Chris you understand the difference between series regulators and the Vicor reads as the emitter in version. A shunt will work on just the ripple voltage which is even lower.
What the divergence could be is that Bybee may actually have something new!
As to shunts so far the revival of them has been very interesting. When I wrote my AX tutorial I could not mention the active device works best as a follower as that was proprietary information at that time. Borbely quickly followed up with his offerings and the revival of true shunt regulators took off. Virtually all of the follow ons did not pick up that gain in the actual shunt element slowed things down. The earliest guy to get it right was Salas and his variations seem to be the most copied. Of course one guy who did not understand the difference between a filter and a regulator got upset thinking he had some new contribution.
Interesting, so it is a series regulator but using a current monitor. Again something that I think is original. A similarity to the Bybee is that it filters the input voltage for a reference (however it refers to an active filter), but the difference is that it does this after taking the lowest level of the input ripple.
Last edited:
Would you characterize the Linear Tech LT3080 as a series regulator with a current monitor?
My quick look at the data sheet only shows it as a series regulator, the current limit is probably thermal. A bit different than the Vicor which filters the minimum input voltage and reproduces that to the output unless it sees a funny current issue. The Vicor is not a voltage regulator! It is a filter so the output device does have very much voltage across it under most conditions. The LT3080 is a regulator so the heat it produces will vary with input and the set output voltage.
The bybee is also a filter not a regulator.
Hi Ed, John,
I understand these are filters and not regulators. I think there is some confusion here, or danger of. This thread doesn't need that kind of thing, so I'll drop out now.
For my end, I have a very good understanding as to what they do. I am sure they work fine. We'll leave it at that. Any further speculation on their technical construction is purely guesswork for all of us. I don't think that debating any of that will help anyone.
So, we agree they work. Cool?
I also understand that you are pointing out that these Bybee and other devices/circuits are approaching a problem from novel directions. That's fair, and I don't think that there is any shortage of really interesting ways that problems can be solved. The most elegant in my book use the natural characteristics of a device or circuit to enhance the job at hand. The end result looks very simple on paper or board layout, but the work is highly refined. Complicated stuff is sometimes very rough and not what you could call optimized.
Hi Jack,
Nifty part. You could also use a low noise shunt regulator to attain even lower noise output instead of that resistor that is suggested. For sure it is a regulator, but the way it's configured should be capable of lower noise than the standard low dropout regulators normally seen on the market.
I might have to get me a few to examine as a low noise oscillator supply reg. Cool.
-Chris
I understand these are filters and not regulators. I think there is some confusion here, or danger of. This thread doesn't need that kind of thing, so I'll drop out now.
For my end, I have a very good understanding as to what they do. I am sure they work fine. We'll leave it at that. Any further speculation on their technical construction is purely guesswork for all of us. I don't think that debating any of that will help anyone.
So, we agree they work. Cool?
I also understand that you are pointing out that these Bybee and other devices/circuits are approaching a problem from novel directions. That's fair, and I don't think that there is any shortage of really interesting ways that problems can be solved. The most elegant in my book use the natural characteristics of a device or circuit to enhance the job at hand. The end result looks very simple on paper or board layout, but the work is highly refined. Complicated stuff is sometimes very rough and not what you could call optimized.
Hi Jack,
Nifty part. You could also use a low noise shunt regulator to attain even lower noise output instead of that resistor that is suggested. For sure it is a regulator, but the way it's configured should be capable of lower noise than the standard low dropout regulators normally seen on the market.
I might have to get me a few to examine as a low noise oscillator supply reg. Cool.
-Chris
Music Rails Cost
These devices do not cost $1000 as someone mentioned. They are around $50 to $70 and sold through distributors. Manufacturer is Bybee Labs, Inc. different than Bybee Technologies although their web site says that Bybee is a co-founder. A lot of technical information is available at the web site, so a lot of these questions can be answered.
These devices do not cost $1000 as someone mentioned. They are around $50 to $70 and sold through distributors. Manufacturer is Bybee Labs, Inc. different than Bybee Technologies although their web site says that Bybee is a co-founder. A lot of technical information is available at the web site, so a lot of these questions can be answered.
First and foremost, I'm not knocking on this product. I do not know its design nor have I tried it.
However, I do want to tell you readers that having a design patented is almost meaningless in America. Almost anything can be patented with fancy words and a good patent lawyer.
Let me tell you a few example stories....
1) Computer memory DIMMs have this little I2C/SMBus EEPROM that is called the Serial Presence Detect FRU? It's an industry standard for many years. I know a guy who patented it in 2004. He just called it something else but it's essentially an EEPROM in the same PCA as a bunch of memory chips, aka DIMMs.
