Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Solid State
Home Forums Rules Articles Store Gallery Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

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
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 18th July 2008, 09:38 PM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Default C0G/NP0 Ceramics in Active Filter Circuits

After reading Cyril Bateman's published articles from Electronics World, I am wondering if C0G type ceramics would be superior to film types in active crossovers and filter circuits. While they did have a hint of 3rd order distortion just barely measurable at ~-130dB in his test jig, they performed better than some Mylar types and as Cyril noted had much better reliability than any of the film types, as he found in the several thousand caps he tested that many axial and/or radial leaded parts would occasionally have problems with non-ohmic connections to the lead wires (obviously not a problem with surface mount caps).

After reading his work, I'm at a loss for any reason not to use them. We all know X7R and other type II dielectrics are not at all acceptable for active filter circuits, but is NP0/C0G a viable alternative?
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th July 2008, 10:49 PM   #2
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: berkeley ca
Mylar is not good for audio filters.
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th July 2008, 11:27 PM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Cyril's testing did show much higher distortion for PET (harmonic and intermodulation) vs. PP, Film/Foil, and NP0/COG ceramics, so yes I agree they are not good. But he noted the very occasional problem of non-ohmic connections on leaded parts on all type of film capacitors, which lead to primarily odd-order distortion products. This is why I am wondering if, in a production environment or for the hobbyist who cannot test these things, if C0G is the better choice since it only measured minorly worse than the best film/foil he tested (and produced mainly even order distortion). Cyril even went so far as to say that for any value 10nF or less that chip ceramic NP0/C0G was his preferred choice. I should note his tests of X7R type ceramics show them to be among the worst next to tantalum, so I am in no way discussing anything other than type I dielectric ceramics.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th July 2008, 01:03 AM   #4
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: berkeley ca
My tests published 30 years ago showed that X7R ceramics were awful, as well as tantalum. Unfortunately, Cyril did not footnote either the 'IEEE' or 'Audio' paper on this. Nonlinear distortion is just one factor, DA is just as important.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th July 2008, 01:07 AM   #5
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Blog Entries: 1
Did you check any NP0? I've always wondered about that myself.

In my own active filters, I just use PP/foil and Teflon. And why not? They're reasonably cheap and reliably good.
__________________
“Listening to records is like ****ing a picture of Brigitte Bardot.” - Sergiu Celibidache
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th July 2008, 01:27 AM   #6
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: berkeley ca
NPO is well known, but not practical. Just look at the size and price. Polypropylene is better, and polystyrene and teflon, even better.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th July 2008, 02:06 AM   #7
anatech is offline anatech  Canada
diyAudio Moderator
 
anatech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Georgetown, On
Completely agree with that. I guess that if you have them, then try them out. It's not like you can break anything by trying.

I have been considering a test for these NPO/COG types. I see a few of the better old amplifiers that did use these types and sounded pretty good.

As far as reliability is concerned, a few ceramic types have shorted or become noisy due to metalization going around the ceramic disc a bit. Imagine my surprise after tracing the faults down to a part I didn't think was prone to failure.

-Chris
__________________
"Just because you can, doesn't mean you should" © my Wife
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th July 2008, 03:00 AM   #8
jcx is offline jcx  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ..
when building in surface mount technology np0/c0g can be acceptable, but I have measured more 2nd order IMD than Bateman's results suggest - it could be manufacturer and test condition related

I don't know of PPS film cap measurements to this level - the other smt film technology (besides "mylar" relative PEN)



Quote:
Originally posted by jcx
lynx soundcards can do this directly, add some cleverness from jerald graeme's "optimizing op amp performance" book and with a dedicated low noise +30 dB amp in front of the lynx (and a lot of averageing to get below the noise floor) i can see to -160 dB - as evidence that i have really measured distortion, i found that 2 series 200V np0 caps gave ~ -110 dB distortion with 8Vrms while relpacing them with polystyrene dropped the harmonic to the measurement noise floor (caps in Av +4 sallen-key 30KHz low pass, 1 Kohm Rs in a compound/buffered op amp filter circuit) - the fundmental is also visible at the correct level calculated from loop gain
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th July 2008, 09:39 AM   #9
lineup is offline lineup  Sweden
diyAudio Member
 
lineup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: the north
NP0 ceramic is sometimes a good choice.
Especially when good film caps with wanted values are hard to find.

Besides the electrical qualities,
we often want 1% or max 2% tolerance caps for active filters.

Good axial polyproylene can be found with 1% from 47pF to 47nF.
For example these Vishay BC Components type 460 to 464
Click the image to open in full size.
__________________
lineup
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I need an active sub filter! hernanstafe Subwoofers 18 4th December 2007 09:32 PM
active filter from rod elliot and sub filter questions wuffer Parts 0 2nd October 2005 01:12 PM
Active Filter ChevS-10 Solid State 4 24th June 2005 05:35 PM
looking for active filter sim P.Lacombe Everything Else 0 2nd January 2003 09:33 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:28 AM.

Page generated in 0.12653 seconds (76.49% PHP - 23.51% MySQL) with 10 queries

Copyright ©1999-2012 diyAudio