With the project of the 6-chennal Super Melquiades is about to hit its final stage I might to review my summarizing observations. The 6-chennals Macondo is driven by 6-chennals dedicated DSET Melquiades, that looks like properly orgies for the job. The success of the 6-chennal DSET is unquestionable, though I would not advise anybody to go this route – too much work. The only thing that drove me into this project is a comment of a friend of mine why said: After you finish this 6-chennal DSET you will be done and you will not need to do it again”.

Well, after I finish with 6-chennal Milq and the Injected Macondo I pretty much have no areas to attack or improve in Macondo/Melquiades configuration and I am not planning to undertake any other alternation of that tandem. Still, for a sake of journalistic honesty I would like to outline some aspects of Macondo/ Melquiades that would explore if the circumstance or condition changes. Those directions are NOT on my radars as now but still, from a perspective of the playback system architecture those moments should be named.

1)      I would like to try amorphous core foe my LF transformer. I know, I know, the amorphous core is not LF core but I know what I hear and if I found somebody who would be able to make for me dedicated amorphous LF transformer then I would try.

2)      If I move to a larger room (>4 time larger then I have now) then it is highly likely that the power of 6-chennal Super Melquiades will not be enough to drive Macondo. The LF channel will to much in class A2 (Milq is dead in A2) and the single stage amps will have not enough gain

3)      The Zaratustra II should be tried on bass The Zaratustra’s 200W of class A, the Melquiades’ driver stage with ability to deliver 90A might be an interesting alternative for a class A on DSET’s bass. I put the Zaratustra II project on the back burners for now.

4)      DHT for Macondo MF channel only. This opportunity that I would be welcome to experiment with. The single 6E6P with Milq’s bias now drivers the Vitavox S2 driver and it does very well. Still, if I come across of an interestingly sounding direct heated triode with over 30 times gain then I would certainly dive it a change to drive me MF Vitavox. I do have a spare amorphous OPT for 1kOhm tube – so it should not be so difficult to experiment with it. I do not know the market of the DHT tubes well enough. If someone has your yeas a 25-35 times gain vintage DHT that might give 1-5W power then let me know. The irony is that I kind of preserve a space inside f the 6-chennal Super Melquiades if anything like this come to existence. I personally will not dive into this journey as I very pleased what a single 6E6P does but I will keep my mind open for a single DHT. I will not consider the DHT for other then MF channels.

5)      Changing my LF section, rewirering all 12 drivers in parallel and consequential introduction of another 1.3R dedicated LF output transformer. I see a lot of benefits in a situation when ALL my LF driver are connected in parallel. If I have a space that I would gladly add as few more drivers to my line array….

Since the idea of the Macondo and Super Melquiades is not fulfilled (it took from 2002 to 2008!!!) I am VERY welcome to any practical, theoretical or conceptual critique of the Macondo/DSET design or the implementation.  You do not need to be constrictive – it is my job to distinct BS from a criticism that might has some rational grains…

Paul S wrote:

If a DHT for MF only, what sounds better than a 45?  Best regards, Paul S

Paul S wrote:

I have been surprised that you have not already pursued the Zarathustra for your multi-driver, sealed LF.  From your early descriptions of both, this seemed like a natural pairing and the most likely way to go, to keep the drivers "off the cushion" and also just to handle all that mass.

Zarathustra is a lot of work. I would love to have it built but it will require a lot of labor to do it properly. Anyhow, I would go for all parallel 1.3R bass driver connection before I go for Zarathustra.

Paul S wrote:

If a DHT for MF only, what sounds better than a 45?  I realize it does not meet all your listed criteria but the tube is special in terms of sonics and "immediacy", and as near as I can tell its usual problems result from improper application, eg, "FR".

I did not say that DHT should be “better” people claims the DHT has different sound but I do not believe in stupid audiophile myths. People for years made many-many different DH SETs and then the indirect heated ML-2.0  literally fucked up all  SETs out there. So, where the DTH myths stays?... I kind of know what people like in DHT and not necessary agree with them, though there is an aspect in all of that that I would like to look deeper. I said that might TRY an interesting triode from 30 or 40 but only if I found something that will be able to do one stage gain. My primary interest is not in direct heating but in the sonic advanced of some tubes from 30-40, unfortunately in 30 all tubes were DH.  Not of the 45, 2A3, AD1, 71A, VT52, UV201, 50, ER-226, 525B, UV-227, 56, PX-25, PX4 or anything else like this will do what I need as they have low Mu or high impedance to be used in a single stage. I am not wiling to use two stages for 2W of MF. If I found a high-gain low, impedance DHT then I might give it a chance it to compete with what I get from 6E5P.  If not, then my single 6E6P will do juts fine and I have no motivations or needs to experiment further. Still, I do not think that DHT tubes ever were made with high transconductance… I need to consult with DHT folks.

