together. I've got it almost figured out in my head, and I'm just trying to convey that image to a CAD style form. I'll let the other experts here figure out what to put in these cases. I'm leaning toward a shared power / ground / remote buss, with fully hidden connections all around (the DIYMA way is usually to be stealthy in installs), with the RCA and speaker wire independent to each module. It doesn't work out when the RCA's and speaker wire are bussed as well, because of the variables involved (2ch, 6ch, 7ch??), but power is always constant. 

Importantly, the Power Distribution module will have a relay built into it, so the remote wire can accomodate many amp modules. Really, the only important limitation of this design is available power pulling from 0 or 4 gauge wiring. In effect, this will operate as a fused distribution block and ground block.

What I want to know is what type of heatsink should this have? Extrusion, Die Cast, Billet (we can always recycle the shavings and melt it down again), or Stamped? Let me know, so I can go that direction.


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

Fourthmeal: You have an E-mail...


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

would you mind redirecting that to PM? I rarely check my email.


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

Sent to your PM box


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

fourthmeal said:


>


I would buy this. Connections on one side makes me happy.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Nice work !!


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

The sweetest part about this design is that the power distribution module should be able to fit ANYWHERE in the row of amps. The left, center, right..wherever. By being a simple buss design, it will work. Don't forget, it would be critical to have a relay built into the remote trigger, so it could handle multiple amps.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

Come to think of it, you might need to take the top bar part out.
It covers the screw holes and mounting holes..But other than that, sweet idea!


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

dual700 said:


> Come to think of it, you might need to take the top bar part out.
> It covers the screw holes and mounting holes..But other than that, sweet idea!


The top plate is removable, and the screws to remove it are under the logo channel, which is the blue thing. This allows the logo to slide out, and voila, there are the access screws. In addition to allowing for terminal connects, this will also allow gain, crossover, etc. to all be adjusted from under the cover.


----------



## ogahyellow (Apr 16, 2007)

If it's done that way, then I think the pre-production "investors" should get shares. I really think this is a great idea, and could turn a nice profit. And that's where the shares would come in. 

I actually think someone should try to patent this idea before one of the big boys has a modular design out next year. I mean they do read the forums, don't they?



MiniVanMan said:


> All we need is 100 people to send Werewolf $350.00 so that he can do this. Then those 100 people agree on a design after driving Werewolf crazy for 6 months. Then when all is said and done and a production model comes out, the initial investors get a discount, then we try to market the product, and end up with a bunch of kids frying their amps because they don't know what they're doing, and our credibility gets creamed.
> 
> Sorry, I'm a bit pessimistic. I would love a modular designed amp, but just don't know how practical it is.
> 
> You guys figure it out and you have my investment dollars.


----------



## Thumper26 (Sep 23, 2005)

fourthmeal said:


> its googlesketch.
> 
> Freebie.
> 
> ...


I think you nailed what i was thinking with a single "power center" that sends power to all the modules and has a relay for remote turn ons as well. On the amp casing, figure whatever design is most effecient at removing heat. Also incorporate a groove underneath the amp to run rca cables, or have the section where they plug in be covered like on the MB Quart amps.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

Tonight I'll try to post up some new drawings I've been working on. I got a hideaway plan for most of the wiring. Should look ultra-clean. 

How about some people post up some pics (medium size) of what they view to be the most efficient type of heatsinks. I have a few ideas, but I want to see what the consensus of our group is.


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

The Heatsink that Lunar uses is very good at handleing heat...

Here are some pictures:


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Tn_Audiophile said:


> The Heatsink that Lunar uses is very good at handleing heat...



Hot damn! Did you have one that was just a little too long


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

I'm liking the heatsink found on some Diamond amps, the CDT amps, some older Alpines, the Focal amps (can't use it, not enough surface area!), Crossfire, and older MTX amps.


----------



## forty5cal1911 (Sep 11, 2006)

The old ESX Quantum series amps by zed had very good heatsinks and a fairly basic design to boot. If I'm not mistaken these were cast also vs milled billet.


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

Ha... 

That is part of the Dealer Package they send to new dealers... I shows how the heatsink is put together...


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

OK guys...

What is our consensus on the amplifier we want to build...?

How many channels ?, How much power each ?, What features ?.... etc...

J


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Tn_Audiophile said:


> OK guys...
> 
> What is our consensus on the amplifier we want to build...?
> 
> ...


A modular frame with 10 spaces, up to 9 channels of amp or 8 channels of amp+DSP+PS

Like a blade server beoatchs


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

I'm thinking -

2x25 (1x50)
2x75 (1x150)
2x150 (1x300)
1x500 

a 4 gauge power distribution module, 
and a 0 gauge distribution module


----------



## ghart999 (Feb 8, 2006)

Well I am a patent attorney, so when we get this figured out we can patent the idea and license it to manufacturer X to build.

Of course it looks like we will have about 100 inventors on the patent. lol


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

MarkZ said:


> Without.
> 
> And personally, I think it'll be a lot cheaper than $500. But again, this is because I'll be doing everything myself. If we did something in bulk and had to get a build house involved (at least just to fabricate etched PCBs), then that's probably a significant additional expense.
> 
> But yes, the heatsink remains a major issue. I'm still waiting for a machinist to step up and say "no problem!".


Have fun with that!!

I've got several really nice, modular designs for car audio amplifiers, but can't afford to have the heatsinks manufactured. I do PCB layout and have a PCB manufacturer in China plus a local company do the stuffing. 

This is how I'm having the Behringer supplies made (which work great, BTW).

Basically, you need investors willing to take a chance on the tiny DIY mobile audio market. Some of us are diehards, but many will just buy something cheaper that doesn't do the job as well. Trust me, I've thought long and hard about this exact idea. If someone wants to throw $100K at this idea (individually or collectively) with a small hope of making it big time, then by all means contact me and I'll pass the idea along to my business advisor.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

ghart999 said:


> Well I am a patent attorney, so when we get this figured out we can patent the idea and license it to manufacturer X to build.
> 
> Of course it looks like we will have about 100 inventors on the patent. lol


The idea of buss connection for multiple amps to link up to is mine. I've had this figured out for a long time now. My drawings prove the theory. So, feel free to PM me on the matter if you like. Granted, lots of other inventions are necessary to complete the design, but this modular concept has always been a big thing to me.


----------



## ghart999 (Feb 8, 2006)

fourthmeal said:


> The idea of buss connection for multiple amps to link up to is mine. I've had this figured out for a long time now. My drawings prove the theory. So, feel free to PM me on the matter if you like. Granted, lots of other inventions are necessary to complete the design, but this modular concept has always been a big thing to me.


