Announcing the next generation: UltraCap LPS-1.2 (Now 5/7/9/12V! ; Now with parallel LT3045 regulators!)

[sgr]

Yes. Please offer a diy upgrade path. 

[Superdad]

3 hours ago, Johnseye said:

Nice work guys.  I know you put in some long hours and a lot of effort.  Thanks in advance for helping to improve our SQ.

 

Will you be offering a trade in upgrade from v1 to v1.2 ?

 

Hi John,

Thanks to you--and all--for the very kind words.

 

With regards to trade-ins for upgrading, I anticipated this question and in fact have thought about it for several months.  I even did a whole little spreadsheet analysis to figure out if there is a way to do this that works favorably for everyone.  Sadly, after running the numbers every which way, the final verdict was no.

 

First, let's be clear that there could never be a "DIY" upgrade to make an LPS-1 into an LPS-1.2.  Completely different board, different parts, module, software etc.

 

Simply upgrading to a new circuit board is not possible either.  The cutouts for the jacks/switches at the back are completely different, requiring that the enclosure be exchanged as well.  And the original 22W Mean Well charger won't handle the new model either.

So any upgrade is really means getting an entirely new UltraCap LPS-1.2 package.

 

That brought me to the process of considering if we could take back original LPS-1 units for credit towards the purchase of a new LPS-1.2.  The obvious questions were:

1) Could we give enough credit to clients for them to feel good about the value from their 1st-generation unit?

2) Would we be able to resell--as used of course--the LPS-1 units taken back, and how many might sell per month?

3) Where and when would the profit on the transactions take place?

 

Keep in mind that because we price our products for direct sale, there is no big 40-50% dealer/distributor discount built into the retail price--so we can't "steal" from that to make an upgrade program work without loosing real profit dollars.

UpTone's total cost of its products is a bit more than half the retail price. (I guarantee this is a much skinnier model than most other companies in boutique audio.) That's after including all parts, packaging, PayPal/credit card fees, royalty to John Swenson, but NOT including staff labor or overhead, or costs associated with repairs/replacements.

Our cost to make the LPS-1.2 went up a bunch over the original, and I cut the margin even further to keep the retail price bump from being higher than $40 (a $60 bump would have maintained the margin).

 

Let's step through this:

People originally paid $395 for an LPS-1 (or less if without a charger or if part of a bundle with the ISO REGEN).  Let's say we gave $190 in credit/discount towards the purchase of the $435 LPS-1.2.  UpTone would end up with a used LPS-1 (hopefully not scratched; hopefully with all the little bits though I'm sure the retail box would get scrapped) and $20 profit.

Then we would have a used LPS-1 to test, repackage with cables, etc.--which we would then hope to sell for perhaps $325 plus shipping?  Taking out more PayPal fees and the refurbishing labor and transactional costs, we might, in the end, make the original LPS-1.2 profit plus about $90.  But only once the original LPS-1 sold--and our assumed $325 price for a used unit will have to compete with other used units being sold.  We could get stuck! 

 

Frankly I think:

a) A used LPS-1 can fetch more than $190 on the open market;

b) Most new clients are going to want to get the new generation LPS-1.2--for about $110 more than my above scenario's $325 for a "factory refurbished" LPS-1.

c) The logistics of it all would make me crazy.

 

So there you have it.  Just wanted everyone to know that I really did try to envision a way to assist our loyal clients in upgrading if they desire to do so.  Sorry it does not work out to be practicable.

 Of course the performance of the LPS-1s you already have is not degraded in the least by the existence of the new generation unit.  

 

[If anyone wishes to discuss this matter further, please send me a message privately.  Any debate here about the decision will likely be deleted so as to not clutter up the thread.  As you all know, UpTone operates under my personal/business philosophy of "radical transparency," and we share more details about products, development, and operations than most firms.  I lost a fair amount of sleep over this issue--and now it is settled.]

 

Thanks for understanding.

Regards,

--Alex C.

[sgr]

Many of us use the Lps-1 with REGEN ISO and The Rendu family. We heard what the LPS-1 did for these components.  So the $400 question? What improvements or differences can we look forward to hearing when the new lps-1.2 arrive? 

(If this is the wrong place to ask please feel free to move it Alex. 

