Re: two versus one
How so? It isn't as straight forward as testing transistors. Please share!tiltedhalo said:The easiest way is to remove the offset and match the chips via an outside source without effecting the sonic signature of the individual chips.
whats what?
C9,10,13,14,19, and 22 would be 3 to 5% silver micas 5pf and would be optional, they are to help with RF rejection.
C25,26,27,28 are NFB isolation caps these are 47uf polarized 25VDC precision tantalum 3% or lower.
On U1, R6,33,32,31,30, and VR1 form a voltage divider network along with R28,29 and C27 form the injection and isolation point to null out the DC offset. this is repeated for all the chips.
R12,13 and C3,4 form the sense loop that travels from the output to the sense lines of the DRV134, this helps transpose some of the sonic charecteristics of the LM's to the DRV keeping the slew rates equal and helping increase the frequency bandwidth.
The overall idea was to let all the chips work together with as close two zero loss as possible, and leave a very short NFB loop under 5mm and maintain the sound quality.
C9,10,13,14,19, and 22 would be 3 to 5% silver micas 5pf and would be optional, they are to help with RF rejection.
C25,26,27,28 are NFB isolation caps these are 47uf polarized 25VDC precision tantalum 3% or lower.
On U1, R6,33,32,31,30, and VR1 form a voltage divider network along with R28,29 and C27 form the injection and isolation point to null out the DC offset. this is repeated for all the chips.
R12,13 and C3,4 form the sense loop that travels from the output to the sense lines of the DRV134, this helps transpose some of the sonic charecteristics of the LM's to the DRV keeping the slew rates equal and helping increase the frequency bandwidth.
The overall idea was to let all the chips work together with as close two zero loss as possible, and leave a very short NFB loop under 5mm and maintain the sound quality.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.