Bottlehead Forum

Bottlehead Kits => Legacy Kit Products => Paramount => Topic started by: Demsy on May 25, 2014, 05:59:34 PM

Title: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Demsy on May 25, 2014, 05:59:34 PM
I just re-read my older post regarding the 220v Paramount. I asked if there were any steps needed to anticipate the fact that the supplied transformer is 120-240v, while our line voltage here in Indonesia is 220v.

I got this reply from PJ:

"You are probably OK without any changes. The only thing I'd check on is the filament voltage.
When I tested the prototype (I just looked up my notes) I found 5.29 volts DC at 120v/240v. So, proportionally, I'd expect 4.85 volts which is only 3% low - well with even the 5% recommendation, and certainly within the 10% maximum tolerance. A low filament voltage does not becom important until the tube is well worn, so there is plenty of time to make changes if there are any problems. I don't remember what wire is used, but using a larger wire diameter (e.g. 16 gauge) will give the maximum voltage to the actual tube terminals.
If the actual voltage in use is too low for comfort, there are Schottky diodes with a smaller voltage drop than the ones in the kit; a simple change will raise the voltage. But as I said, you have plenty of time - a couple years at least - before you would need to do anything."

And then I read the sticky by PB regarding the additional capacitor between A1 and A4 pins, in case that the filament voltage is low.

I haven't got the chance to check the filament voltage, yet, I run the Paramounts with 230v currently.

But in any case which of the 2 methods should I follow, if my filament voltage turned out to be too low. And are the current 220v transformer different that the ones from 2012, since PJ calculated that even with 220v the filament voltage would stay within 3% of 5.29v (for 300B), at that time.
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Paul Joppa on May 25, 2014, 06:55:54 PM
The capacitor won't change the voltage, it will just reduce the hum (if any) from the filament supply.

It's always a good idea to first check the actual line power voltage, which can vary +/-10% from the nominal value. In some places it is very stable; in others it can vary with the time of day and/or the season - all depending on the electrical system's loads.
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Demsy on May 25, 2014, 07:51:51 PM
Will a low filament voltage cause hum? To my understanding reading the sticky, it is as if the capacitor is a cure for a too low voltage.
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Demsy on May 26, 2014, 01:20:07 AM
I just measured the line voltage, it's 230V and the voltage between the pins A1 & A4 which is indeed very low, 4.45v and 4.49v on the amps.

Please advice the steps needed to bring the filament voltages up, while the line voltage stays at 230v as that is the highest that can be used for the other equipments. PJ, you mentioned using other Schottky diodes with lower voltage drop. Could you help me with the type of those diodes and the necessary steps that I should follow? Or would following PB's advice be sufficient? I lean more towards bringing the voltage up, though.

Thanks in advance
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Paul Joppa on May 26, 2014, 06:46:24 AM
Sorry, I had not read the sticky before. I see some problems with it, so I'll have to consult with PB before we have a solid recommendation. There are several other things that can be done, and once this is resolved we'll put it in the sticky.
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Demsy on May 26, 2014, 02:26:39 PM
Thanks PJ, looking forward to the recommendations
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Demsy on May 28, 2014, 04:56:33 AM
Brought the manual slide regulator from my work, set the output voltage to 240v. Connected the Paramounts and took the voltage between the pins A1 & A4, it's 4.75V and 4.78V. So I would need a line voltage of 250v or even more to have the filament voltage at 5V. What could have been wrong, the transformer?
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Paul Joppa on May 28, 2014, 05:54:36 AM
Your measurement marches what we measured yesterday. There is no fault with either the 120v or the 240v transformers - I was worried there might be so we checked carefully. 4.75v is 5% low, which is well within the normal 10% acceptable variation (though EML for example specifies 3% - not possible without regulation). I have not been able to find an explanation for why the original prototype from 2006 measured 5.27v (we have determined that the power transformer did not change).

We're still working the problem, but meanwhile here is some discussion of how we arrived at this situation and what we are doing about it:

First off, here is the wikipedia article, for further information on this difficult subject:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mains_electricity

As you can see from the article, the emerging widespread 230v standard does not mean that anyone actually has 230v power - most systems are either nominally 220v or 240v, and the approved deviations from nominal have been adjusted to allow the old systems to remain in use.