 

Thanks,

Steven

 

 

[agladstone]

4 hours ago, Superdad said:

 

Hi John,

Thanks to you--and all--for the very kind words.

 

With regards to trade-ins for upgrading, I anticipated this question and in fact have thought about it for several months.  I even did a whole little spreadsheet analysis to figure out if there is a way to do this that works favorably for everyone.  Sadly, after running the numbers every which way, the final verdict was no.

 

First, let's be clear that there could never be a "DIY" upgrade to make an LPS-1 into an LPS-1.2.  Completely different board, different parts, module, software etc.

 

Simply upgrading to a new circuit board is not possible either.  The cutouts for the jacks/switches at the back are completely different, requiring that the enclosure be exchanged as well.  And the original 22W Mean Well charger won't handle the new model either.

So any upgrade is really means getting an entirely new UltraCap LPS-1.2 package.

 

That brought me to the process of considering if we could take back original LPS-1 units for credit towards the purchase of a new LPS-1.2.  The obvious questions were:

1) Could we give enough credit to clients for them to feel good about the value from their 1st-generation unit?

2) Would we be able to resell--as used of course--the LPS-1 units taken back, and how many might sell per month?

3) Where and when would the profit on the transactions take place?

 

Keep in mind that because we price our products for direct sale, there is no big 40-50% dealer/distributor discount built into the retail price--so we can't "steal" from that to make an upgrade program work without loosing real profit dollars.

UpTone's total cost of its products is a bit more than half the retail price. (I guarantee this is a much skinnier model than most other companies in boutique audio.) That's after including all parts, packaging, PayPal/credit card fees, royalty to John Swenson, but NOT including staff labor or overhead, or costs associated with repairs/replacements.

Our cost to make the LPS-1.2 went up a bunch over the original, and I cut the margin even further to keep the retail price bump from being higher than $40 (a $60 bump would have maintained the margin).

 

Let's step through this:

People originally paid $395 for an LPS-1 (or less if without a charger or if part of a bundle with the ISO REGEN).  Let's say we gave $190 in credit/discount towards the purchase of the $435 LPS-1.2.  UpTone would end up with a used LPS-1 (hopefully not scratched; hopefully with all the little bits though I'm sure the retail box would get scrapped) and $20 profit.

Then we would have a used LPS-1 to test, repackage with cables, etc.--which we would then hope to sell for perhaps $325 plus shipping?  Taking out more PayPal fees and the refurbishing labor and transactional costs, we might, in the end, make the original LPS-1.2 profit plus about $90.  But only once the original LPS-1 sold--and our assumed $325 price for a used unit will have to compete with other used units being sold.  We could get stuck! 

 

Frankly I think:

a) A used LPS-1 can fetch more than $190 on the open market;

b) Most new clients are going to want to get the new generation LPS-1.2--for about $110 more than my above scenario's $325 for a "factory refurbished" LPS-1.

c) The logistics of it all would make me crazy.

 

So there you have it.  Just wanted everyone to know that I really did try to envision a way to assist our loyal clients in upgrading if they desire to do so.  Sorry it does not work out to be practicable.

 Of course the performance of the LPS-1s you already have is not degraded in the least by the existence of the new generation unit.  

 

[If anyone wishes to discuss this matter further, please send me a message privately.  Any debate here about the decision will likely be deleted so as to not clutter up the thread.  As you all know, UpTone operates under my personal/business philosophy of "radical transparency," and we share more details about products, development, and operations than most firms.  I lost a fair amount of sleep over this issue--and now it is settled.]

 

Thanks for understanding.

Regards,

--Alex C.

FYI, for all thinking of upgrading to the LPS-1.2 from the original LPS-1, I sold my LPS-1 for $325 plus shipping in less than 1 hour!! 

So, it’s not difficult to sell them, especially since it is a 4-8 week wait for the new ones and obviously much more $ towards the new version than the $190 you would receive via an upgrade program!! 

[Superdad]

15 minutes ago, agladstone said:

FYI, for all thinking of upgrading to the LPS-1.2 from the original LPS-1, I sold my LPS-1 for $325 plus shipping in less than 1 hour!! 

So, it’s not difficult to sell them, especially since it is a 4-8 week wait for the new ones and obviously much more $ towards the new version than the $190 you would receive via an upgrade program!! 