Wojtek wrote:

I think P.Q and Audio Note wouldn't mind building  a monster custom amorphous bass OPT. Looks like they have the best amorphous transformers on the market now. They're damn expensive .

Peter is not a designer and he would have no idea how to build the transformers that I need. It should have two separate coils with separated primary and secondary, having secondary removable and interchangeable 9I can go away with it for LF only transformer). Since each coil will spread juts across a part of the core then it requires REALLY know what the person does in order to hit the target impedance, particularly considering that the secondary will be a load of ~0.9R. Also, I do not know if amorphous bass is something that I need. Bud told a lot about M3 that looks like more interesting for bass…

Wojtek wrote:

P.Q is not a designer nor he is an "electrician" but Andy Grove who designs circuits and transformers for AN is. I'm sure he'd know very well what you're talking about. Whatever your opinion of AN sound is they have lots of experience with designing transformers for the circuits ,and they have resources for R&D which most of small ,independent winders simply lack.

P.Q is not an “electrician”, he is a marketing buffoon. Anyhow, I do not care or value the AN’s R&D, there are more interesting and more capable places, not to mention that why AN would suddenly experiment with custom designs? As far as I know AN, they experiment ONLY with something that they can steal and to market. A sub 1Ohm, LF-only, 5-7Hz, 20W, with fast core transformer is not something that they will find committal viable as they do not do any DSETs – so I do not think that they might be sufficiently vested inot this project

Wojtek wrote:

I don't think DHT you're looking for exist but you may pitch the idea to Czech manufactureres -they are the most adventurous of the pack  or contact that DIY guy who makes his own tubes.

Actually it is a good idea. I do not know how interesting those Czech guys are in terms of Sound but if they or perhaps somebody eagles feel that it might be a market for high Mu DHT then it might lead to something. As I understand DHT has very small cathode and therefore very small cathode emission. Who knows if the people have objectives of a single stage DHT then they would come up with a special high transconductance version. Unfortunately I am a not a DHT enthusiast and I would not sponsor the R&D toward this end – if somebody will make it I might give it a chance, despite that it would be the contemporary production.  Meanwhile I have more interest in possibility to found high Mu from vintage and “obtainable” triodes. The obtainabilety is an important factor as I like to run my amps brutally and I do not care about the life span of “kinky” vintage tune that I happened fish at eBay. If I would not have a supply of those tubes for 20-30 years then I would not use it.

JJ Triode wrote:

Romy, take a look at EML 30A and its cousins: http://www.emissionlabs.com/datasheets/EML20B.htm

Yep, thanks, JJ. Still the EML 30A has a lot of gain but it has also very high plate impedance as well. As much gain will be gotten by Mu as much gain will be burned into a higher transformer ratio.

JJ Triode wrote:

Really though, I think you should close up the right-hand 6-channel Milq in its present form do any updates to the PS of the left 6cM that you feel are needed to keep them identical, and then just enjoy them for a while.

Oh, absolutely! What I am writing in this thread is a pure strategic thinking about what “might be done”- I am not doing anything after the 6-channel Milq is up and running unit I feel that I need “something and to identify that this “need for Sound” might be addressed by a “different” MF amplification.

JJ Triode wrote:

As I recall you also had a few open tasks with the Macondos, like fixing the right-hand RAAL and finding the new DPoLS after the amp changes you have made.

Sure, after I final the amps the Macondo might be eventually finished as well. BTW, the horrific result with that right-hand shredded RAAL tweeter lead to a VERY interesting discovery… regarding the problem with APS power regenerator. I would need to write about it sometimes in RAAL thread as it was in a way unique.