Technically there could be multiple inventions and hence patents that could come out of this if we ever wanted to go that far with it. Of course for all we know this idea was patented 10 years ago and was just never utilized by the owner of the patent(s).


----------



## Thumper26 (Sep 23, 2005)

i like those lunar Chassis a lot. The fan would be a nice bonus as well...


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

ghart999 said:


> Technically there could be multiple inventions and hence patents that could come out of this if we ever wanted to go that far with it. Of course for all we know this idea was patented 10 years ago and was just never utilized by the owner of the patent(s).


word. i forgot about that.


----------



## ghart999 (Feb 8, 2006)

Of course I can also trademark the name Werewolf Amps...


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

There we go!
We've got a lawyer to do the legal stuff, heatsink designer, couple of experts here.
Now, who's got $$$?


----------



## ghart999 (Feb 8, 2006)

I got $11.87 to contribute for 1 share of stock in Werewolf, Inc.


----------



## vactor (Oct 27, 2005)

i swear that *Canton *made some modular amps back in the late 1980's and early 90's. cannot remember the name or the specs, but i know that they sold amp "chassis" that would hold a number pf plug in "modules" that were of various power ratings, and thus you could "build" your own multi channel amplifier using a chassis (or however many you wanted) and then the right plug in "modules" for each or each set of channle.s there's GOT to be someone who is old school who remembers these things, right?


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

Tn_Audiophile said:


> The Heatsink that Lunar uses is very good at handleing heat...
> 
> Here are some pictures:


How do you know that? Have you done any thermodynamics calculations on that or are you taking their word? They have a fan placed in the middle of the chassis doing most a part of the work. The lunar amp heatsink is probably really expensive to produce.

I think a cheaper solution might be the forced cooling used on the XTANT amps like the 603 and such if you wanted to go that route. They use a very simple heatsink. Just need to find a better way to secure the board.


----------



## zukiaudio (Jan 31, 2007)

vactor said:


> i swear that Cantoon made some modular amps back in the late 1980's and early 90's. cannot remember the name or the specs, but i know that they sold amp "chassis" that would hold a number pf plug in "modules" that were of various power ratings, and thus you could "build" your own multi channel amplifier using a chassis (or however many you wanted) and then the right plug in "modules" for each or each set of channle.s there's GOT to be someone who is old school who remembers these things, right?



the amplifier design was called 

canton mainframe modular autosound amplifier system

it had smaller 2 channel modules which were rated up to 15 watts x 2 and bigger single channel modules which were rated up to 100 watts x1 each.

the mainframes were 3 or 5 module capable, and also contained crossover and power supply modules as well as cables to join each module.


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

durwood said:


> How do you know that? Have you done any thermodynamics calculations on that or are you taking their word? They have a fan placed in the middle of the chassis doing most a part of the work. The lunar amp heatsink is probably really expensive to produce.
> 
> I think a cheaper solution might be the forced cooling used on the XTANT amps like the 603 and such if you wanted to go that route. They use a very simple heatsink. Just need to find a better way to secure the board.


The heatsink pictured is an interesting design, but not very good for convection thermal transfer. I'd like to see how airflow can move past the board without an inlet duct - or is that on the bottom, too?

Xtant has done it well for cheap. A simple extrusion and fan makes a great heatsink - especially in a car because there is less dust in the air than in a home or professional environment. You should have a fan monitoring circuit online in the case of failure, but most car amps have that covered by way of thermal overload protection.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

Just wait...I'll have a new drawing up by tonight. I think I nailed it.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

durwood said:


> How do you know that? Have you done any thermodynamics calculations on that or are you taking their word? They have a fan placed in the middle of the chassis doing most a part of the work. The lunar amp heatsink is probably really expensive to produce.
> 
> I think a cheaper solution might be the forced cooling used on the XTANT amps like the 603 and such if you wanted to go that route. They use a very simple heatsink. Just need to find a better way to secure the board.


I could not agree more, keep the extrusion ugly as hell and simple.. then cover it up with some bling or anti-bling.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

This is before I put the covers on it.

This does show the heatsink though. Easy but effective, IMO.









Here's the ass of it.


----------



## kappa546 (Apr 11, 2005)

i completely agree with the fan... best way to cut costs without sacrificing integrity.


----------



## SOHCKing03 (Nov 21, 2006)

I like.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

I think before you put too much effort into designing the heatsink, you need to have some idea about where all the hot stuff is going. Are they going to be mounted on the underside of the PCB (top of the chassis) or the sides? Both? What kind of package will the output devices be in? If you use TO-3, are you going to have to use thicker "shelves" in which to mount them on?

Personally, I don't see enough metal in your pictures to make me happy! 



kappa546 said:


> i completely agree with the fan... best way to cut costs without sacrificing integrity.


A fan? Where's the "gagging" smiley?


----------



## kappa546 (Apr 11, 2005)

eh whatever take a look at LP's heatsinks then, huge amounts of fins and still manage a decent size for the power. either way it doesnt matter to me as i doubt i'll be jumping in on these... a fan sounds sensible though but what do i know


----------



## NaamanF (Jan 18, 2006)

Or we could just water cool it with an external radiator.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

Yes, mount the PCB upside down. There is plenty of metal here! Remember, this would be a tiny 25W x 2 in this example, simple scale up for the bigger amps. Here's some refined pics of how it COULD be. Just throwing ideas out in the arena.










Back side.











I think a fan is a bad idea if you are running lots of amps. Maybe on the heavy hitter mono amps though.

Also, keep in mind, I'm not an amp designer, I'm working with asthetics, and other designs I've seen work. There is a lot of metal in this extrusion though. I'd imagine you have more space then needed, even with just the top and back plate mounted.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

But those fins are deep. The fins on that amp look like a mid 90s PPI amp.



kappa546 said:


> eh whatever take a look at LP's heatsinks then, huge amounts of fins and still manage a decent size for the power. either way it doesnt matter to me as i doubt i'll be jumping in on these... a fan sounds sensible though but what do i know


----------



## kappa546 (Apr 11, 2005)

yea but i think people are more worried about an extra 3" of length to achieve the same surface area rather than an extra .5" height throughout.

now that i think about the fan idea, it would probably be pretty difficult to implement something effective with the modular design.

fourthmeal: take Linear Power heatsinks as a model, eliminate the middle portion for the name plate and have continuous fins. seems kind of silly to waste real estate advertising equipment that no one will recognize. hahaha it's funny that by following the opposite logic no one mistakes a "simple" linear power amplifier


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

kappa546 said:


> eh whatever take a look at LP's heatsinks then, huge amounts of fins and still manage a decent size for the power. either way it doesnt matter to me as i doubt i'll be jumping in on these... a fan sounds sensible though but what do i know