 

Hi Allen:

To be clear...

a) Should be just 4 weeks from now;

b) There is no "upgrade program!"   (The $190 thing was just a hypothetical, and the math did not work out anyway.)

 

[Superdad]

On 1/16/2018 at 4:54 PM, sgr said:

Many of us use the Lps-1 with REGEN ISO and The Rendu family. We heard what the LPS-1 did for these components.  So the $400 question? What improvements or differences can we look forward to hearing when the new LPS-1.2 arrive? 

 

Thanks,

Steven

 

Hi Steven:

The honest answer is that nobody--including John and me--knows yet. Technically the new LPS-1.2, with lower output impedance and the crazy low-noise regulators, offers superior performance. (And the expanded voltage range, power switch, and current monitoring port will be nice features for some.)

But how much will the technical advances translate into sonic improvements for the devices people typically power with our UltraCap supplies?  Beats me.  But a lot of folks will find out soon enough! 

 

[One data point may be that a few people have added a popular DIY dual-LT3045 circuit board between their power supplies and end device--and they have reported nice results.  Yet our particular paralleling technique results in even lower output impedance than the method used on the DIY board.]

[agladstone]

13 minutes ago, Superdad said:

 

Hi Allen:

To be clear...

a) Should be just 4 weeks from now;

b) There is no "upgrade program!"   (The $190 thing was just a hypothetical, and the math did not work out anyway.)

 

Yes, I know there is no upgrade path! 

The point I was trying to make to anyone considering an upgrade is that there is no need for Uptone to offer once since it is very easy to sell the original LPS-1 now and that they should expect to be able to get around $325 for it! 

Also, I know it is 4 weeks for the current batch of pre-orders (I’m included in that batch and I can’t wait to get mine!! :)), I have the 4-8 week window in the event that the first batch of available units becomes sold out. 

 

[Superdad]

5 minutes ago, agladstone said:

Yes, I know there is no upgrade path! 

The point I was trying to make to anyone considering an upgrade is that there is no need for Uptone to offer once since it is very easy to sell the original LPS-1 now and that they should expect to be able to get around $325 for it! 

Also, I know it is 4 weeks for the current batch of pre-orders (I’m included in that batch and I can’t wait to get mine!! :)), I have the 4-8 week window in the event that the first batch of available units becomes sold out. 

 

I know you know you know I know...  

I replied for the benefit of others who might drop by.  

Ciao,

AJC

[[email protected]]

7 hours ago, Superdad said:

[One data point may be that a few people have added a popular DIY dual-LT3045 circuit board between their power supplies and end device--and they have reported nice results.  Yet our particular paralleling technique results in even lower output impedance than the method used on the DIY board.]

Hi Alex

 

Not few - many...

 

About "better" paralleling technique - are you sure that it will cause lower impedance? I know that additional circuits can compensate voltage drop at ballast resistor, but still you HAVE this ballast resistor in chain.

 

John, can you clarify lower impedance point for the paralleling methods you use? 

[Superdad]

12 hours ago, [email protected] said:

Not few - many...

 

About "better" paralleling technique - are you sure that it will cause lower impedance? I know that additional circuits can compensate voltage drop at ballast resistor, but still you HAVE this ballast resistor in chain.

 

John, can you clarify lower impedance point for the paralleling methods you use? 

 

Hi Alexey:

Great to see you here at CA!  For those who don't know, Alexey produces a line of small DC-DC circuit boards based on TI TPS7A4700 and LT3045 regulators.  He ships them all over the world from his location in United Arab Emirates and these boards for DIYers have become VERY popular.

My apologies to you Alexey about my use of the word "few"; I meant it in regards to the addition of your boards in-line after output of our original LPS-1. I only know of a few folks who are doing that, though I am sure there are more.  As acknowledged, your boards are quite popular with users of other supplies.  I think that is great.  Being able to locate your board close to the load is a very good thing as well.

 

With regards to John's use of the LT3045's ILIM current monitor pin as a means to compensate for ballast resistance (and we don't use any resistor between the regs--its the calculated resistance of equal-length traces): The method does indeed lower output impedance.  I'll leave it to John if he wishes to publicly discuss this further.  For most users this is a bit "into the weeds" as we say.  Plus there are aspects of our design that I prefer not be revealed.

