After playing for some time with Dmitry’s great DHT composite triode models, I looked at refining the model by matching my own set of curves of the 4P1L in triode-mode. Here is my take on it:
Tag: 4P1L
I’ve got the (SE) power!
For DHT single-ended (SE) topology, I have to admit that I reached to the conclusion that in my opinion either 6C4C or 4P1L are the way forward in terms of sound and cost after not being happy with the option of running the 45 in A2 mode. Both 4P1L and 6C4C sound lovely in SE despite many will say the 300B is unbeatable. Yes, won’t say a ridiculously thing such as 6C4 or 4P1L are the “best DHTs”. We all know that there are many great DHTs out there, but at a cost. Well, if cost is not a problem for you, you can chose great NOS valves from PX4, 50, 300B to 813 or 845. The latter comes with a hidden price: the power supply. I’ve been there as I’m building the 4-65a SE and most of the budget is used in the power supplies. Sound-wise, we did a side-by-side listening tests on many SE and PSE amplifiers and couldn’t find a significant different between 4P1L PSE and 300B stages. This could easily end up in loosing the tangent and falling into an endless debate about topologies, OT, driver-output stage combinations, bla, bla, bla, but in reality you can’t beat a 4P1L PSE in terms of cost and bias flexibility (i.e. you can easily get 5W from a pair of 4P1L as we will see later). I wish I could achieve the output power I like (i.e. 3W) with a 45. A 45 in push-pull is then very attractive but I haven’t listened (or build) it yet.
I have a very decent stash of both 4P1L and 6C4C, so obviously I will be inclined to get the most out of these ladies rather than continuing burning money on other NOS valves . If you are still reading this is simply because you have (or at least considering buying) 4P1Ls or 6C4Cs and you want to build a good amplifier with them.
So how much power can you get out of the 4P1L? Anatoliy did his own tests and was very pleased with the results in terms of sound. I haven’t run the 4P1L in A2 yet but here it would look like in A2:
You can get clean 5W from a pair of 4P1L running at 50mA (each) and biased at 200V. The driving requirements are only 50Vpp and we can see in the diagram above that the positive grid excursion is to just over 10-12V. Obviously the right driver needs to be used to provide the necessary grid current in A2 and also withstand the changes in grid impedance when transitioning from A1 (high impedance) into A2 (low impedance) with minimum distortion.
I don’t currently have an 2K5Ω OT gapped at 100mA, so won’t be looking at running a 4P1L PSE in A2 like this.
Instead, I have a pair of LL1623/60mA which can provide a varied set of transformation ratios: 5K6Ω, 3KΩ and 1K6Ω.
With this OT I could then easily get 2-3W out from a 6C4C or 4P1L PSE as we shall see looking at the loadlines.
4P1L PSE load line
A pair of 4P1L can be easily matched, so 4P1L PSE is a great cost-effective option to deliver +3W single-ended warm sound in A1. Having investigated filament bias, harmonic content, now is time to look at this configuration in a bit more detail.
I have at hand a nice LL1623/60mA which can be configured to 3KΩ:8Ω. After looking at the loadline here is what I think it should play well to deliver 3W:
- Va=250V, Ia=60mA, Vgk=-22.9V
- The pair of 4P1L will equate to mu=8, gm=12mA/V and Ra=690Ω
- Vg= 41.6 Vpp
A driver with some headroom to provide at least 80Vpp should be fine for this SE amplifier. Without looking at harmonic cancellation, this stage should deliver 3W at about THD=1%. Clearly proven that I will not readapt the 45 for A2 🙂
EDIT – 17th March 2013
Just realised after reading Imzen’s comment that the maximum Pa used is incorrect. 4P1L is a 9W device when triode-connected. So here is the correct loadline for a 5K OT:
As we can see, it’s better to run this valve in PSE as you will get just 1W in SE with 1.5% THD when biased at 220V/40mA…
Sweating the 45… (Part4)
Last week I looked at optimising the 45 loadline in A2. Clearly we shouldn’t be attempting to get more than 2W from this valve without a significant level of distortion. However, having about of 3W would be attractive for the transient response of this amp.