I hate fans, I'd rather see nothing but heatsink, but I know a big chunk of aluminum is not cheap. So a fan will cut costs drastically. I was using the xtants as a model becuse you can mount them side by side and the fans/heatsinks match up and you get continuous flow through. It would work wit the modular idea if you left ventilation holes on both of the sides just as xtant did.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

kappa546 said:


> yea but i think people are more worried about an extra 3" of length to achieve the same surface area rather than an extra .5" height throughout.
> 
> now that i think about the fan idea, it would probably be pretty difficult to implement something effective with the modular design.
> 
> fourthmeal: take Linear Power heatsinks as a model, eliminate the middle portion for the name plate and have continuous fins. seems kind of silly to waste real estate advertising equipment that no one will recognize. hahaha it's funny that by following the opposite logic no one mistakes a "simple" linear power amplifier


Don't forget that the purpose of the center portion on the top plate is to have a removable, slideable (via those channels) logo, under which is a few access screws to reach the main gain, crossover, etc. So, we need that. Besides, I couldn't imagine that you'd need more surface area to cool. Take this shape, and extrude it to an 8" instead of 5 (which is what you see in the pics), and you have a massive heat sink. The width of it would depend on the wattage ratings, and we can basically go as wide as we need. 

What do you guys think of the translucent covers? It was a thought...


----------



## kappa546 (Apr 11, 2005)

didnt realize something would liek beneath that but either way, make it smaller. you dont 3" of access area for a few knobs. i would definitely accomodate as much heat dissipation capability as possible.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

fourthmeal said:


> Don't forget that the purpose of the center portion on the top plate is to have a removable, slideable (via those channels) logo, under which is a few access screws to reach the main gain, crossover, etc. So, we need that. Besides, I couldn't imagine that you'd need more surface area to cool. Take this shape, and extrude it to an 8" instead of 5 (which is what you see in the pics), and you have a massive heat sink. The width of it would depend on the wattage ratings, and we can basically go as wide as we need.
> 
> What do you guys think of the translucent covers? It was a thought...


Your drawing kicks a$$!!
Just a thought, IMP, having over 100s of amps, I like when the gains are also on the same side on rca/power to cut cost.
Your idea is hella cool though, but it might up the cost some more...(that removeable top plate)


----------



## Genxx (Mar 18, 2007)

fourthmeal-I like your design. Could make it where the translucent covers are removable. So if you feel like having them cool if not then cool to. You can change the looks that way to fit whatever you are trying for astheltically.
I prefer to have all the controls-gain, x-over ect on top of the amp. Most people are doing flush install, false floors. So if the controls are on the end you would have to remove the cover panels to get to the controls and most of us have them in some tight spots to get to controls easily. 

Fans-why not have an preforated area or mesh covered area on the end. With mounting points for a fan of a particular size. Then you can pick up a fan and add it if desired.

Cons to my own idea-If only one end, then will really only circulate heat from a small area, the end modules effeciently. Seems still a little hard to do with a modular design to make it work right. I am sure it would drive the cost up once you start incorporating fans designs into it.

I wish I had all the technical knowledge a lot you have. So I can offer no other advice. But I am learning a lot here about amp internals.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Air movement is a big plus, fan=definately, a quiet, quality, ball bearing fan that will last !

How far would you go with your windows up and no AC?

Honey, the trip is over !!

Heat is the enemy of electronics.

My amp stops playing when I turn it up.

My sub cuts out.

My bass stops when I use my BBe and turn it up.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

IDEA....How about the Power Distribution module has a fan inside of it? This would solve the problem. OR, the endplates (yet undrawn, but I'll get to it) could have push-pull fans in them. It wouldn't cost as much in the end, because I could then go with a simpler heatsink, resulting in less material used, and less crafty building techniques. If we went fan, then I could do more or less what Focal and Brax do, which is a sleek flat top.

I'm all for hiding all the connections. I think hiding them 100% would go a long way towards beautifying the look. 

I'm also all for having a removable top plate to make adjustments. That means a lot when you already have the amps installed.

Thanks for all the kind compliments. You know, Googlesketch is pretty easy to learn, I imagine most of you could do what I'm doing in a short amount of time. It is 1000X easier to learn then, say, a CAD program. download it for free out on the web and play with it, see if you can come up with some good ideas.

http://sketchup.google.com/


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

I REALLY like Chads idea of following the old Xtant design... A tunnel with a Fan at the end that could all be connected for one long tunnel...

Xtant really had a great thing with those original designs...

J


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Tn_Audiophile said:


> I REALLY like Chads idea of following the old Xtant design... A tunnel with a Fan at the end that could all be connected for one long tunnel...
> 
> Xtant really had a great thing with those original designs...
> 
> J


Thnk about it, the extrusion for the sink would be cheap as hell and would not have to be finished. The exterior case could be offered in chrome for bling, black crinkle for people like me, or primered for a custom job (I would probably think about this too!) But it would limit you to a specific frame size which could mean wasted space for those who want less channels. SO MUCH less aluminium would have to be used than if it was one huge extrusion. This would also make it easier to do in kit-form. I really think this idea would drive the costs much lower. Stackable or lego designs are cool but I see problems. A bussing system is the way to future proof it.

****, even adopting a standard! We have this frame, it becomes popular, Alpine decides to make a module-style H701 to snap into the "Wolf Bus", maybe another amp maker decides our modules blow balls, here comes and ARC Wolf Bus module. **** man, you could even have a line of Wolf Bus stiffening caps 

In pro audio API frames and Neve frames are popular, many different companies have adopted the standard. You can pop a Buzz Audio mic pre or compressor right in an API frame with your API preamps and have the best of both worlds.

Oh, and dammit, gains have to be labled in dB of attenuation!!!!!!


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

chad said:


> Oh, and dammit, gains have to be labled in dB of attenuation!!!!!!


Hell ya!


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

Know what tooling costs for a new heatsink design are?

You want old school PPI? $50 per foot, unfinished.


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

Hic said:


> Air movement is a big plus, fan=definately, a quiet, quality, ball bearing fan that will last !


Ball bearing fans are noisier over their lives than sleeve bearing fans.

http://www.comairrotron.com/cooling_fan_noise.shtml


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

ezaudio,

Thank you !

By the way, That is so sweet !!


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

Hic said:


> Air movement is a big plus, fan=definately, a quiet, quality, ball bearing fan that will last !
> 
> How far would you go with your windows up and no AC?
> 
> ...


You can dissipate heat effectively without a fan in many designs.