 

Again, your small boards are--for those equipped to use them--a fantastic value and we are so happy that you offer them. The architecture and overall performance of Linear Technology LT3042/45 regulators is like no other, and they readily compete with the best discrete regulator circuits--at a fraction the cost.  Plus they are easy to design with.

Our UltraCap LPS-1.2 is a complete, robust, and flexible power supply unit, so your LDOVR brand circuit boards appeals to a different, though complimentary market than UpTone.

 

Best regards,

--Alex C.

[agladstone]

Alex:

in regards to the ability to add a voltage / current display to the LPS 1-2 until you may offer one yourselves , is there one on Amazon for example that you could recommend as being compatible with the LPS1-2 ? (Not asking for you to recommend one brand vs another so to speak, just that I don’t know what one I would need that would work with the LPS 1.2. I would definitely like to get one, this seems like a valuable DIY add on and I see it being very useful!) 

[Superdad]

1 hour ago, agladstone said:

Alex:

in regards to the ability to add a voltage / current display to the LPS 1-2 until you may offer one yourselves , is there one on Amazon for example that you could recommend as being compatible with the LPS1-2 ?

 

Yes, this one specifically:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00YALV0NG/

[[email protected]]

11 hours ago, Superdad said:

The method does indeed lower output impedance.  I'll leave it to John if he wishes to publicly discuss this further.  For most users this is a bit "into the weeds" as we say. Plus there are aspects of our design that I prefer not be revealed

Hi Alex

 

Thank you for the nice words about LDOVR PCBs

 

I hope John can explain why and how ILIM circuit can improve overall system impedance, don't think that it is related to your know-how, but just to compare 2 solutions offered by LT. I am one of the few whos trying to find seeds in weeds 

 

BR

Alex

[pl_svn]

oooops: missed the announcement thread here (no emails to faithful customers, this round, Alex?  )

managed to jump straight-away on the wagon though 

 

will use it to power a Qutest DAC as soon as I can grab one 

[Steve Bruzonsky]

Will this power supply get warm or very hot in use?

 

As a reference, I have several HDPlex 100 watt LPS. I find if I only have one component connected to a HDPlex, it gets mildly warm. With each additional (4 max) component connected it gets warmer/hotter. I live in Arizona and it gets hot enough in the summer without adding radiators. HA@ (And I have a Sony VW-5000 laser projector in the room which when used adds enough heat as it is)

[jtwrace]

Does the 1.2 have the issues corrected from the measurements by Amir at ASR?  

[Superdad]

1 hour ago, jtwrace said:

Does the 1.2 have the issues corrected from the measurements by Amir at ASR?  

 

Yes it does. This is detailed in the first announcement post in this thread, as well as the thread I linked to.  

It was always about the un-ground-shunted Mean Well allowing in the unique high-impedance form of leakage. 

 

Quoting from my first post:

Every UltraCap LPS-1.2 will come with a newly sourced 7.5V/4.8A/36W, world-voltage-compatible SMPS (see photo below). While our UltraCap supplies have always 100% blocked the path of low-impedance AC leakage (from its charger and the path from other connected components), recently discovered high-impedance leakage was able to enter. This is easily prevented by the shunting (connecting) of the SMPS charger’s DC output “ground” to AC mains ground (see this post: https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/37034-smps-and-grounding/?page=9&tab=comments#comment-734822.  The customized new SMPS we are including for charging already has that connection internally, so no high-impedance leakage ever enters the LPS-1.2.

 

 

The comparison measurements (showing the high impedance leakage going away) in my link above were also posted long ago (October 2017) in the very thread of Amir's that you linked to. (https://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/uptone-lps-1-linear-power-supply-review-and-measurements.1849/page-6#post-53828).  But you were there in that thread, so you knew that already... 

 

[Superdad]

1 hour ago, Steve Bruzonsky said:

Will this power supply get warm or very hot in use?

 

Yes, our UltraCap power supplies will run anywhere from barely warm to rather hot, depending upon the current load they are called upon to provide.  But even running at its rated maximum output current of 1.1 amp continuously, the components inside are only at about half their rated temperature and there is nothing to worry about.  It is designed for longevity.

 

It is a small 4-inch case, so even if someone runs it near its limits, it won't add more than a few watts of heat to a room.  Nothing like a big power amp or large power supply. 