So how will this circuit perform in a simulation? Let’s see what the spice results are:
The THD is significantly better due to the harmonic cancellation between the two stages. The driver distortion is 0.3% at full tilt (150vpp) and this could be improved. I guess the 6e5p could do better, but interesting to see how the cancellation of harmonics may play around. The new operating point and the stacked supplies will demand different MOSFET parts of 1kV for sure…
Driving the 45 in A2 (part 2)
On the previous post I explored how more power could be extracted from the 45 in class A2. Here is a first draft circuit using the 4P1L as the driver stage with a mu-follower gyrator load to provide current with low output impedance:
3.5W can be obtained with 13Vpp input signal. Clearly a pre-amp is required, but that is the output level I’m currently getting from my preamp so should be fine. The LND150 CCS reference can be optimised and derived from the stable 280V.
Not a bad idea, just an additional power supply to avoid any nasty cap in the path.
4P1L pentode driver (continued)
After the initial tests done with the 4P1L in pentode mode and filament bias, I thought a bit about how this driver could be implemented in practice. I may try this configuration in my 4-65a SE amp, but am not urged by this at all.
The screen supply is formed by a gas valve (SG3S) which provides a very stable reference when feed by a CCS. In this case the cascoded pair M3 and M4 will provide in conjunction with R4 and U2 a very low noise screen current to U1. R9 has to be adjusted on test to set a current of about 15mA on the CCS. The 4P1L will draw 1.8mA at 81V as screen current, so R4 may also need adjustment to set the right operating point.
The driver should provide about a gain of 150. Driving easily a transmiting vale (or why not a 300B 🙂 ) in class A2 with this configuration. My tests showed a maximum THD of about 0.27% at 200Vpp.
Gain could be reduced if needed by tweaking the RL. And if stacked supplies are not used, then a single +400V supply could be used with additional dissipation across the reference currents (M1 and M3/M4).
Keep thinking…
4P1L Pentode Driver (Test 2)
Improving the driver with a gyrator load
After the early experiments with the 4P1L driver in pentode mode, I decided to look at improving it somehow given advice given. The gyrator load is not a good match for a pentode unless the reflected impedance is low enough to control the gain of the stage. Gary Pimm recommends:
“In the driver experiments the plate resistor was increased to a value larger than in traditional Pentode driver stages to get more gain.A CCS was placed in parallel with the plate resistor to add plate current to compensate for the high value plate resistor. This allows you to have independent controls of the gain and operating current. The resistor is chosen to set the gain and the CCS is used to set the Pentode operating current.To maximize the circuit performance the resistance in the screen circuit is adjusted for minimum distortion. There are draw backs to this- The circuit has to be tweaked for each tube. As adjusting the screen voltage and resistance also effects the gain of the stage you have to compromise some to have the gain match between 2 channels. This is not a circuit where you can swap tubes around without “calibrating” the stage on the test bench. Another interesting way of applying the circuit is to place the plate resistor in parallel with the Pentode and have the CCS supply all the current needed by the stage. This allows the Pentode driver stage to have PSRR similar to CCS loaded triode stages. It also makes the signal current loop very small including only the Pentode, cathode, and plate resistors. The noise and capacitor colorations of the power supply are quite effectively removed.”
So I opted for adding a resistor in parallel (RL) to adjust gain, minimise distortion and improve PSRR:
The load resistor is 68K. I optimised the operating point to reduce distortion at maximum swing (i.e. 200V peak to peak). The input impedance of the soundcard interface which is 100K didn’t produce a significant impact on the distortion when measuring from the anode output or in the mu output:
Interesting to see that distortion is now nearly half of previous operating point and 0.27% for 200Vpp is very good.
The screen current is approximately 1.8mA at 81V bias.