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

By the way guys.... just for your information...

http://www.macrom.it/EN/amps/extreme-11.htm

J


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Tn_Audiophile said:


> By the way guys.... just for your information...
> 
> http://www.macrom.it/EN/amps/extreme-11.htm
> 
> J


Goddamn they copped onto our idea fast!


----------



## ghart999 (Feb 8, 2006)

Tn_Audiophile said:


> By the way guys.... just for your information...
> 
> http://www.macrom.it/EN/amps/extreme-11.htm
> 
> J


Damn - I guess it does already exist.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

Not even close. It isn't modular. It has a bridge that connects one to another, and POWER SUPPLY AKA big capacitor. The DSP looks good though.


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

I think the Macrom DSP is the same as the Zapco...


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

The more I think about that xtant amp, the more me likey!!
One fan to push, one fan to pull..
This practically will reduce the heatsink cost significantly. Just throw in a case to cover it, or maybe a thick, mash case like milbert's..

Chad is the man!!


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

dual700 said:


> The more I think about that xtant amp, the more me likey!!
> One fan to push, one fan to pull..
> This practically will reduce the heatsink cost significantly. Just throw in a case to cover it, or maybe a thick, mash case like milbert's..
> 
> Chad is the man!!


Sometimes a push/pull can hinder. It's often times better to have 2 pushing or 2 pulling. The air... it spins, and develops weird currents.....

Many pro amps use a bit of a V and shove air down the wide side, many designers have found this to work rather well.

As for me being the man... naawwww, I'm just a cheapskate :blush:


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

Think about chad, we could do a push-pull because of the modular end-cap concept. 

I'm moving to a new apartment for the next few days, so I may not be around too much,...don't worry, I'm hatching ideas for you guys, ...man I love think-tanks like this one.


----------



## Jiggad369 (Aug 18, 2006)

Stop talking and build something, would ya?


----------



## kappa546 (Apr 11, 2005)

instead of designing prematurely why doesnt someone investigate what it'll take to get this started


----------



## Cancerkazoo (Jul 21, 2006)

Making the extrusion to fit a standard board size would be nice. 200mm between output transistor mounting area and the lower input panel area would be nice, also selling extrusions to the DIYer could net some $$. You could panelize amp channels on a full size PCB there and mount it right up.
cheap DS PCBs


----------



## 03blueSI (Feb 5, 2006)

dual700 said:


> We need:
> A big 6 channels that is staggered for full active set up for DIYMA community.
> 1. Affordable
> 2. Built is great (we know it will)
> ...



How about tripath or some sort of Class G or Class H or some sort of hybrid design?


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

Olimex isn't as cheap as many folks think...

Then, who builds them? At what price?

Save on heatsinking. Go with UcD amplifiers.

http://hypex.nl/


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

So, let's start looking at suppliers.
Oh, here's one. 


http://www.tunpohk.com/cp.php?catid=11&nowmenuid=2005&cpath=0011:

Find all those amplifiers' designers in one place!

Arc Audio (surprised?)
http://www.tunpohk.com/cp_detail.php?id=926&nowmenuid=2005&cpath=0011:0230:&catid=11
Cerwin-Vega
Clarion
Crossfire
Performance Teknique
US Amps
Dragster Audio
Profile 
Kenwood

...and countless other small label OEMs. Mix and match your PCBs and heatsinks.
Want to start a car audio company? Order a few samples, send in your artwork - and they'll do the rest.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

Nice find, EZaudio!!!


----------



## low (Jun 2, 2005)

okay if this goes through...its gotta have to3 output devices...*cough*


----------



## low (Jun 2, 2005)

aww man, definitely a nice find on the amp heatsinks, lol!


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

low said:


> okay if this goes through...its gotta have to3 output devices...*cough*


How 'bout TO3-P's?

Metal can TO3's are going away


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

what are some good T03-P's anyway? Does any mfg make ones similar to the old Toshiba ones?


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

dual700 said:


> Nice find, EZaudio!!!


I try to shy away from tooting my own horn, but I've already been down this road. 

Building a car amplifier from scratch for resale is nearly impossible. You will be eaten alive and the amplifier will cost a lot more than anyone will want to pay. 
It probably won't work the first time.
Or the second time.

Once you've spent about $15K in heatsink tooling costs and NRE, you need to find someone that can build an amplifier and a 12V switching power supply. This knowledge isn't cheap and a lot of engineers don't have what it takes to properly build them so they don't blow up. Then, someone has to decide what features the amp will or will not have. That could take a year if everyone that reads this thread has an opinion (and I know you do). 

Then you've got circuit layout and fabrication. A design firm charges $130/hr to do layout. Assemblers. Packaging. Accounting. Sales...

Having fun yet?

Ask Sundown Audio's owner. Arc Audio. Audiopipe. Avionixx...any of these guys will tell you (if they're being honest) that they couldn't afford to tool up their own product lines. It doesn't cost a fortune to start a company with rebranding. 

My first exposure to this was in 1992 when a friend "heard from a friend" about "The POWER!" subs being sold by "some guy" in Des Moines, IA. I visited the gentleman who claimed to have speakers "just like Kickers" for some $80 each for a 12" driver. He was buying them from Eminence or Creedence and putting his label on the dustcap and a sticker on the magnet. 100pc minimum. You can still do this today.

So, in short - you guys want to build a killer amplifier but you need to understand that there are already pretty good designs out there. If you've got a different concept of modularity, then go get a patent on the chassis and use someone's amplifier design. You'll still be unique even if the guts tell a differnt story.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

I was under the impression that people didn't want to build one for resale. That it was for the few of us in this forum that want to go the route. You can essentially do it all by hand in kit form without having to incur the costs of bringing manufacturing into it. Except MAYBE a group buy on PCBs.

The major consideration is the heatsink. And I think people are going about things all wrong with this CAD stuff. You use whatever heatsink you can get for cheap. There are people up on ebay that sell heatsink material for reasonable prices, and many will cut it for free. Get in good with a machinist and he can make the other sides. Or maybe some of you know how to do it. Drill out the holes for the connectors yourself.

There's work involved for those who want to do it. But that's what I thought the *DIY* amp was all about anyway.


----------



## Cancerkazoo (Jul 21, 2006)

THIS + gainclones would make the easiest DIY amp imho. 4 bridged lm4780 cards would = 4 x 120 watts or lm3886s for 68 watts per however many cards you build. With 2 PSUs, or maybe a bigger torroid and double the mosfets, you could support 68 x 4 + 120 x 2. Anyone more electronically inclined know if the SG3525 can support enough current to switch twice the amount of mosfets?