 

Cheers,

--Alex C.

[R1200CL]

On 1/16/2018 at 5:30 PM, Superdad said:

But how much will the technical advances translate into sonic improvements for the devices people typically power with our UltraCap supplies?  Beats me.  But a lot of folks will find out soon enough! 

 

Does not this depend on the regulators and probably others noise generating parts used in the device beeing powered. ?

 

So in theory (and as an example) I ought to get an upgraded UltraRendu MK ll with better regulators ?

 

Is it possible to measure the output noise on a DCC or DAC, based on if a LPS-1 vs an LPS-1.2 is being used ?

Can these measurements be affected by the cables in use ? (How god they are “protected”, like JSSG). 

 

Have you done any experiments  on using mu metal to protect noisy items on the print ?

 

I have seen measurements where using a LPS vs a SMPS affecteds the output noise on a LPS-1. I don’t know for sure if those measurements was 100 % correct, but can you in general comment on replacing a SMPS (with JSGT) vs using a LPS ?

 

Would you say if there is absolutely no difference in using a SMPS vs a LPS, on a LPS-1 or LPS1.2, there may be minor effects introduced by those SMPS elsewhere in your system ?

 

If I where to power more than one LPS-1 or LPS-1.2 with a LPS, is your recommendation to use one LPS per LPS-1, or does it not matter at all ?

[asdf1000]

Hi @JohnSwenson

 

I know the LPS-1.2 will have a lower noise output than the LPS-1, especially if providing 5V bus power.

 

But if we follow your SMPS grounding method with the LPS-1, how does it compare with the LPS-1.2 in terms of leakage current performance?

 

Can we expect the same or better leakage current performance with the LPS-1.2 vs LPS-1? According to your own measurements.

 

Cheers in advance

 

[Superdad]

8 hours ago, Em2016 said:

But if we follow your SMPS grounding method with the LPS-1, how does it compare with the LPS-1.2 in terms of leakage current performance?

 

Can we expect the same or better leakage current performance with the LPS-1.2 vs LPS-1? According to your own measurements.

 

I am going to give a long and detailed answer, so get comfortable. The impatient can skip to the very end, but you'll miss out some... 

 

First some clarification for newcomers:

Both the original UltraCap LPS-1 and the new LPS-1.2 COMPLETELY block the path of traditional low-impedance leakage from whatever supply is used to “energize”/charge it.  

More importantly, as a “floated”/isolated ultra-low-noise, ultra-low output impedance linear power supply, any device powered by an LPS-1/1.2 will then not participate in the forming of a “leakage loop” with the rest of the gear in your system.  Remember, ALL AC mains connected power supplies (linear or SMPS) have some leakage, and any two of them (joined by analog or digital cable grounds) will interact in a unique pattern. Interupting leakage (AC currents traveling over DC ground paths)—from for example between computer and DAC—and preventing those “loops” from forming is the whole reason for the bank-alternating UltraCap topology.  Otherwise we could have made our lives a lot simpler by just offering a conventional AC>DC LPS. 

 

Steering back towards your question:  

It was discovered that, because of our use of transistors as the switches to alternate between ultracap banks (as opposed to large clicking relays), the very small amount of residual capacitance of each of those transistors added up to about 80pF.  That tiny amount of capacitance across the power domains of the LPS-1 circuit board was enough to allow passage of a lesser-known form of AC leakage from an SMPS which John terms “high-impedance” leakage (it could be described in other ways, but in any case it is not something that any SMPS adaptor manufacture is aware of or gives a spec or a care to).

[The how and why we missed this when the LPS-1 was first released is something I detailed elsewhere, along with measurement graphs proving the below.

 

As most of you here know, once John got a handle on this “high-impedance” leakage (mild Kryptonite to the SuperMan LPS-1, though not nearly as big a deal as made out to be) he found that keeping it from ever entering into the LPS-1 was simple:  Just connect a wire from the DC output “ground”of the SMPS charger to the AC mains ground pin closest to the socket that the same adaptor is plugged into.  This very effectively shunts the high-impedance leakage to ground.  So it never even enters the LPS-1.

Some SMPS adaptors with grounded 3-wire AC cords already have the above “ground shunt” internally, but as luck would have it, the Mean Well brand model we were selling with the LPS-1 does not.  