In the US, over the last couple decades that Bottlehead has been in business, we have mostly heard from customers that their electric power was 120v to 128v, with only a few exceptions. Nevertheless, we design for 120v, which is the standard. When we began to offer the higher voltage, we were mostly expecting english-speaking customers from Europe, so we chose the 240v standard as used in England rather than the 220v. We expected voltages to be mostly higher than the nominal, as is the case in the USA. Voltages that are too high cause much more damage than voltages that are too low.

More recently we have had customers (mostly outside Europe) who have 220v legacy power systems, and have voltages that drop below the nominal 220 as often as they rise above it. This results in a filament voltage that is indeed low enough to worry about. Yesterday we tested some possible solutions that can be fitted to an already-built Paramount, but I want a little more data before making specific recommendations.

In addition, we are gradually changing our designs in various ways to deal with this issue, without imposing higher costs on everyone.
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Demsy on May 28, 2014, 03:30:49 PM
Paul, thanks for your reply. I'm wondering whether you could give me a list of the measurement of the 120V transformer pins, this way I can easily compare it with my 240v transformer under real 240V line voltage. I understand that 4.75V is still within the tolerance but but please understand that I'm looking for the ideal 5V filament voltage.
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: 2wo on May 28, 2014, 04:07:15 PM
You could use a Vairac (adjustable autoformer) to fine tune the incoming line. They go to about 110-120% of input.

Or there is a way to use a low voltage, filament type transformer as a buck-boost, I,m sure I have it in my notes somewhere ;D. Maybe someone has a link...John
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Paul Joppa on May 28, 2014, 08:07:44 PM
Paul, thanks for your reply. I'm wondering whether you could give me a list of the measurement of the 120V transformer pins, this way I can easily compare it with my 240v transformer under real 240V line voltage. I understand that 4.75V is still within the tolerance but but please understand that I'm looking for the ideal 5V filament voltage.
We have done the measurement you describe and the secondary voltages are identical with 120v into the 120v transformer and with 240v into the 240v transformer. The winding resistances are also identical.

Our measurements are not complete yet - we just did enough to know that there is no special problem with the 240v transformer, and to know that the capacitor will work for 2A3s but not for 300Bs. I have a couple other approaches in mind, but I need to test them so I know exactly what to recommend. Unfortunately PSUD does not have good enough models for the diodes we are using, so testing is the only way to get accurate results. I believe I will be able to get you very very close to 5.00v for a range of supply voltages below 250v.
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Demsy on May 29, 2014, 01:12:36 AM
Thanks PJ. It would be real nice if the input voltage could be kept at 230V, that way I don't need the slide regulator. I already have 3 voltages at present, 120V for the Dungeness, 230V for my pre-amps, turntable, CD etc. and at the moment 240V for the Paramounts 8).

Also thank you for your suggestions, 2wo
Title: Power Plant ? ?
Post by: Grainger49 on May 29, 2014, 06:18:28 AM
I'm going to suggest a cleaner and more expensive answer.  Get a PS Audio Power Plant, of any generation.  It can control the output voltage and frequency.
Title: Re: Power Plant ? ?
Post by: Paul Birkeland on May 29, 2014, 09:38:21 AM
I'm going to suggest a cleaner and more expensive answer.  Get a PS Audio Power Plant, of any generation.  It can control the output voltage and frequency.
This isn't really a "clean" approach.  If one wanted to resell their amps later, what are you supposed to tell prospective buyers?

How dirty is your actual power?  How clean is the actual output from the PS audio?
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Grainger49 on May 29, 2014, 10:23:12 AM
I've been using a P300 for 3 or 4 years.  Here is the thread describing the results:  http://bottlehead.com/smf/index.php/topic,1372.msg9575.html#msg9575

I don't buy Bottlehead equipment for its resale value down the road.  Getting the kit price back seems to be a good deal.  I buy it for its value and sound.

I'm afraid I haven't understood your point.  My point was voltage (and frequency) can be adjusted on a Power Plant.  The OP could raise the output voltage for his Paramounts.


Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Demsy on May 29, 2014, 03:25:40 PM
Grainger, our line voltage here is 220v daytime and could go down to 200v at night. For this I already use a 5kVA automatic voltage regulator, which is now set at 220V. I also connected a manual slide regulator, set at 240V, to it. Of course I can bring the voltage up to 250V, but the point is to find out first why the filament voltage is still below the specified 5V even at 240V. I really don't have the desire to keep the chain of regulators in my music room.

Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Grainger49 on May 30, 2014, 01:00:36 AM
Ok, I had not read that you had brought your input to the Paramounts to 240V and still not brought the heaters to spec.  Sorry!

