Idea for linearizing a cascoded VAS
 User Name Stay logged in? Password
 Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Search

 Solid State Talk all about solid state amplification.

 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
 27th June 2008, 03:47 AM #1 ionomolo   diyAudio Member     Join Date: May 2007 Location: Los Angeles Idea for linearizing a cascoded VAS I have (and will) keep working on a class A ccs-loaded Sziklai output stage, and doing so i found that the nonlinear capacitance of the gate worked in my favour as it modified the ammount of compensation, making it higher when the transconductance was higher and lowering it when the transconductance (and so OLG) was lower. The idea i got from this, and that will seem grotesque to everybody not actually doing the maths, is that a cascoded vas could be made extraordinarily linear by using a varicap diode as compensation capacitor. It would work the following way: As the input current grows the transconductance of the VAS grows, so the amount of voltage increase needed at Cdom to produce a certain current increase becomes lower (i'm assuming that this happens after the pole and that the vas is working as an integrator). Assuming that the varicap behaves exponentially, the current needed to produce a voltage increase at the vas would go higher the same way the transconductance does, so the two effects would cancel and the whole system will be closer to a perfect integrator. As the terms appear in exponential form, a clever cascoding that made the voltage at the varicap change by the correct amount would allow to compensate for the effect squared, and this will fulminate also the distortion due to the exponential transconductance at the input stage, giving "mega-linearity". Has anyone tryed something like this, or knows a technical reason that discourages it? Please avoid the Cdom must be linear because you want things linear because it's easy to prove on paper that the nonlinear cap makes the overall system more linear.
 27th June 2008, 10:22 AM #2 nikwal   diyAudio Member   Join Date: Aug 2005 Interresting enough.. I think my brain have to process this for a while then I'll go back and see .. hmm actually I got an idea while reading this as it do contain some good info.. :-D thx.. (hmm but spontaneously I'd like to make the problem go away in some other way) __________________ http://dsl.mine.nu (very enironmental friendly 5watt damn small linux server made from a compaq t1010 terminal)..
ionomolo
diyAudio Member

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Quote:
 Originally posted by nikwal Interresting enough.. I think my brain have to process this for a while then I'll go back and see .. hmm actually I got an idea while reading this as it do contain some good info.. :-D thx.. (hmm but spontaneously I'd like to make the problem go away in some other way)

Error cancelation is refered by Douglas Shelf as attacking the symptoms instead of the problem. While this is true up to a certain point, the transconductance of a bjt is exponential by nature and there is little to do about it. Biasing it high enough to make it look linear is trying to hide the problem, not solving it.

Thanks for your interest and i'm happy my post has somehow been useful.

 27th June 2008, 03:02 PM #4 jcx   diyAudio Member   Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: .. once you've chosen your amplifying device Dr Ed Cherry has spelled out several times 3 ways to linearize a gain stage: Increase the bias to signal ratio - use less of the nonlinear gain curve Cancellation – really only useful with diff pair and push-pull emitter followers, and even order distortions Negative Feedback – local feedback as in degeneration, emitter/source followers or larger feedback loops including more gain stages what is being discussed here appears to be a form of cancellation by using a additional nonlinear device, cancellation includes "predistortion" as well as even order cancellations of diff pairs or complementary stages - and only works as well as the nonlinear parts are well known and fully predictable/stable over the operating range and with unmeasured environmental or loading changes using ideas from Cherry's list isn't cheating since as far as I know they encompass all the ways we know that work but please feel free to add new concepts to Cherry's list, it would be a considerable service to electronic engineering
syn08
Account disabled at member's request

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto
Quote:
 Originally posted by jcx Cancellation – really only useful with diff pair and push-pull emitter followers, and even order distortions
No, not really. Check this: http://perso.orange.fr/francis.audio2/AmpHegglun.doc

I wouldn't build such an amp, though.