I have manually modified a few of them with an internal jumper wire, and John measured that as being slightly better then the external trick (detailed at the beginning of his “SMPS and Grounding” thread).

 

Okay, so now that we are all caught up: 

Every new LPS-1.2 will ship with a 7.5V/4.8A/36W adaptor that I had custom made (nice flexible 16awg 1-meter coax DC cable with short barrel plug that completely inserts into our jacks).  Of course this new adaptor has the magic ground-shunt internally.

 

Finally to your question of an LPS-1 with a ground-shunted adaptor versus an LPS-1.2: 

(And as you stated, leaving aside the lower noise and lower output impedance of the paralleled LT3045 regulators and the expanded output voltage range that includes 9V and 12V.)

John and I revisited this very question the other night.  Will the analyzer (using his custom direct leakage measurement jig) show the same pattern of near-zero high-impedance leakage: LPS-1 versus LPS-1.2?

The answer, even if the exact same SMPS (say the new one we include) is used, is NO.  This is because, while the ground-shunt is HIGHLY effective, it is not 100%.

And that is why, early on during the design of the next-generation LPS-1.2, John went on a hunt for appropriately spec’d transistors with even lower capacitance.  He designed and had fabricated a special small test board just for the purpose of testing candidate transistors.  He chose very low capacitance parts for the original LPS-1 (avoiding MOSFETs which, while easier to implement, would have had massively higher capacitance), but later realized that the spec sheets for these transistors always list only the pin-to-pin capacitance (sorry, I get mixed up about base, emitter, collector directions) for the “on” state, whereas we are interested in lowest capacitance in their “off” state.  Hence the many hours of hand testing samples from a selected range of low-capacitance parts until he found two that he really liked.

In the end I recall that John calculated the total capacitance (across power domains) due to the use of the chosen new transistors for the LPS-1.2 to be about half the set used in the original LPS-1.

 

So yes, the LPS-1.2 will measure a bit better than the LPS-1 with regards to the lowest levels of passed high-impedance leakage.  But I guarantee that whatever sonic differences people hear between the models won’t be primarily due to this.  A ground-shunted SMPS already takes care of 90% of this already minor issue.

 

—Alex C.

[beautiful music]

25 minutes ago, Superdad said:

 

First some clarification for newcomers:

Both the original UltraCap LPS-1 and the new LPS-1.2 COMPLETELY block the path of traditional low-impedance leakage from whatever supply is used to “energize”/charge it.  

More importantly, as a “floated”/isolated ultra-low-noise, ultra-low output impedance linear power supply, any device powered by an LPS-1/1.2 will then not participate in the forming of a “leakage loop” with the rest of the gear in your system.  Remember, ALL AC mains connected power supplies (linear or SMPS) have some leakage, and any two of them (joined by analog or digital cable grounds) will interact in a unique pattern.   Interupting leakage (AC currents traveling over DC ground paths)—from for example between computer and DAC—and preventing those “loops” from forming is the whole reason for the bank-alternating UltraCap topology.  Otherwise we could have made our lives a lot simpler by just offering a conventional AC>DC LPS. 

 

Steering back towards your question:  

It was discovered that, because of our use of transistors as the switches to alternate between ultracap banks (as opposed to large clicking relays), the very small amount of residual capacitance of each of those transistors added up to about 80pF.  That tiny amount of capacitance across the power domains of the LPS-1 circuit board was enough to allow passage of a lesser-known form of AC leakage from an SMPS which John terms “high-impedance” leakage (it could be described in other ways, but in any case it is not something that any SMPS adaptor manufacture is aware of or gives a spec or a care to).

[The how and why we missed this when the LPS-1 was first released is something I detailed elsewhere; I’ll insert the link to that post when I am back at my desk later.]

 

As most of you here know, once John got a handle on this “high-impedance” leakage (mild Kryptonite to the SuperMan LPS-1, though not nearly as big a deal as made out to be) he found that keeping it from ever entering into the LPS-1 was simple:  Just connect a wire from the DC output “ground”of the SMPS charger to the AC mains ground pin closest to the socket that the same adaptor is plugged into.  This very effectively shunts the high-impedance leakage to ground.  So it never even enters the LPS-1.

