This Homemade Headphone Amplifier Is A Work Of Art
this8bitlife.com
this8bitlife.com
Projects like this are why I like to make things, not for the thing, but for the make.
Understandable, honest, unobtrusive, thorough, and useful. Really good design by D.Rams definition.
Hacking (often just for the fun of it) is so much more rewarding and in the end provides so much more value than the usual techcrunch-style drama that often occupies most of HN home page.
I'd pay in the $100 range for one without thinking, real audiophiles would probably pay much more.
Hopefully I'm just being overly cynical.
The really cool part here is the assembly. That thing is very pretty.
I'd start pricing at around $350 and see how that flies.
You also overestimate the per hour cost of semi skilled labor. The skills involved arent that involved or difficult to learn (especially with the right tooling).
I would price the labor at around $15-$30 per hour minimum. You aren't going to farm this out to an assembly shop (not enough volume) and there isn't enough money in it to hire employees and deal with that overhead, so you're down to finding a FOAF or a student who can solder and is reliable. Factor into that that the person must be supervised.
Next, this isn't just assembly that has to work; it has to look good, so the assembler needs the skill and attention to detail to provide that. That means either you get lucky or you have a lot of rework, or you watch him closely. Soldering is not enough: need to pay attention to the cut ends of those thick conductors. The component lead terminations must look good and the components themselves should be fairly regularly placed and not look sloppy. Remember, you're selling primarily on looks. Also, if this assembler isn't always available, you have to make enough inventory to handle orders that may come in until he can make more if you don't have the time to do it yourself.
Volumes are uncertain, but the parts are cheap, so let's assume he buys enough to make 100 units at a time. The selling price has to reflect the risk that all those parts won't be used. Buy higher inventory levels and your parts cost goes down, but risk of "dead stock" goes up.
Having a small electronics mfg business on the side, I live this on a daily basis. Luckily I don't sell to price sensitive hobbyists :-)
But in the end, the price I'd try to sell it for has nothing to do with how much it cost to build: it's cool looking. That's where the price comes from.
There are plenty of sub-contract electronic manufacturing companies that'd take on jobs of 100 units.
> I would price the labor at around $15-$30 per hour minimum.
Yes.
I wouldn't be surprised to see something like this on Kickstarter, though.
I count about 20 components, about 40 solders. Allowing 5 seconds per bend (using jigs), 5 seconds per solder, one minute for assembly (again using jigs), one minute for finish... I'd say about 7 minutes labour per unit. Jigs, etc, could run to 100 hours all up, they seem very simple.
I'd feel comfortable budgeting 15 mins/unit for runs of 1000+.
My experience teaches me that it takes on average soldering a few dozen units of anything unusual before the assembler gets the hang of it. Unusual being anything besides stuffing a PC board and manually soldering. This is not likely to ever be a high volume product, and I probably (admittedly only knowing the size of the market from what other posters have said) would not be comfortable doing production runs of more than 50 at a time, so you lose a lot of the benefits of doing long runs.
That said, I think your estimates are a bit optimistic. Once the entire time is accounted for: from kitting up the run, setting up the work area, actual assembly and testing, my guess would be closer to 30 minutes per unit.
Slightly OT, but if you can point me to any good resources for setup and manual assembly of cable harnesses, it would be much appreciated. It's an area I find myself getting involved in and I don't have much experience, so it's pretty much "learning by error."
The amazing thing I've learned from lerking there from time-to-time is that some folks are actually seeding, promoting and selling their "cottage-made" products there.
The thing is, these gear "slutz" are hungry for well-made/hand-made, "analogy" products that simply don't cost a fortune -- think Value Compressors & Amps etc. -- I think this guy could do well to go and check it out...
An example of another product that was "launched" on this site (serial #001 was sold on that very forum), is a beautiful little "8bit sound box" called Biscuit, hand-made by some guy in France:
That this is a fully point-to-point design encased in resin is cool, but it's not $300 cool unless he's building it with top-notch components, which I don't see here.
This is what I would call, if you'll forgive me, transparent design. Obviously I'm not talking about the just the case. The mechanism of action of modern electronics is hidden behind 6-layer printed circuit boards and integrated circuit packages. Opening up an iPhone gives precious little insight into its workings. You wind up googling datasheets instead of following traces.
This is a tactile product. A 6-year old could pick up this amp, ask a few pointed questions about what they see inside, and actually have a prayer of figuring out how it works. I know I would sit there for cumulative hours just turning it over and watching the image of the components refracted through the faces. With everything stripped away, the noise becomes the signal – the imperfections in the solder joints, slight tool marks on the leads, the banded resistors that have gone out of style.
Yeah, there are people that would pay quite a bit for this, even if they're not audiophiles.
How many people want or even know what this thing does?