Thanks, jk, this subject was well thought. I did not look dip but here are just a few links with a simple search:

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/LatestPosts.aspx?ThreadID=634

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/LatestPosts.aspx?ThreadID=4241

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/LatestPosts.aspx?ThreadID=5046

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/LatestPosts.aspx?ThreadID=5344

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/LatestPosts.aspx?ThreadID=2795

One of the reason I have become such a devotee of DSET topology (you call it MultiSET) is because the OPT problems, or I would say “luck of flexibility” with OPT. I did not use mumetal, nanocrystaline, cobalt.  There were some folks why have posted at this site who did. I also did not go for air-core for tweeters intentionally. There was discussion about it as well. All Super Milq’s transformers use amorphous lamination with exception of bass, that is M6 (Mecca oriented silicon steel). Still it is not regular M6 but the M6 that was marinated for 6 month in shish-kebab sauce and then was sent to India where it was blazed on a fire that cremated the oldest in the world 112-year old virgin. The bass lamination after than became was much better… but unfortunately now it is too sensitive to light and I forced to wrap it in black underwear….

Romy the Cat wrote:

1)      I would like to try amorphous core foe my LF transformer. I know, I know, the amorphous core is not LF core but I know what I hear and if I found somebody who would be able to make for me dedicated amorphous LF transformer then I would try. … 5)      Changing my LF section, rewirering all 12 drivers in parallel and consequential introduction of another 1.3R dedicated LF output transformer. I see a lot of benefits in a situation when my entire set of LF drivers are connected in parallel. If I have a space that I would gladly add as few more drivers to my line array….

I kind of wonder if I really would like to go there.

There are no questions in my mind that reconnecting the drivers in parallel will be beneficial. There are no questions in my mind that amorphous LF transformer will be beneficial, particularly if to make it to drive the set of the paralleled drivers. I need nothing to reconnect the driver in parallel – a few hours work and I will be though. I have found a very large chuck of amorphous core; have the transformer winder and the person who can assist me with the design. The cost of the project is mandible and nothing prevents to go there.

Still, I am hesitant. Tow aspect bothers me: one technical and one psychological.

The technical aspect is following: going with a core as fast as amorphous is it means that my LF-only large transformer with enormous inductance and with no sections still will have response all the way to 20kH… and that mean that I would need to go for second order filter on my woofer towers. I would like to found a way to restrict the HF extension of the LF channel without putting the second order low-pass on the bass.

The psychological aspect is: I do not want to do it anymore. My initial objectives with Macondo and Melquiades were to get where I would like to go with my demands considering the non-existence of the supplies. It took a few years, I did obtained the result that I feel comfortable - I relay would like to quit audio in the way how I practiced it for the last few years. I am glad what I did but since whatever I got is good “as is” I would like just to “use audio” instead of “building audio”.  I never had explicit interest in DIY for sake of DIY and always tried to buy intend of doing the things… My involvement in Macondo/Melquiades project put me in heavy DIY rotation – I enjoy the result but I do not particulars care or like the process.

If to change the transformer were just plug and play task then I do not mind to try it. However with the complexity of Macondo/Melquiades tandem I am afraid that it might be another month projects: to re-EQ the channels, to put the second order filters, to re-normalize the bias supply in Milq, and so on… I would not even mention that the woofer section and the Milq are dam heavy and I really do not look at the prospects to shovel them again.

I think I am getting older or whatever… At this point I would like just turn the system “on” and “off” and I would like do not “fuck” with it anymore, it has been “fucked” enough. I still have some minor ideas and micro-projects on pipeline of my mind but I think at this point I do not want to undertake any major projects. Let see how my future moods will decide for me but for now the “Macavity's not there”

Referencing the post from my “Playback Listing” forum:

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=7412

I would like to make an interesting announcement. T is high possible that Macondo soon will have another, the 7the channel. Now it will not be the midbass horn. It will not be the ULF resonator. It will not be the RT60 channel.  It will not be the microwave tweeter…

I would keep at this point the identity and the purpose of this new channel classified but I would like to inform that I am deep-considering and most likely it will be implemented.

If not working on the HF to get the ambiance, which probably would be the "moronic" way to accomplish it, then is it some lower bass? There's a hint on Romy's comment about his new tuner having better low bass response than any other source. Perhaps this has you wondering about improving the lowest bass performance.

Rgrds

Romy the Cat wrote:

Now it will not be the midbass horn.