John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II - Page 3599 - 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 27th February 2013, 07:45 PM   #35981
diyAudio Member
 
scott wurcer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: cambridge ma
Quote:
Originally Posted by simon7000 View Post
If the issue of TIM is well understood, then one could calculate for any given design, how much would be present and use that in design trade-offs. ES
Yes but it is just a subset of general large signal limitations of amplifiers which is/was understood. You know slew as in slewing a coastal gun in WW2. An unnecessary extra acronym made up by the audio community.
__________________
Silence is so accurate.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th February 2013, 07:59 PM   #35982
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Oakmont PA
Quote:
Originally Posted by scott wurcer View Post
Yes but it is just a subset of general large signal limitations of amplifiers which is/was understood. You know slew as in slewing a coastal gun in WW2. An unnecessary extra acronym made up by the audio community.
The information added when the phrase TIM got invented was the issue not just of slew rate but gain (or transconductance) also counted.

When doing the classic control loop for gun control undershoot and overshoot were big issues. Nyquist gets the credit for that bit of math and increased understanding. Those are stability issues.

What in my OPINION was new was that with identical gain bandwidth products, amplifiers could produce internal distortion if the gain was too high and the bandwidth (or slew rate) too low. (Implying that increasing the gain of a circuit without increasing the bandwidth might not result in decreased distortion... under some transient conditions.)

This added to the knowledge of the large signal/small signal bandwidth (Slew rate) which came from the problems with higher speeds and larger swings on triangle waves.

It is a fine point of distinction.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th February 2013, 08:46 PM   #35983
diyAudio Member
 
jan.didden's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Great City of Turnhout, Belgium
Blog Entries: 7
Bandwidth is (unless noted otherwise) a small-signal spec, slew rate is a large signal spec.
If you make sure your amp can handle the max signal amplitude and rise time it will enconter in normal use, there's no TIM or slew rate limitations. Straightforward engineering.

I cut my teeth, slew-rate wise, on Bofors 40L70 air defense guns.
We build an interface to connect these guns to a digital air defense processor. We learned very quickly that lower slew rate without overshoot was faster than high slewrate with a lot of overshoot, especially if it is you against a heavily armed jet fighter...
Absolutely the same as in electronics, replacing mechanical properties with capacitance, power and acceleration.

Many people here know quite well how to explain it, and many did.
But then some time later somebody comes along who should know better but spreads the same old disinformation again. Makes one tired.

jan
__________________
I won't make the tactical error to try to dislodge with rational arguments a conviction that is beyond reason - Daniel Dennett
Check out Linear Audio Vol 7!

Last edited by jan.didden; 27th February 2013 at 08:49 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th February 2013, 09:26 PM   #35984
gpapag is offline gpapag  Greece
diyAudio Member
 
gpapag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Athens-Greece
Quote:
Originally Posted by jan.didden View Post
I cut my teeth, slew-rate wise, on Bofors 40L70 air defense guns.
jan
These guns ruined my ears

George
__________________
["Second Law is a bitch." - SY] ["The Road To Heaven:Specify the performance & accept the design. The Road To Hell:Specify the design & accept the performance"-Bruno Putzeys]
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th February 2013, 09:31 PM   #35985
diyAudio Member
 
Kindhornman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Los Angeles, California
You can't be that old George! You would have to be in your 90's at least I would think.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th February 2013, 09:43 PM   #35986
bcarso is offline bcarso  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Canoga Park, California
Quote:
Originally Posted by scott wurcer View Post
Yes but it is just a subset of general large signal limitations of amplifiers which is/was understood. You know slew as in slewing a coastal gun in WW2. An unnecessary extra acronym made up by the audio community.
I think my first encounter with slew as a verb and adjective was when I joined the Astronomy Dept., where it applied to the rapid motion and associated motors of a telescope. On the control paddle, there was a big toggle switch you had to throw in order to enable it, as of course inadvertent actuation would cause you to "lose everything" if in the middle of a specific observation.

I once arrived at the site of the Dept.'s Ojai Field Station telescope, perhaps for some equipment changeout or responding to another problem. I was unexpectedly met by the late George O. Abell and a cute co-ed, respectively academic director and participant in that year's version of the long-running Summer Science Program at the Thacher School, in which I'd been a student in 1965. Chitchat ensued, and I asked George if the rules for appearance at dinner had changed after so many years, i.e. did one still have to dress for dinner. No, he said, the rules haven't changed, and gesturing toward her, for dinner she'd have to take all of that off.

But George went on to say how timely my visit was, as he had just been demonstrating telescope slewing and the protective limit switches in right ascension and declination. He learned that his recollection of limit switches in declination was faulty as he had slewed the tube into a grinding halt against the fork, thoroughly jammed.

Last edited by bcarso; 27th February 2013 at 09:45 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th February 2013, 09:51 PM   #35987
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Oakmont PA
Jan,

We are talking, but I don't think we are communicating.

If I have an amplifier with a gain of 100 at 1,000 hz. and another with a gain of 1000 at 100 hz. They both can be rated as having the same gain bandwidth. If they both have a thd of 1% at 500 hz, must they have the same TIM?

ES
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th February 2013, 10:50 PM   #35988
diyAudio Member
 
scott wurcer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: cambridge ma
Quote:
Originally Posted by simon7000 View Post
Jan,

We are talking, but I don't think we are communicating.

If I have an amplifier with a gain of 100 at 1,000 hz. and another with a gain of 1000 at 100 hz. They both can be rated as having the same gain bandwidth. If they both have a thd of 1% at 500 hz, must they have the same TIM?

ES
The use of transient in that term is inaccurate, the input transfer function is there for contiuous time signals. The tanh shape for an undegenerated bipolar is directly related to the total current i.e. when at max there is the onset of hard slew. R.D. Thornton and J.K. Roberge at M.I.T were teaching it this way in 1969, Barrie Gilbert was already preaching from this pulpit in 1968 and before.
__________________
Silence is so accurate.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th February 2013, 11:00 PM   #35989
bcarso is offline bcarso  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Canoga Park, California
Quote:
Originally Posted by scott wurcer View Post
The use of transient in that term is inaccurate, the input transfer function is there for contiuous time signals. The tanh shape for an undegenerated bipolar is directly related to the total current i.e. when at max there is the onset of hard slew. R.D. Thornton and J.K. Roberge at M.I.T were teaching it this way in 1969, Barrie Gilbert was already preaching from this pulpit in 1968 and before.
And Tek and others were figuring out some ingenious ways around the limitations of tanh, as it were, mostly applied to global-feedback-free 'scope amps.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th February 2013, 11:06 PM   #35990
diyAudio Member
 
Esperado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: France
Quote:
Originally Posted by simon7000 View Post
If I have an amplifier with a gain of 100 at 1,000 hz. and another with a gain of 1000 at 100 hz. They both can be rated as having the same gain bandwidth. If they both have a thd of 1% at 500 hz, must they have the same TIM?
As you don't provide the transition frequency of each amp (or open-loop gain), this question cannot be answered.
__________________
Ultimate Protection and more.The Only Source of Knowledge is experience, everything else is just information A. Einstein
  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 06:51 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