How many of those people will think this product is so much better than what they have that a clear version is worth spending $100s of dollars on?
It could be that the market is huge and I just do not understand it, but you didn't really help us understand how big it is either. To me, "a killing" seems like a stretch.
It's a poor assumption that novelty-factor is high on the list of an audiophile. As cool as this design is, what it does does not add any functionality or utility to the amp. At the extreme upper end sure novelty may become more of a factor. But even when you get to kilobuck amps the component and labor costs are still quite high, ie. the designer of a $5000 amp usually has $2500 sunk into the amp, and he might sell a dozen of them. And to do that, the company has to have a ton of cachet in the industry.
There is a very large and active community around headphone audio if you're interested in this field... in excess of a quarter million members with about 10M posts - http://www.head-fi.org/. I've been an active member there for over 7 years and into this hobby for over a decade. I've hosted a meet with about 30 members w/ almost $100k in equipment. I personally have owned over $20k in equipment over the years. I think I can speak with some authority on this.
Well, it looks like you could drop the amp off a bridge, run over it with some trucks, and attack it with a blowtorch, and still have it work fine afterwards, as long as you didn't hit the jacks directly with the blowtorch. That may not be functionality you're interested in, but I think it probably counts as added functionality!
The issue is that acceleration in itself doesn't damage chips, capacitors, resistors, etc. What happens is that the things that hold those components in place — their leads — experience large forces from trying to hold those components in their relative position. Those forces are generally greatly reduced by potting.
There are probably exceptions. It wouldn't be surprising if MEMS gyroscopes and accelerometers were more subject to damage after potting.
Here's a bog-standard amp which looks almost exactly the same as the encased-in-epoxy variant http://electronics-diy.com/electronic_schematic.php?id=797
Here's the information for the op-amp they choose:
http://www.ti.com/product/opa2132
Note that they don't even give you a schematic for the op-amp because it's so complicated.
Something like this: http://bigiain.com/onetransistoramp.html
Could be built for approximately zero dollars by just about anyone who's the sort of person who's got transistors "lying around" at home. I can easily imagine explaining how that works to the satisfaction of my "test" 9 year old. Not so much with the opamp version...
His choice to pot the electronics in transparent (apparently polyester) resin reminded me of this unfinished design provocation of mine, "The Egg of the Phoenix: a computational time capsule": http://www.canonical.org/~kragen/eotf/
Specifically, I was thinking that potting solar-powered electronics in transparent resin would be a good way to ruggedize them, so that your electronics might have a chance to keep working for decades or centuries.
http://www.dickblick.com/products/castincraft-clear-polyeste...
Seriously nice work. Tempted to build something similar myself.
A headphone (even a big one) uses little power. For this amp, output power is around 200mW apparently.
Sure, acrylic is not the best conductor of heat around, but I'm guessing the tight coupling to the chip casing and low power makes it a non issue.
It's very difficult to assemble a circuit without a substract (PCB or other), and those wires aren't going to stay straight by themselves.
The shining capacitors are a special touch (I guess he removed the plastic cover on them)
I'm not sure about the sound quality though.
I think it still lives on in some Ham radio groups teaching materials and standards though, as well as niche environments or reliability critical applications like (aero-)space
While it may look cool, it's a complete disaster for maintenance.
I figured out both what they are and how to tell if one has been blown when I was a teenager, all by myself, sans internet.
Oh, and I want one.
the cone movement, and hence volume, is proportional to the strength of the magnetic field, which is, in turn, proportional to the current through the wire and the number of turns in the coil.
there is a tension here, which is not obvious. the problem is that the coil is fastened to the cone, and so moves with it. for a responsive cone, we want as light a coil as possible (a heavy coil will give the speaker cone inertia, making it less faithful to the music signal). but if we make the coil lighter by reducing the number of turns we reduce the volume; if we make it lighter by making the wire thinner we increase the resistance, lower the current, and again reduce the volume.
one way to work around this is to supply a higher voltage to the coil. that can counteract the higher resistance of a thinner wire, and so provide the same volume with, hopefully, better sound quality. but the output voltage of many sources (particularly portable players) is limited.
so, finally, all should be clear: people use amplifiers like the one here to increase the available voltage so that they can use higher impedance, and arguably better sounding, headphones.
Some of them would be suitable for beginners to electronics. The practical aspects are easy enough. And the theory is reasonably straightforward.
And people enjoy putting them in nice cases. Often these are lumps of wood, or aluminum; this resin case is a lovely example though.
Why this passive aggressive line in an article praising how cool and pretty this amp is?
"Although there is no metal shielding as you would have in a conventional chassis/PCB the amplifier exhibits no unwanted noise or RF interference as you may associate with an open chassis design such as this it is dead silent even though it is next to my mobile phone and WiFi router."