 27th June 2008, 04:23 PM #6 jcx   diyAudio Member   Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: .. OK "emitter" is too specific for you? we can add source followers to the list of distortion cancellation schemes - or even just "complementary" stages but complementary stages are more limited in that different carrier mobility and/or N vs P doped Si conductivity make it impossible to make completely complementary devices Cherry goes on to point out that distortion cancellation schemes usually see a practical limit of <30 dB cancellation while at audio frequencies feedback can achieve many more orders of magnitude improvement as an example jfet diff pairs with nominal "square law" gm should be the most linear SS stage - until you compare them to BJT diff pairs with emitter degeneration to give the same gm as the fets - then bipolar diff pairs are more linear
 27th June 2008, 05:12 PM #7 scott wurcer   diyAudio Member     Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: dorchester ma I don't know where this falls, but if you vary the tail current of an LTP in just the right relationship to the differential input you can generate a flat region around zero and preserve low noise, which is difficult with Schmook's offset diff-pairs. We have a patent (AD8099). I suppose one could quibble but I don't really want to get into the "is it feedback" argument. __________________ "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."
 27th June 2008, 05:33 PM #8 darkfenriz   diyAudio Member     Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Warsaw So you want a reverse biased varicap diode? How about zener voltage of a typical varicap? Regards Adam
 27th June 2008, 05:33 PM #9 jcx   diyAudio Member   Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: .. Scott, I haven't see that ADI circuit but as a guess varying tail current modulates gm so this would constitute a form of "gain scheduling" which I would mostly classify as distortion cancellation in control theory I think gain scheduling is equivalent to a "pre-distortion"/cancellation scheme where you have prior knowledge of the nonlinear device's transfer function/distortion and create a fixed compensating gain schedule ( preferably a smooth curve) - where the gains are switched/varied by another measured variable I agree that sometimes the influence of the “scheduling” variable may seem to include some aspects of negative feedback, we would have to be very careful about using the same assumptions/definitions/semantics to draw sharp distinctions nor is there any need to draw such distinctions to have a useful circuit - a useful circuit may well include both pre-distortion/cancellation aspects and negative feedback
 27th June 2008, 08:44 PM #10 ionomolo   diyAudio Member     Join Date: May 2007 Location: Los Angeles I havn't seen a single reason why this should interfere with negative feedback, the amp will still have nfb and stability should be equal or even better. Compensation has to be made for the worst case transconductance, so a more linear design will be also more stable and leave more margin for feedback.

 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 Forum Rules
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Site     Site Announcements     Forum Problems Amplifiers     Solid State     Pass Labs     Tubes / Valves     Chip Amps     Class D     Power Supplies     Headphone Systems Source & Line     Analogue Source     Analog Line Level     Digital Source     Digital Line Level     PC Based Loudspeakers     Multi-Way     Full Range     Subwoofers     Planars & Exotics Live Sound     PA Systems     Instruments and Amps Design & Build     Parts     Equipment & Tools     Construction Tips     Software Tools General Interest     Car Audio     diyAudio.com Articles     Music     Everything Else Member Areas     Introductions     The Lounge     Clubs & Events     In Memoriam The Moving Image Commercial Sector     Swap Meet     Group Buys     The diyAudio Store     Vendor Forums         Vendor's Bazaar         Sonic Craft         Apex Jr         Audio Sector         Acoustic Fun         Chipamp         DIY HiFi Supply         Elekit         Elektor         Mains Cables R Us         Parts Connexion         Planet 10 hifi         Quanghao Audio Design         Siliconray Online Electronics Store         Tubelab     Manufacturers         AKSA         Audio Poutine         Musicaltech         Holton Precision Audio         CSS         exaDevices         Feastrex         GedLee         Head 'n' HiFi - Walter         Heatsink USA         miniDSP         SITO Audio         Twin Audio         Twisted Pear         Wild Burro Audio

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post gionag Pass Labs 3 19th March 2008 08:08 PM jnb Tubes / Valves 5 9th September 2007 10:28 PM croccodillo Tubes / Valves 5 29th June 2007 10:35 AM Fuling Pass Labs 17 6th December 2006 03:26 PM Acoustic Absorb Solid State 12 20th August 2006 06:50 PM

 New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20 AM.