4P1L ceramic socket
4P1L SPICE model updated
Dmitry Nizh kindly worked out the 4P1L triode SPICE model using his great tool:
Here is Dimtry’s model:
** 4P1L_TRIODE ************************************************************
* Created on Mon Jan 07 07:31:48 PST 2013 using tube.model.finder.PaintKIT
* URL: http://www.bartola.co.uk/valves/valve-curves/4p1l/
*————————————————–
.SUBCKT TRIODE_4P1L_TRIODE 1 2 3 ; P G K ;
+ PARAMS: CCG=8P CGP=7P CCP=9P RGI=2000
+ MU=8.232 EX=1.3719 KG1=851.25 KP=108.0 KVB=528.0 VCT=-1.0 ; Vp_MAX=450.0 Ip_MAX=0.08 Vg_step=5.0
*————————————————–
E1 7 0 VALUE={V(1,3)/KP*LOG(1+EXP(KP*(1/MU+(VCT+V(2,3))/SQRT(KVB+V(1,3)*V(1,3)))))}
RE1 7 0 1G
G1 1 3 VALUE={(PWR(V(7),EX)+PWRS(V(7),EX))/KG1}
RCP 1 3 1G ; TO AVOID FLOATING NODES
C1 2 3 {CCG} ; CATHODE-GRID
C2 2 1 {CGP} ; GRID=PLATE
C3 1 3 {CCP} ; CATHODE-PLATE
D3 5 3 DX ; FOR GRID CURRENT
R1 2 5 {RGI} ; FOR GRID CURRENT
.MODEL DX D(IS=1N RS=1 CJO=10PF TT=1N)
.ENDS
*$
4P1L Pentode Spice Model
Inspired by Rajko’s model, I tried creating my own Spice model of the 4P1L pentode:
Dmitry’s tool for pentode is difficult to fit to the pentode curves, not as the triode tool which is very accurate. Here’s Dmitry’s explanation:
“The pentode model equations, as defined by Koren, have one very, very important property: they reduce to a pretty accurate triode model of the same device if the screen moves together with the plate (I have a parameter UL for that and for ultra-linear arrangement, UL=1 is triode – try it! – then ul=0.4 or so is for UL connection, UL>1 is so called supertriode connection). That’s the good news, a really good one but that is the end of the good news. The bad news is that pentode and tetrode fitting can be at best very approximate – that is, the knee region and the slopes are not right for most tetrodes and pentodes, with the exception for some small-signal pentodes.”
Here is my model. Hopefully someone can try it and report some results:
** 4P1L PENTODE ************************************************************
* Created on Sun Jan 06 18:21:28 GMT 2013 using tube.model.finder.PaintKIP
* model URL:
*————————————————–
.SUBCKT PENT_4P1L PENTODE 1 2 3 4 ; P G K G2
+ PARAMS: CCG=9P CGP=0.1P CCP=9.5P RGI=2000
+ MU=9.27 EX=1.4139 KG1=1658.84 KG2=3528.0 KP=469.2 KVB=40.504 ; Vp_MAX=450.0 Ip_MAX=0.07 Vg_step=1.0
*————————————————–
RE1 7 0 1MEG ; DUMMY SO NODE 7 HAS 2 CONNECTIONS
E1 7 0 VALUE= ; E1 BREAKS UP LONG EQUATION FOR G1.
+{V(4,3)/KP*LOG(1+EXP((1/MU+V(2,3)/V(4,3))*KP))}
G1 1 3 VALUE={(PWR(V(7),EX)+PWRS(V(7),EX))/KG1*ATAN(V(1,3)/KVB)}
G2 4 3 VALUE={(EXP(EX*(LOG((V(4,3)/MU)+V(2,3)))))/KG2}
RCP 1 3 1G ; FOR CONVERGENCE
C1 2 3 {CCG} ; CATHODE-GRID 1
C2 1 2 {CPG1} ; GRID 1-PLATE
C3 1 3 {CCP} ; CATHODE-PLATE
R1 2 5 {RGI} ; FOR GRID CURRENT
D3 5 3 DX ; FOR GRID CURRENT
.MODEL DX D(IS=1N RS=1 CJO=10PF TT=1N)
.ENDS