I'd say Paul Joppa will come up with the answer.
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Demsy on June 02, 2014, 04:03:28 PM
PJ, if the line voltage were set 250V, would there be any negative consequences for the transformator and it's other outputs?
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Paul Joppa on June 02, 2014, 07:05:25 PM
>>> "PJ, if the line voltage were set 250V, would there be any negative consequences for the transformator and it's other outputs? "

No, none.

I have developed a preliminary set of recommendations to give the 5.00 volts with line power of 220, 230, 240, and 250v, and interpolation will allow intermediate voltages to be accommodated. I am not yet ready to post them.
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Demsy on June 02, 2014, 10:20:39 PM
Thanks PJ. Good to know that the recommendations are on it's way!
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Demsy on June 16, 2014, 02:30:52 PM
Any progress so far, PJ?
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Doc B. on June 16, 2014, 02:37:14 PM
PJ is away for a week or two.
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Demsy on July 14, 2014, 01:15:51 AM
Hi PJ,
How's the development of the recommendation?
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Paul Joppa on July 14, 2014, 02:38:50 PM
Sorry for the delay; several of us have been absent off and on and out communication is a little haphazard!

I have given Doc B a draft writeup which he will probably post on the site once we are all agreed it's satisfactory. Meanwhile, for the specific problem of a Paramount on 220v, the best solution is fairly simple:

1) Wire the filament power choke as if it were for a 2A3. This will reduce the DC resistance from 0.6 ohms to 0.15 ohms, raising the voltage about 0.55v. The exact change depends on some uncontrollable variables such as the amount and type of distortion on the power line voltage.

2) It will also increase the hum a bit; if this is a problem you can place a 10000uF/10v to 16v cap across the output of the choke (positive to choke terminal 6, negative to terminal 1). This capacitor can be used with any Paramount to reduce the very small residual filament hum.
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Demsy on July 15, 2014, 07:06:37 AM
Will the final solution be the same as what you've written? I'm not comfortable with the increased hum and additional components. I plan to use a high sensitivity (105db) loudspeakers in the near future.
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Paul Birkeland on July 15, 2014, 08:00:17 AM
I'm not comfortable with the increased hum and additional components. I plan to use a high sensitivity (105db) loudspeakers in the near future.

I would recommend trying the choke rewiring.  If it does elevate the hum, then pop the cap across the output of the choke.  (10,000uF/16V)
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Paul Joppa on July 15, 2014, 11:19:09 AM
With 105dB speakers (!) I would certainly add the capacitor. It will then be much quieter than the normal (240v) stock build.

In the proposal I made (the draft article) I tried to avoid using complicated or difficult modifications. The suggested mod will work well *5.00 +/- 2.5%) for voltages in the range 220-230 volts. There are different versions for 230-240v and 240-250v, and the stock circuit is excellent at 250-260v.  In my opinion greater precision is not warranted in light of fluctuations in available power.
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Demsy on July 15, 2014, 02:47:40 PM
Thanks PJ and PB.
Would this apply for both of the 300B and 2A3 tubes?
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Paul Joppa on July 15, 2014, 05:12:34 PM
No, the 2A3 is different and more complicated.
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Demsy on August 04, 2014, 12:24:42 AM
PJ, easiest for me is to bring the line voltage up to 255v instead of the other mods, as you mentioned that for 2A3 it's different and more complicated changes are needed.
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Mach2 on September 10, 2014, 03:36:37 AM
Sorry to hijack this thread, but I'm about to assemble my Paramount 240V 300b kit and I'm more or less in the same situation. Our line voltage here can be stabilized at 220V +/- 5V with a voltage regulator and based on what I have read here it's not ideal for the Paramount kit.

How should I proceed with my build? Should I follow PJ post here, wiring the the choke using the 2A3 scheme and add in the caps later if necessary? Anything else I need to worry about? What should I expect for the resistance and voltage measurement?

Thanks!
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Paul Joppa on September 10, 2014, 11:39:01 AM
The stock circuit, with a 300B, is +/-5% over the range 235v to 260v. The rewired choke is optimal in a 300B version at 225v input, and within +/-5% over the range 215 to 235v.
Title: Re: Paramount 220v version
Post by: Mach2 on September 11, 2014, 06:28:10 PM
The stock circuit, with a 300B, is +/-5% over the range 235v to 260v. The rewired choke is optimal in a 300B version at 225v input, and within +/-5% over the range 215 to 235v.

Thanks, PJ! I'll go ahead with the plan and let you know how it goes.