2) Seen some of IBM's latest computers with lots of DIMM sockets? It is based on a memory buffer that Intel makes. It connects to the Intel CPU and allows you to expand DIMM capacity. OK, so Intel CPU, Intel Memory Buffer. Guess what? I know of 2 separate patents going to 2 separate parties for the same thing. I personally know all of those engineers. They are not from Intel.
Lawyers these days......
So if someone tries to sell you a patented product, it doesn't make it any more "wow" than say something a knowledgeable person could DIY for him/herself.
However, I do want to tell you readers that having a design patented is almost meaningless in America. Almost anything can be patented with fancy words and a good patent lawyer.
Let me tell you a few example stories....
1) Computer memory DIMMs have this little I2C/SMBus EEPROM that is called the Serial Presence Detect FRU? It's an industry standard for many years. I know a guy who patented it in 2004. He just called it something else but it's essentially an EEPROM in the same PCA as a bunch of memory chips, aka DIMMs.
2) Seen some of IBM's latest computers with lots of DIMM sockets? It is based on a memory buffer that Intel makes. It connects to the Intel CPU and allows you to expand DIMM capacity. OK, so Intel CPU, Intel Memory Buffer. Guess what? I know of 2 separate patents going to 2 separate parties for the same thing. I personally know all of those engineers. They are not from Intel.
Lawyers these days......
So if someone tries to sell you a patented product, it doesn't make it any more "wow" than say something a knowledgeable person could DIY for him/herself.
You are right, Arius, but not in this case. Jack Bybee has a cousin (also named Jack Bybee, by the way), who is an attorney, so they can very efficiently go after someone who obviously tries to steal the design. Usually, patents also exist to sell to other companies, in order to get royalties, and sometimes they might sign away the whole patent. Jack Bybee has been patenting ideas for many decades, unfortunately many are still classified, but I know that he has sold some patents in the past to different companies.
Hi John,
The ultimate protection against being ripped off. Sorry, couldn't resist commenting.
From another viewpoint, since classified patents are unknown to the normal world, why would we care? What difference would any of this make? Of course, any logic could extend poor Jack's situation as precarious. He knows too much, and is therefore both a national hero and a major security issue thanks to John Curl here. The poor guy is probably about to go into protective custody against his will. All because the world now knows how critically important his knowledge is to the United States of America. If he is kidnapped, they'll probably have instructions to kill the poor fella.
John, you really must be more careful about what you say in a public forum. You've completely blown Jack's cover now. Remember, "loose lips sink ships".
-Chris
Why?
The ultimate protection against being ripped off. Sorry, couldn't resist commenting.
From another viewpoint, since classified patents are unknown to the normal world, why would we care? What difference would any of this make? Of course, any logic could extend poor Jack's situation as precarious. He knows too much, and is therefore both a national hero and a major security issue thanks to John Curl here. The poor guy is probably about to go into protective custody against his will. All because the world now knows how critically important his knowledge is to the United States of America. If he is kidnapped, they'll probably have instructions to kill the poor fella.
John, you really must be more careful about what you say in a public forum. You've completely blown Jack's cover now. Remember, "loose lips sink ships".
-Chris
Chris,
it really is an issue when you file a patent application and a colonel shows up to have a nice little chat. Then you get the story of how Bell Labs really didn't invent the Laser and the fellow who did got the patent much later (after the real invention was declassified.)and made much more money.
ES
it really is an issue when you file a patent application and a colonel shows up to have a nice little chat. Then you get the story of how Bell Labs really didn't invent the Laser and the fellow who did got the patent much later (after the real invention was declassified.)and made much more money.
ES
I haven't said anything recently that might hurt Jack Bybee, but I have in the past, said too much, in the heat of discussion, in order to get certain people to take him seriously. However, I failed to convince anyone, and nobody here does take his efforts seriously, at least not on this website. It doesn't matter, now. Live in ignorance. '-)
Can't find a single patent issued with Jack listed as the inventor. Even if a patent is sold to someone else, the inventor remains the inventor. The only thing that changes is the assignee name.
Your buddy Jack seems to be quite the phantom. So far there hasn't been one shred of evidence produced to support any of your claims about him.
se
Ok. Found him under John William Bybee.
But there's just ONE patent issued to a John Bybee. And it was filed in 2007, well after he first started selling his black magic stuff.
So getting back to John's claim that "Jack Bybee has been patenting ideas for many decades, unfortunately many are still classified, but I know that he has sold some patents in the past to different companies," there's not one shred of evidence to support it.
As I said, Bybee seems to be a phantom.
se
- Status
- Not open for further replies.