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

Cancerkazoo said:


> THIS + gainclones would make the easiest DIY amp imho. 4 bridged lm4780 cards would = 4 x 120 watts or lm3886s for 68 watts per however many cards you build. With 2 PSUs, or maybe a bigger torroid and double the mosfets, you could support 68 x 4 + 120 x 2. Anyone more electronically inclined know if the SG3525 can support enough current to switch twice the amount of mosfets?


While it can support the current _in theory_, it cannot in practice. I wouldn't use the SG3525 anyway, unless you have some specific reasons. The TL494CN is much less expensive and will do pretty much the same thing. Either way, you're looking at an outboard "speed up" circuit that can dump lots of Ciss current into those FETs for cool running operation. In fact, I don't think I'd run four FETs without a totem-output driver. I just prefer keeping my supplies ultra stable.

With all those channels, though, I'd be inclined to run either multiple or multi-tap transformers and a regulated supply. Regulated because the chips themselves have an upper limit and run best when limited voltage-wise into low impedance loads.


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

MarkZ said:


> I was under the impression that people didn't want to build one for resale. That it was for the few of us in this forum that want to go the route. You can essentially do it all by hand in kit form without having to incur the costs of bringing manufacturing into it. Except MAYBE a group buy on PCBs.
> 
> The major consideration is the heatsink. And I think people are going about things all wrong with this CAD stuff. You use whatever heatsink you can get for cheap. There are people up on ebay that sell heatsink material for reasonable prices, and many will cut it for free. Get in good with a machinist and he can make the other sides. Or maybe some of you know how to do it. Drill out the holes for the connectors yourself.
> 
> There's work involved for those who want to do it. But that's what I thought the *DIY* amp was all about anyway.



OK, well then making a bunch of PCBs with a good design on it is fairly simple. I bought about 200 Pioneer amplifier toroids for a DIY car amplifier I've been toying with. They're not real high power, but are good for a two channel "Gainclone" style car amp. I'm not so sure I'm going to pursue the whole idea, unless someone can give me a good reason to.


----------



## 300Z (Mar 20, 2005)

Cancerkazoo said:


> THIS + gainclones would make the easiest DIY amp imho. 4 bridged lm4780 cards would = 4 x 120 watts or lm3886s for 68 watts per however many cards you build. With 2 PSUs, or maybe a bigger torroid and double the mosfets, you could support 68 x 4 + 120 x 2. Anyone more electronically inclined know if the SG3525 can support enough current to switch twice the amount of mosfets?


This is pretty much what I was going to do ~2 years ago, but at the time my schedule was super busy and I had very little spare time so I gave up on the idea... then my dad was going to design me a 5 ch amp and I would build it myself but our ideas and goals were a little different and I didn't knew where to get some of the parts needed to build the amp and so I ended giving up on that too.
But now that I know where to get a lot of the parts needed and have some spare time perhaps I'll get started working on this project... 

To me I would want a high efficiency amp, most likely a class G design. With different power output per channel, like ~40x2 @8ohm, ~100x2 @4ohm and 250x1 @4ohm is all I need. But I need some processing too.

Ok, so who is gonna be the first one to get their amp done?  
Gotta call my dad for some help...


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

300Z said:


> This is pretty much what I was going to do ~2 years ago, but at the time my schedule was super busy and I had very little spare time so I gave up on the idea... then my dad was going to design me a 5 ch amp and I would build it myself but our ideas and goals were a little different and I didn't knew where to get some of the parts needed to build the amp and so I ended giving up on that too.
> But now that I know where to get a lot of the parts needed and have some spare time perhaps I'll get started working on this project...
> 
> To me I would want a high efficiency amp, most likely a class G design. With different power output per channel, like ~40x2 @8ohm, ~100x2 @4ohm and 250x1 @4ohm is all I need. But I need some processing too.
> ...


I don't think you need separate power output requirements for those three configurations. 40x2 @ 8 ohms is close to 100x2 @ 4 ohms already. And 250x1 @ 4 ohms could just be a bridged pair using the same Vrails.


----------



## 300Z (Mar 20, 2005)

MarkZ said:


> I don't think you need separate power output requirements for those three configurations. 40x2 @ 8 ohms is close to 100x2 @ 4 ohms already. And 250x1 @ 4 ohms could just be a bridged pair using the same Vrails.


True...


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

durwood said:


> what are some good T03-P's anyway? Does any mfg make ones similar to the old Toshiba ones?


there are some good ones out there, I can't remember numbers now but I'll look. Some of the new ones can handle some insane voltages!


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

300Z said:


> This is pretty much what I was going to do ~2 years ago, but at the time my schedule was super busy and I had very little spare time so I gave up on the idea... then my dad was going to design me a 5 ch amp and I would build it myself but our ideas and goals were a little different and I didn't knew where to get some of the parts needed to build the amp and so I ended giving up on that too.
> But now that I know where to get a lot of the parts needed and have some spare time perhaps I'll get started working on this project...
> 
> To me I would want a high efficiency amp, most likely a class G design. With different power output per channel, like ~40x2 @8ohm, ~100x2 @4ohm and 250x1 @4ohm is all I need. But I need some processing too.
> ...



Hi, do you spend time over at the diyaudio.com board? Did you buy some toroids from that kid who claimed to be in partnership with the guy that started Synopsis? I got some, too, but didn't do anything with them...


----------



## 300Z (Mar 20, 2005)

ezaudio said:


> Hi, do you spend time over at the diyaudio.com board? Did you buy some toroids from that kid who claimed to be in partnership with the guy that started Synopsis? I got some, too, but didn't do anything with them...


I'm a member over diyaudio.com too but I don't check the forum very often. And no, I haven't got any toroids from anyone... at least not yet.


----------



## phatredpt (Feb 22, 2006)

Hopefully this isn't TOO far off topic....
Has anyone ever attempted to reverse-engineer any of the Linear Power designs?
Just curious....


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

phatredpt said:


> Hopefully this isn't TOO far off topic....
> Has anyone ever attempted to reverse-engineer any of the Linear Power designs?
> Just curious....


Those amps were built to sound good and last long, as you know 

So, consequently, probably not a 21rst century type of amp.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Hic said:


> Those amps were built to sound good and last long, as you know
> 
> So, consequently, probably not a 21rst century type of amp.


Quote of the day right there folks and it's only 8:30AM here!


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

phatredpt said:


> Hopefully this isn't TOO far off topic....
> Has anyone ever attempted to reverse-engineer any of the Linear Power designs?
> Just curious....


Linear Power amps are quite basic, like a US Amps design (the old stuff). Their simple implementation is quite powerful, but not really low distortion. Bottom line is, they sound great, but how do they do it?

