John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II - Page 2685 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Member Areas > The Lounge

The Lounge A place to talk about almost anything but politics and religion.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 22nd August 2012, 06:04 PM   #26841
jcx is offline jcx  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ..
are the discrete op amp design crowd going to at least read Groner's op amp distortion paper, try to master the design details he has published for discrete op amps

SG-Acoustics Samuel Groner Discrete OpAmps



Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavebourn View Post
Today it is not needed. I would take one low noise dual opamp and combine it with one more single fast opamp that has better output stage, adding few resistors. The result will be one opamp that you can't beat by discrete designed opamp.

I certainly agree that many op amp parameters can be improved by using composite/multiloop monolithic designs; extreme low noise, hi V swing are the main limitations - limits that are only relevant for a very few home diy audio applications

Last edited by jcx; 22nd August 2012 at 06:09 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd August 2012, 06:06 PM   #26842
diyAudio Member
 
scott wurcer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: cambridge ma
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcarso View Post
And as remarked, he thought he was the first to conceive of the use of inductors in the emitters to limit gain at high frequencies, but it was, like so many things, prior art, which (like they do more times than not) the USPTO missed.
To be fair the schematics of the modules were not published until much later. In 1966 they would have been a trade secret, and if Dick invented it I have no idea why it was not patented at the time.
__________________
"The question of who is right and who is wrong has seemed to me always too small to be worth a moment's thought, while the question of what is right and what is wrong has seemed all-important."
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd August 2012, 06:21 PM   #26843
EUVL is offline EUVL  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
> you guys will have to help on the discrete NPN/PNP choices

2SC3324 / 2SA1312

> I was going to use LSK170/74's on the input.

Can the general public get LSJ74 ?
Since when, and where ?

If not, I suggest we only use N-devices (BF862), or MMBF5458/5462.

I shall open a new thread now.

Discrete Opamp Open Design


Patrick
__________________
xen-audio.com

Last edited by EUVL; 22nd August 2012 at 06:23 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd August 2012, 06:33 PM   #26844
diyAudio Member
 
Wavebourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pleasant Hill, CA
Send a message via Skype™ to Wavebourn
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcx View Post
I certainly agree that many op amp parameters can be improved by using composite/multiloop monolithic designs; extreme low noise, hi V swing are the main limitations - limits that are only relevant for a very few home diy audio applications
High voltage opamps for an output stage are available. It is not a problem. And an opamp made of several opamps will be still discrete. Or, I can make a hybrid IC containing couple of case-less chips, one with low noise dual opamp, another with high voltage opamp. It can even fit into existing DIP sockets.
__________________
The Devil is not so terrible as his math model is!
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd August 2012, 06:45 PM   #26845
RNMarsh is offline RNMarsh  United States
diyAudio Member
 
RNMarsh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: 2457 Cascade Trail; Cool, CA. 95614
Scott -- so whats the end goal?

discrete circuit to beat the 990 using 990 topology?

Last edited by RNMarsh; 22nd August 2012 at 06:47 PM. Reason: updated 990?
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd August 2012, 07:00 PM   #26846
diyAudio Member
 
scott wurcer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: cambridge ma
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNMarsh View Post
Scott -- so whats the end goal?

discrete circuit to beat the 990 using 990 topology?
No, FET input and as simple as possible. I'd say it needs to outperform an OP627 on all audio specs.

EVUL's right it needs to use cheap readily available parts. The 2mV max offset is unrealistic with hand matched devices even most discrete duals are worse.
__________________
"The question of who is right and who is wrong has seemed to me always too small to be worth a moment's thought, while the question of what is right and what is wrong has seemed all-important."
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd August 2012, 07:04 PM   #26847
RNMarsh is offline RNMarsh  United States
diyAudio Member
 
RNMarsh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: 2457 Cascade Trail; Cool, CA. 95614
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNMarsh View Post
Here is My challenge for a descrete opamp --> using any topology and transistor types (except expensive and/rare/obsolete/exotic types): no more than 8 transistors; drive 30 ohms or lower with no more than -105db harmonics, 20-20Khz; S/N ref 1v -unweighted to be at least -110db (input shorted). ; no use of dc servo, allowed - dc offset at output less than 2mV over time and normal use temp range. all when used at gain = 10 or less.

How much better than these requirments/specs can be made??

RNM
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd August 2012, 07:08 PM   #26848
RNMarsh is offline RNMarsh  United States
diyAudio Member
 
RNMarsh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: 2457 Cascade Trail; Cool, CA. 95614
Quote:
Originally Posted by scott wurcer View Post
No, FET input and as simple as possible. I'd say it needs to outperform an OP627 on all audio specs.

EVUL's right it needs to use cheap readily available parts. The 2mV max offset is unrealistic with hand matched devices even most discrete duals are worse.
Trimmable to 2mv and stays there without servo.

Ok - 627 is goal. without dc servo in low gain app?? Cant require an IC added for dc servo in low gain apps. Should be required to Not use coupling caps anywhere -- too expensive and bulky.

Last edited by RNMarsh; 22nd August 2012 at 07:17 PM. Reason: Discrete 627
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd August 2012, 07:11 PM   #26849
morinix is offline morinix  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by underwurlde View Post
HUGE thread! 27,000+ posts and this is Part2!

So, can I be bold enough to ask what exactly is this thread about? I assume it was to work out what was in John Curl's pre-amp?
Has this been figured out yet?

No doubt some smart-ar$e will suggest reading of the entire thread...

Andy
For parts one and two together it's been 6 years, 7 months, 15 days As John says, go and read the first few 100 posts in part one.
__________________
Robert
Lounge Audio

Last edited by morinix; 22nd August 2012 at 07:17 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd August 2012, 07:20 PM   #26850
diyAudio Member
 
Wavebourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pleasant Hill, CA
Send a message via Skype™ to Wavebourn
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNMarsh View Post
Scott -- so whats the end goal?

discrete circuit to beat the 990 using 990 topology?
I think, the question should start from what the market would prefer: an analog of a famous opamp, or an opamp that would beat the famous opamp, or a preamp that will beat preamps that used that famous opamp?
__________________
The Devil is not so terrible as his math model is!
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:46 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2