It's nice to be recognized, no doubt. But you think they just traversed the web, came across your article and snagged it?
Well sorry, from the looks of it, it seemed like blatant self-advertising. I don't mind to be wrong though.MagicBox, you have really low expectations of people.
Edmund's work is very professional, accurate and insightful. It's no surprise to me that it would get noticed like this. You could almost say that Edmund's work is an advertisement of MicroCap, not the other way around.
Well I can see why you'd react that way. In some areas of life those practices can be predicted like clockwork (though self-promotion alone is not really unethical if you're honest and polite). After what I've seen of Edmund so far though, I actually chuckled a bit when I read your post. It just doesn't fit him to me (not that I know him very well).
@Edmond
Hey, I can't help that the website picture seems to suggest a list of user submitted articles. Hence why it made me wonder. Instead of throwing around threats, maybe just actually answer an honest query in the post before? Not that I really care either way now.
Their web site suggest nothing of that sort. Besides, I wrote it was Stein who pointed out the existence of that list. That should have made clear, or at least implied, that I did not submitted an article to MC. I don't know how the people at MC found my web site (though it's not really difficult). Anyhow, according to Andy Thompson (CEO of MC) the reason why it was put on their list was this:
"Your article was added to our list because it demonstrated a sophisticated understanding of both amplifier design and the use of Micro-Cap."
Needless to say that I feel very flattered. Anything wrong with that?
Last edited:
MagicBox, you have really low expectations of people.
Edmund's work is very professional, accurate and insightful. It's no surprise to me that it would get noticed like this. You could almost say that Edmund's work is an advertisement of MicroCap, not the other way around.
Hi Keane,
First, thank you for your kind worrds.
" Edmund's work is an advertisement of MicroCap" Most likely, that was the main reason why MC put my web site on their list.
BTW, my name is Edmond (never mind).
Cheers, E.
Nothing wrong with that, so props and apologiesTheir web site suggest nothing of that sort. Besides, I wrote it was Stein who pointed out the existence of that list. That should have made clear, or at least implied, that I did not submitted an article to MC. I don't know how the people at MC found my web site (though it's not really difficult). Anyhow, according to Andy Thompson (CEO of MC) the reason why it was put on their list was this:
"Your article was added to our list because it demonstrated a sophisticated understanding of both amplifier design and the use of Micro-Cap."
Needless to say that I feel very flattered. Anything wrong with that?
Their web site suggest nothing of that sort. Besides, I wrote it was Stein who pointed out the existence of that list. That should have made clear, or at least implied, that I did not submitted an article to MC. I don't know how the people at MC found my web site (though it's not really difficult). Anyhow, according to Andy Thompson (CEO of MC) the reason why it was put on their list was this:
"Your article was added to our list because it demonstrated a sophisticated understanding of both amplifier design and the use of Micro-Cap."
Needless to say that I feel very flattered. Anything wrong with that?
You are indeed entitled to feel flattered!
Cheers,
Bob
Clearly Stuart is a class act...... I am curious --- I tried every SPICE software as it became available since ver 1.0 Berkeley SPICE running in DOS. I settled on MicroCap when it came out. It seemed to work well from the beginning and only gets better ---
How do you run unregistered MC software? I travel and cannot run my software without the USB HW key they provide linked to the serial number of my software. Once I lost the key or left it behind somewhere and I had to buy another key for $250. Next time, they said I would have to buy a new package if it got lost again. I need to travel and use my MC without worry of loosing or damage to the key. How can it be done?
THx-RNMarsh
How do you run unregistered MC software? I travel and cannot run my software without the USB HW key they provide linked to the serial number of my software. Once I lost the key or left it behind somewhere and I had to buy another key for $250. Next time, they said I would have to buy a new package if it got lost again. I need to travel and use my MC without worry of loosing or damage to the key. How can it be done?
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Emulated hardware(usb) + a pirated image of the usb "dongle".
PC (or the software) won't know the difference.
Pssst ... some very expensive soft(warez) encrypt the USB .. registration is the "decrypt"
...special tools will make the image decrypted for ease of loading on said virtual usb drive.
OS
PC (or the software) won't know the difference.
Pssst ... some very expensive soft(warez) encrypt the USB .. registration is the "decrypt"
...special tools will make the image decrypted for ease of loading on said virtual usb drive.
OS
Last edited:
May I build it ? (trans-impedance stage).
Works with exceptional performance , BTW
Thanks, OS
Of course, you may build it.
Cheers, E.
I said it worked very well.
I made a CFA and a VFA version (close to the concept art).
(below 1 = CFA/ below 2 = VFA)
10ppm 20K -100w with each .... but lowish pssr on the CFA one.
Not really any better than a Baxandall or Hawksford.
Is there some other aspect I may be overlooking in performance ?
(Versus a simpler transconductance setup).
OS
Attachments
Hi Richard,
If the number of components permit, you might run the demo version of MC. However, this number is rather limited (50). In the past, I've tried to circumvent this limitation by slightly modifying the program, only two bytes. That were compare instruction which served a first check on the number of components and nodes. After removing this check, these numbers became a bit higher, but certainly not that large as in the professional version. Apparently there were more checks. Anyhow, after this tiny hack, I was able to simulate a small amp.
Cheers, E.
Hi OS,
>"Is there some other aspect I may be overlooking in performance ?"
Yes, there are a few essential aspects:
1. Input inclusive compensation (MIC).
2. Using pre-drivers, because the current gain of the TIS is just unity.
For utmost performance, it is also recommended that the collectors of the pre-driver are bootstrapped, see fig. 6 or 17 of my web page, because the TIS output is very sensitive to a nonlinear (capacitive) loading. As you certainly know, Cob vs Vce is far from linear.
Cheers, E.
>"Is there some other aspect I may be overlooking in performance ?"
Yes, there are a few essential aspects:
1. Input inclusive compensation (MIC).
2. Using pre-drivers, because the current gain of the TIS is just unity.
For utmost performance, it is also recommended that the collectors of the pre-driver are bootstrapped, see fig. 6 or 17 of my web page, because the TIS output is very sensitive to a nonlinear (capacitive) loading. As you certainly know, Cob vs Vce is far from linear.
Cheers, E.
Hi Richard,
Have you tried LTSPICE?
If so, I'm curious how you compare the two.
Cheers,
Bob
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.