*The following is My Opinion.*

The front-end preamp/processing. 
Most amplifiers have a low end preamp that really destroys the S/N ratio and has lots of odd-order distortion properties, input latchup, oscillations and other well documented oddities. In fact, most preamp/crossovers on car audio amplifiers are very ill-designed and not matched to the amplifier at all. Linear Power used quality front end components, and very few of them. No internal crossovers (old stuff, guys). 

Gain imbalance is a biggie with most amps using dual-gang pots with poor interchannel tracking. Car audio magazines used to post these results, but they just don't anymore. I think car amps were getting to be too poor-quality to post these results, so the pressure from big manufacturer's ad departments made the editors dumb down those tech writeups.
All these guys have to say is "it sounds good" and give it some nearly meaningless score and suddenly the winning company is Hot Sh*t. 
It's the Stereophile Effect.

Oh, I got off topic. But it's probably still relevant to some degree...


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

I'm working on a fan-cooled tunnel style setup, to simplify design. Xtant FTW. Now, I guess MTX is doing the same thing.


----------



## low (Jun 2, 2005)

ezaudio said:


> Linear Power amps are quite basic, like a US Amps design (the old stuff). Their simple implementation is quite powerful, but not really low distortion. Bottom line is, they sound great, but how do they do it?
> 
> *The following is My Opinion.*
> 
> ...


darn, so it wasnt those TO3s that made them so badass??


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

fourthmeal said:


> I'm working on a fan-cooled tunnel style setup, to simplify design. Xtant FTW. Now, I guess MTX is doing the same thing.



Nice! I found that Aavid-Thermalloy has some nice, small (2.5" square) tunnels that use their Max-Clip system. I will have to get some samples in to see what can be done.


----------



## kappa546 (Apr 11, 2005)

phatredpt said:


> Hopefully this isn't TOO far off topic....
> Has anyone ever attempted to reverse-engineer any of the Linear Power designs?
> Just curious....


now thats something i'd be interested in. finding some of the better designs to copy however would be hard. DPS and HV series are a must.


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

WOW this thread died on the vine !


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Tn_Audiophile said:


> WOW this thread died on the vine !


The server puked, we kinda started over I feel


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

We shall see....

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16048&highlight=choose


----------



## GaryDavis (Jul 18, 2007)

I'm a long time reader, however I finally took the time to register today. I would love to see this into fruition. Sounds like it would be a great amp to own.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

I'll tell you why it hasn't kept going:

Too many _can't do_ attitudes. Also, WAY too many cooks in the kitchen. I've offered my help in design and put out a few different styles, but I'm still working on the fan-cooled tunnel option. One big problem I keep having with my sketch program is that I'm starting to reach critical mass when it comes to polygons. I may be getting too detailed for this program.



Oh yah, the server sucked for a while, too.


----------



## SOHCKing03 (Nov 21, 2006)

Well how about we start putting people in different "positions". Someone should focus on the design of the heatsink/casing, someone in charge of designing the power supply, someone in charge of finances, etc etc. Then others of us can help give suggestions and even design things on our own and bring them to the table. So let's start having people nominate other people for "positions" or you can nominate yourself. They may accept the nominate or resfuse it.

I nominate fourthmeal as head designer of heatsink/casing. I also nominate Chad as a designer of the PCB. Anyone else wanna step up to the plate?

-Brad


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

SOHCKing03 said:


> Well how about we start putting people in different "positions". Someone should focus on the design of the heatsink/casing, someone in charge of designing the power supply, someone in charge of finances, etc etc. Then others of us can help give suggestions and even design things on our own and bring them to the table. So let's start having people nominate other people for "positions" or you can nominate yourself. They may accept the nominate or resfuse it.
> 
> I nominate fourthmeal as head designer of heatsink/casing. I also nominate Chad as a designer of the PCB. Anyone else wanna step up to the plate?
> 
> -Brad


I can always do amp war #4 like the old days... 
But hopefully no more threats/wishing me to die, though...


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

if anyone wants to do something revolutionary with the sink design:

endcaps and amp links were the 90's solution. Alpine has a novel concept of stackability for a small footprint if that suits the install needs. Side by side the integration is terrible.

If you are looking for something highly modular, the sinks will be linkable in multiple directions. This means all amp controls and wiring is on one side of the sink (which can be good or bad), and the sections can stack in any way. PDX style, side to side, even top to bottom. Think legos.

Of course the processor has to be able to fit inside. This suggests a sink that is large enough to fit a disassembled 701, since thats what most folks here will be running anyways. allowing for another ampheatsink to fit into the stack for this purpose.

There should be no need for links, covers, or any alternate peices. specify the number of sinks desired. One size fits all.


----------



## forty5cal1911 (Sep 11, 2006)

I think a lot of people think there is some magic that will happen to get this off the ground. First of all is it even feasible with such a limited number of people REALLY interested (I am one of them). What kind of investment are we talking about? $10,000 $20,000 more than that, less than that? Maybe zuki or sundownz could chime in here possibly even JasonPaul of Cadence to let us know realistically what we would be looking at. If you are talking outsourcing to an overseas build house there will be a minimum run of how many units? What's the break even point and would the money be needed up front (of course). Are you going to do r&d and test pre-production units? If so there will be additional expense. If this is to be seriously considered I'm with SOHCking people need specifically designated roles or nothing will be accomplished.

Just tryin' to light a fire under some asses


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

Here's some pics of a fan-cooled setup. Finally got it to work.

I can't get my pics to download to my main pic server, so I just ran them here.


----------



## Sinfoni_USA (Mar 9, 2005)

Fourthmeal: 
Nice ideas... keep them coming...


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

forty5cal1911 said:


> I think a lot of people think there is some magic that will happen to get this off the ground.


It's not gonna happen. I guarantee. It's just a fun excercise in design.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

Whiterabbit said:


> It's not gonna happen. I guarantee. It's just a fun excercise in design.


It is THIS attitude I was talking about. You tell me something: Just how many successful entrepreneurs (sp?) had the same attitude as that? Zero.

Don't guarantee me anything with that type of pessimism.

We all want different things, so I can assure you it will take compromise, but it isn't out of reach. Stamping steel, extruding aluminum, making PCB's...its not out of question. It is tough though, so contribute if you think it will help.


----------



## arrogantt (May 26, 2007)

please tell me the design concept is still under way!


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

Pessimism killed my enthusiasm, and no one responded, so I just LIG. But I've made about 20 different cases on my sketch program.


----------



## 300Z (Mar 20, 2005)

fourthmeal said:


> Pessimism killed my enthusiasm, and no one responded.


I just haven't had the time do much of anything lately but this still one of my projects to build... Right I'm still going back and forward exchanging ideas with my dad on which is the best way to go...


----------



## SQ_Bronco (Jul 31, 2005)

bump? this thread came out and died while I was on "vacation" from car audio (june-september), so I missed it; I'd love to see it get going again.

