|
|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
| Pass Labs This forum is dedicated to Pass Labs discussion. |
|
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 |
|
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Amsterdam
|
I've been reading through patent #5710522 trying to understand the basics behind Nelson's active current source setup. I bumped into this topic after having read this thread where kenpeter at post #12 says :
Quote:
![]() When the input signal swings negative, IRFP440 becomes less conductive causing the current through Rsense B to drop and Rsense A to rise because Cout is being charged through the attached load. Whereas with a single Rsense the max loading current would be about 1.4A (0.66/0.47), this time the maximum loading current is 3A (0.66/0.22). As soon as the Cout is filled the idle current gets distributed evenly over Rsense A and Rsense B again resulting in a idle of 1.4A The same applies for the positive signal swing where the IRFP440 becomes more conductive causing the current through Rsense B to rise while unloading the charge from Cout through IRFP440. The rise in current over Rsense B will cause BDX64 to become less conductive further lowering the current through Rsense A. Looking at the original patent I can't help but wonder if the split sense resistor setup accomplished the same without R5 and C1 ? ![]() Now the big Q is if this all sounds better and, listening to this setup while I type, I must say it does ! Somehow Zen seems to be in better control of the woofer.
__________________
We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we would let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines. Last edited by chriscam; 23rd April 2011 at 01:52 PM. Reason: added identifiers |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
The one and only
|
The advantage of the Aleph circuit is that the values of
DC and AC are easily adjusted independently.
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: USA
|
Those two split resistors are employed to force the transistor on top to double the output current from the bottom tr. into the load. (for efficiency,
which is not impressive, when that top tr. serves as a CCS). Simple math: Ra*It+Rb*Ib=constant (which is Ube of the bipolar tr. in the FB loop) Since Ra=Rb, then It+Ib=const. Now, switching to deltas, dIt=-dIb, and dIout=2dIb, which is the result of Push-Pull action of the SRPP principle, employed in your, and similar circuits. So, again, the circuit employs the feedback loop to force the top transistor to produce the desired effect.
__________________
The truth is out there. Who can handle the truth? |
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Patent? What patent? | Taterworks | Subwoofers | 1 | 28th January 2009 07:55 AM |
| Supersym patent | Rescue Toaster | Pass Labs | 6 | 22nd January 2008 09:49 PM |
| Patent | ABJensen | Digital Source | 3 | 2nd January 2008 06:46 AM |
| Whizzer patent... | moray james | Full Range | 14 | 28th November 2006 05:50 PM |
| Patent stupidity. | Circlotron | Everything Else | 36 | 11th December 2004 05:04 PM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 0.06666 seconds (81.23% PHP - 18.77% MySQL) with 10 queries |