Some SMPS adaptors with grounded 3-wire AC cords already have the above “ground shunt” internally, but as luck would have it, the Mean Well brand model we were selling with the LPS-1 does not.  

I have manually modified a few of them with an internal jumper wire, and John measured that as being slightly better then the external trick (detailed at the beginning of his “SMPS Grounding” thread.

 

Okay, so now that we are all caught up: 

Every new LPS-1.2 will ship with a 7.5V/4.8A/36W adaptor that I had custom made (nice 16awg 1-meter coax DC cable with short barrel that completely inserts into our jacks).  Of course this new adaptor has the magic ground-shunt internally.

 

Finally to your question of an LPS-1 with a ground-shunted adaptor versus an LPS-1.2: 

(And as you stated, leaving aside the lower noise and lower output impedance of the paralleled LT3045 regulators and the expanded output voltage range that includes 9V and 12V.)

John and I discussed the same question the other night.  Will the analyzer (using his custom direct leakage measurement jig) show the same pattern of near-zero high-impedance leakage: LPS-1 versus LPS-1.2?

The answer, even if the exact same SMPS (say the new one we include) is used, is NO.  This is because, while the ground-shunt is HIGHLY effective, it is not 100%.

And so, early on during the design of the next-generation LPS-1.2, John went on a hunt for appropriately spec’d transistors with even lower capacitance.  He designed and had fabricated a special small test board just for the purpose of testing candidate transistors.  He chose very low capacitance parts for the original LPS-1 (avoiding MOSFETs which, while easier to implement, would have had massively higher capacitance), but later realized that the spec sheets for these transistors always list only the pin to pin capacitance (sorry, I am dumb about base, emitter, collector) for the “on” state, whereas we are interested in lowest capacitance in their “off” state.  Hence the many hours of hand testing samples from a selected range of low-capacitance parts until he found two that he really liked.

In the end I recall that John calculated the total capacitance (across power domains) due to the use of the chosen new transistors for the LPS-1.2 to be about half the set used in the original LPS-1.

 

So yes, the LPS-1.2 will measure a bit better than the LPS-1 with regards to the lowest levels of passed high-impedance leakage.  But I guarantee that whatever sonic differences people hear between the models won’t be primarily due to this.  A ground-shunted SMPS already takes care of 90% of this already minor issue.

 

—Alex C.

Love you Alex and John, My Wishes to success in your upcoming LPS-1.2

[Superdad]

1 hour ago, beautiful music said:

Love you Alex and John, My Wishes to success in your upcoming LPS-1.2

 

That's very kind of you to say.  Many thanks.  

 

Honestly, without the very receptive and appreciative audience--here at CA and elsewhere--we would not be going the lengths we do to develop and produce these complex products.

 

Frankly I am amazed at how much of the details (both technical and audible) you guys pick up on.  My own room/system continues to reveal and impress me, but I bet many of you have equally (or more) amazing systems!  I wish there was a way I could hear tour about and here some of what you folks have assembled.

Plus it would be wonderful to turn each other on to favorite musical artists.

 

Ciao,

--AJC 

[Superdad]

1 hour ago, R1200CL said:

 

And how will Johns other DCC measure with the LPS-1.2 ?

 

Meaning: Will the Rendu’s measure differently using a LPS-1 vs a LPS-1.2 ? 

 

And if yes, can it be explained why ?

 

Do the LPS-1 or the LPS-1.2  measure differently if powered by an LPS vs a SMPS ?

 

My reason for asking is to understand if I shall order one, or just stick to my LPS-1’s.

 

So many questions Andreas.  So little time.  

 

I think many things have already been explained.  We have shown in the past that ground-shunting the an SMPS charging our supply takes care of virtually all the very low level high-impedance leakage.

Plus 3 posts up I explain in detail about the even low capacitance transistors used.

 

And in the first post of this announcement we detail the other major change (besides the wider output voltage range), the switch to LT3045 regulators.  This results in vanishingly low noise and even lower output impedance than before.

 

As John mentioned last night in the "SMPS and Grounding" thread, while he has made some measurements using the hacked-up preproduction boards, we will wait for the production boards before running measurements for publication.  So you will need to be more patient.

 

Thanks,

--Alex C.

 

[jamesg11]

BTW, anyone ordered 2xlps-1.2 for 24V usage?

Looking fwd to some feedback on this ...