I believe in keeping things simple. If we were to design each module to be [email protected], bridgeable, and 2 ohm stable, and had either an impedance matching transformer on board or a jumper selection on a dual-voltage power supply transformer like on old LP amps (ie 5002iq, 8002SW), you could use the same module to do either:

[email protected] 4 (or 8, using IM transformer)
[email protected] 2 (or 4, using IM transformer)
1x300 bridged @ either 4 or 8

We wouldn't have to worry about different rail voltages from a main power supply; one module would meet all our needs except the subwoofer amp (and even that might be doable if we make the modules strappable or use dual-VC subs). 4 modules would then give us:

2x75 (tweeters)
2x150 (midrange)
2x300 (midbass)

Estimating the amp heatsink requirements based off of the fins used on the zapco studio 150 amp, which doesn't get hot bridged into 4 ohms, we'd need about 350 in^2 of heat sink per module. Much less if we do the forced cooling thing (my undergraduate degree was in aero engr with a heat transfer concentration, so I could do the math on the exact required heat sink dimensions if we get far enough along...)

To solve the heatsink problem, Rod Elliott comes through for us:

http://sound.westhost.com/articles/diy-heatsink.htm

Who needs an extrusion? 350 in^2 is 8 2"x11" pieces of 20 gauge steel bolted together- about $10 at home depot, plus the cutting costs.


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

too big. I think the best solution for simple is to make a VERY VERY small 1 channel amp at XXX watts. Pick what you will for output. The amp will be stackable and the terminals will allow for easy strapping together without being a cluge of wire.

for the stackability, itll be like legos. must be able to stack them vertically, side by side, front to back, etc. All to allow for most appropriate fitment for the application.

simply buy as many as you need for your car. Must be reasonably priced, as many cars will need more than a half dozen.


----------



## DonutHands (Jan 27, 2006)

i want as many channels as possible in as small a package as possible. 

somthing like a 10ch staggered power full range class d amp. class d is the future, smaller is better, the end. no one will buy a 4 ft long amp these days.


----------



## bigabe (May 1, 2007)

It'd be nice if there was some little tiny strappable 100w mono amp out there. No bells, no whistles, just a clean little amp. Need more power?? Strap two together and there you go... mo powa...


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

Whiterabbit said:


> too big. I think the best solution for simple is to make a VERY VERY small 1 channel amp at XXX watts. Pick what you will for output. The amp will be stackable and the terminals will allow for easy strapping together without being a cluge of wire.
> 
> for the stackability, itll be like legos. must be able to stack them vertically, side by side, front to back, etc. All to allow for most appropriate fitment for the application.
> 
> simply buy as many as you need for your car. Must be reasonably priced, as many cars will need more than a half dozen.



Hee Hee Hee.


----------



## SQ_Bronco (Jul 31, 2005)

Whiterabbit said:


> too big.


What is too big? I didn't really give any dimensions yet.

Based off of the studio150, if we're clever with the amplifier layout we should be able to put together a 6-channel amp that does what I described above and make it fit in a 24"x11" package, maybe less- basically the same size as an old orion sub amp. It's only 1150 watts, after all... I guess you could also do two 12"x11", stacked SH-1 style, if the length was really that big of a deal.


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

24x11 and 6 channel means each amp separated out would be 6x8. thats too big. and 24x11 is WAY too big.

to pull an Apple Computer on a designer, I'm looking at 4x4x1.5. Certainly no thicker, would be better to be an inch thick. 5x5 would be workable.

at 5x5, 8 channels worth is 20"x10"x1.5". That is OK. Works for a rear deck. But for those of us using an alternate location, say the small side of a sub box, thats too big. Fortunately we could stack two sets of 4 on top of each other and have the amp be 10x10x3. That is OK. But those of us who want a different location, say in the spare tire well may have to use a different configuration. Say stack two rows of four. The footprint is 10x5x 6" tall. That's OK. But those of us who stack the amps in, say, the rear quarterpanel may have LESS footprint room! Stack everything. Say, 5x5x 12" tall. That's OK. Lets say you've got a full size spare but no additional room in the tire well. Maybe the amp will fit around the rim of the tirewell and you can lay all the amps out like petals on a flower around the spare tire.

See how powerful this configuration is?  Imagine going through the calculations again, but using an amp thats 4x4x1


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

so lets say the thing is configured much like a Brick DC-DC converter. In the corners there are holes. Thats it, just holes. stacks can be made using allthread or long bolts, 10-32 or whatever size they end up being. for side to side stacking screws can be used, or clips can be made.

is heat an issue? amps need clearance? can buy 1/4" aluminum spacers to place between the amps and between mounting surfaces.

With the holes in the corners of the chassis, this also eliminates mounting feet or mounting tabs. They bend and break anyways.

we can get as crazy or mundane as we want with electrical mounting tabs. I dont see anything wrong with standard screw terminals that require the use of forks anyways. No amp would need better than 10 gauge for power, 8 gauge for the overkill installer. So begone fancy expensive terminals! rings or forks! That also helps keep costs down.


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

frankly I dont care about staggered power. If ONE amp cranked out in production means the product is cheaper, I win in the end. Strapped doesnt mean anything to me either, since I can always buy a DVC subwoofer for more power. each amp should be enough power for one driver on its own.


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

ezaudio said:


> Hee Hee Hee.


Hopefully I didnt take any future wind out of any future sails you may be raising 

But everyone here has to admit form an installers perspective how PRACTICAL that system is. Simply put, something for everywhere!


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

Whiterabbit said:


> Hopefully I didnt take any future wind out of any future sails you may be raising
> 
> But everyone here has to admit form an installers perspective how PRACTICAL that system is. Simply put, something for everywhere!



Not at all. You are blowing the wind into those sales...er...sails.


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

Another vote for a 7 channel amp please. The smaller but the more power the better.


----------



## SQ_Bronco (Jul 31, 2005)

Whiterabbit said:


> See how powerful this configuration is?  Imagine going through the calculations again, but using an amp thats 4x4x1


Well, I'm just not sure how realistic that is. Does a design for an amp that outputs a useful amount of power and fits in a 4"x4"x1" package exist? I was basing my numbers off an existing small-package mass-produced amp I have sitting on a shelf that seemed like a useful model, but if it can be done better, that's great...


----------



## Cancerkazoo (Jul 21, 2006)

Whiterabbit said:


> too big. I think the best solution for simple is to make a VERY VERY small 1 channel amp at XXX watts. Pick what you will for output. The amp will be stackable and the terminals will allow for easy strapping together without being a cluge of wire.
> 
> for the stackability, itll be like legos. must be able to stack them vertically, side by side, front to back, etc. All to allow for most appropriate fitment for the application.
> 
> simply buy as many as you need for your car. Must be reasonably priced, as many cars will need more than a half dozen.


I still think a gainclone board would work great for this.

lm3886 = 68w module.
or a bridged lm4780 = 120w
even a BPA200 (bridge/parallel lm3886s) = 200w

And I believe they all use the same rail voltage.


----------



## Cancerkazoo (Jul 21, 2006)

SQ_Bronco said:


> Well, I'm just not sure how realistic that is. Does a design for an amp that outputs a useful amount of power and fits in a 4"x4"x1" package exist? I was basing my numbers off an existing small-package mass-produced amp I have sitting on a shelf that seemed like a useful model, but if it can be done better, that's great...


And I believe a lm3886 single channel could fit in that size, with a separate 4"x4"x1" PSU module.


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

lets say you have a crapload of money.

the genesis profile 500 watter is TINY. Not 4x4x1, but its about the size of an altomobile Drive 30, give or take. Something like a touch larger than half a sheet of binder paper, and an inch or so thick?

Given that you get 500 rms in that package, Im thinking of basically half that. cut everything in half.

Want smaller? cut everything in fourths. How small then? are we approaching 5x5x1? 4x4x1?

Ever think a powermac could fit in the case it does? How about some of the laptops out there that are practically too small for a CD?

It'll get there


----------



## SQ_Bronco (Jul 31, 2005)

Whiterabbit said:


> lets say you have a crapload of money.
> 
> the genesis profile 500 watter is TINY. Not 4x4x1, but its about the size of an altomobile Drive 30, give or take. Something like a touch larger than half a sheet of binder paper, and an inch or so thick?


The genesis p1 [email protected] sub amp is 11.8"x8.5"x1.5". Is that the one you are talking about?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, or some kind of naysayer (i wouldn't have bumped this thread if that was the role I wanted to play; i want to see this happen), i'm just trying to be practical...



Cancerkazoo said:


> And I believe a lm3886 single channel could fit in that size, with a separate 4"x4"x1" PSU module.



The gainclones are very interesting. It's a shame they don't have a little more power...


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

That's the one. I overestimated the size.

If I asked you for a multi-gigabyte MP3 player with a touch screen thats 2.5"X1.5" and as thick as a couple quarters, would you have called me impractical last year?

If I asked you for a speedy PC the size of a novel, would you have called me impractical last year? 

If I asked you for a laptop the size of a partsexpress catalog, would you have called me impractical last year?

If I asked you for a 150x4 amp smaller than a ream of printer paper, would you have called me impractical two years ago?

If I asked you for a 2 wheel scooter that balenced itself, would you have called me impractical a few years ago?

Do you think I am being impratical?


----------



## ECLIPSEsqfan (Sep 2, 2007)

Whiterabbit said:


> That's the one. I overestimated the size.
> 
> If I asked you for a multi-gigabyte MP3 player with a touch screen thats 2.5"X1.5" and as thick as a couple quarters, would you have called me impractical last year?
> 
> ...




Thats awesome. lol, you sound like a good friend of mine.


----------



## SQ_Bronco (Jul 31, 2005)

Whiterabbit said:


> Do you think I am being impractical?


no, not necessarily; I don't know enough about what is technically possible to know one way or the other. based off the 40-something amps I have in my closet- yes. based off of what might be do-able? Who knows? That's why I'm asking.

cancer's gainclone comments are right on, I think. Check this out: application notes on the BPA-200; it seems very interesting. With 2 chips per board we'd be looking at (i think) the ability to do [email protected]{4,8} or [email protected]{4,8} or 1x [email protected] or [email protected] Just need to work out the power supply and the rest of the configuration. fyi the amplifier chips used are only ~$5.70 each.


----------



## Infinity (Jun 28, 2005)

ezaudio said:


> Not at all. You are blowing the wind into those sales...er...sails.


Sounds like you're thinking along the lines of the old Monolith module-based amps. They did tell me they would still build them, but wouldn't elaborate on size or price.


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

SQ_Bronco said:


> no, not necessarily; I don't know enough about what is technically possible to know one way or the other. based off the 40-something amps I have in my closet- yes. based off of what might be do-able? Who knows? That's why I'm asking.
> 
> cancer's gainclone comments are right on, I think. Check this out: application notes on the BPA-200; it seems very interesting. With 2 chips per board we'd be looking at (i think) the ability to do [email protected]{4,8} or [email protected]{4,8} or 1x [email protected] or [email protected] Just need to work out the power supply and the rest of the configuration. fyi the amplifier chips used are only ~$5.70 each.


Given that I design amplifiers using these chips, I can tell you up front that they are not the best way to go in a car audio amplifier. They are excellent if you are trying to acheive good sound cheaply, but they cannot support typical high inductance car audio loads without exhibiting some pretty adverse effects. The SpiKe protection circuit is designed to limit current to 5A. Into a 4 ohm load, this is 100W. But the actual component cannot deliver that much current without reducing the rail (supply) voltages significantly which reduces available headroom during regular operation. There are enough "gotchas" with this part to rule it out for a serious car audio amp. US Amps tried it (early Merlin), Dr. Crankenstein tried it (M-80...little red amp) and neither lasted very long.


----------



## SQ_Bronco (Jul 31, 2005)

ezaudio said:


> The SpiKe protection circuit is designed to limit current to 5A. Into a 4 ohm load, this is 100W. But the actual component cannot deliver that much current without reducing the rail (supply) voltages significantly which reduces available headroom during regular operation.


But isn't that "per chip"? I thought that that was what the bridged/parallel thing was about?


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

SQ_Bronco said:


> But isn't that "per chip"? I thought that that was what the bridged/parallel thing was about?


Sure, but why? There is no advantage over a discrete amplifier at that power level. It actually costs more than a discrete amplifier to do this and the designer has no control over any factors of the SpiKe circuitry.


----------



## brawas (Jun 30, 2008)

dual700 said:


> I like the idea like ol Blade 6.100 that I had
> It consists of 3 modules, a/b (sorry Chad )
> 6 X 100, 3 separate power supplies, 3 separate power/ground/remote connections, yes it will drive cost a little more but it actually simplifies the design by housing 3 modules under 1 common heatsink.
> I recall it was quite small and skinny...


I have the Blade 6100. Considering selling it. Anyone Interested?


----------



## brawas (Jun 30, 2008)

tristan20 said:


> Lemmie do some testing on it, I had every single blade SE amp except the illusive 6250 yummy, blades are one of my all time favourite amps


I have a 6100 that I want to sell, but I want it to go to someone who appreciates it.


----------

