Class i
 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
wahab
diyAudio Member

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: algeria/france
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Edmond Stuart If we do take Re (internal as well external) emitter resistances into account we get: Gain = output/input = RL / ( RL + 1/gm + RE' + RE) , where gm ~= Ie / 26mV, RE' is the internal and RE is the external emitter resistance. Now let's define Rtop = 1/gmtop + RE'top + RE for the 'top' tranny and Rbot = 1/gmbot + RE'bot + RE for the 'bottom' tranny, then gain = RL / ( RL + Rtop||Rbot ) and the gm of the whole circuit is 1 / ( Rtop||Rbot ), okay? Now, let's plot this stuff and look at the black curve, which depicts the combined gm (of top and bottom tranny). Contrary to my previous post of gm, the green curve, this one doesn't show the 'doubling' at large currents. Instead, only a small increase in the crossover zone. This is because the circuit is a bit over biased (which is another story). Despite the fact we have taken into account the effect of Vbe, RE' and RE, this kind gm does not explain the excess of distortion caused by a sliding bias. Please tell me what I did wrong. Cheers, E.

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Edmond Stuart The point is that the composite gm of the bipolar output trannies plus emitter resistors did not reveal the gm doubling at large currents. That means you can't use it for explaining the distortion. Perhaps you forgot it, but we are talking about the real cause of distortion: is it bias voltage modulation or is it gm modulation. According to my last plot (black curve) it is not gm modulation. edit: the astute reader would notice that the 'green' gm curve does show gm doubling. So, wtf are we talking about?
Hi Edmond,

Foremost , happy new year to you and to all members of the forum,

There s nothing wrong in the equations above as per se , only
the way they must be interpreted differ between people in this thread.

If we take your circuit as exemple and apply the said equations we can
easily deduct that gm variation of your output stage for 100mA bias
range from 5.26S with no output signal to an asymptotical limit of 8.33S
at very large signal , that is 1.6 variation ratio and this should translate
in the simulation , wich it doesnt if we look at your curves for the non
sliding bias one.

Yet , the sliding bias curve show about this ratio in gm variation ,
wich is the cause of its higher distorsion , i think.

What the equation above dont readily show , or rather interpret,
is that the emitter resistors will cause a local degeneration , that is ,
local negative feedback within the device from emitter to base and this
will translate in what you are interpreting as "base modulation".

Of course , negative feedback will modulate the input signal at the
relevant node, explicitly the devices bases.

Implementing a sliding bias is just reducing the feedback ratio
from emitter to base , hence negating the NFB provided by the emitter
resistors signal and this translate in higher gm variation in the sims , hence ,
higher distorsion as well..................

As obvious in the equations above , quasi linearization of the caracteristic
imply gm variation being mitigated by increasing the emitters resistors values,
wich will induce lower gm ------ > lower but also more linear gain caracteristic.

Is there something wrong in this view?....

 3rd January 2013, 12:23 PM #142 davidsrsb   diyAudio Member   Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Kuala Lumpur To me the non linearity is low enough to be controlled by overall NFB. What I really like about this circuit, is how by combining a n channel VMOS source follower on positive half and n channel common source on the negative half we get a low cost all n channel output stage without the bias stability problems.
Edmond Stuart
diyAudio Member

Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Amsterdam
Quote:
 Originally Posted by wahab Hi Edmond, Foremost , happy new year to you and to all members of the forum,
Thank you, wahab, the same to you.

Quote:
 There s nothing wrong in the equations above as per se, only the way they must be interpreted differ between people in this thread.
I wish I had never dropped these equations. I have never used them. They were only meant as an illustration of what approximately happens inside the simulator. The graphs I've shown were based on simulation, thus NOT based on these f*king equations.

Quote:
 If we take your circuit as example and apply the said equations we can easily deduct that gm variation of your output stage for 100mA bias range from 5.26S with no output signal to an asymptotic limit of 8.33S at very large signal , that is 1.6 variation ratio and this should translate in the simulation , which it doesn't if we look at your curves for the non sliding bias one.
>a 1.6 variation ratio ? I disagree.
The idle bias was 150mA, RE' = 0.04R and RE = 0.12R. So gm ~= 1 / ( 26/150 + 0.04 + 0.12 ) = 3A/V per side; thus for both sides 6A/V, while the graph shows 6.2A/V.
At the extremes of the graph, where Ie = 5A, (the 'other' Ie is almost zero, so we may ignore this one) we get gm ~= 1/( 26/5000 + 0.04 + 0.12 ) = 6.053A/V, while the graph shows 5.68A/V. So I would say reasonable in accordance with my simplified equations. Calculated and simulated gm variation are 1:1008 resp. 1:109.

Quote:
 Yet , the sliding bias curve show about this ratio in gm variation , which is the cause of its higher distortion , i think.
The sliding bias curve shows a 1:2 variation, which has nothing to do with your (erroneous) 1.6 variation. It is caused by the effect you have just explained below: 'negating the NFB provided by the emitter resistors signal'.

Quote:
 What the equation above don't readily show , or rather interpret, is that the emitter resistors will cause a local degeneration , that is, local negative feedback within the device from emitter to base and this will translate in what you are interpreting as "base modulation".
Sorry, I can't follow you. Calculation as well as simulation has taken into account the effect of the degeneration resistors.
>"base modulation" ? AFAIK, I've never used this terminology. Perhaps you mean 'bias modulation'?

Quote:
 Of course , negative feedback will modulate the input signal at the relevant node, explicitly the devices bases. Implementing a sliding bias is just reducing the feedback ratio from emitter to base , hence negating the NFB provided by the emitter resistors signal and this translate in higher gm variation in the sims , hence, higher distortion as well..................
I fully agree, though I still insist that the nonlinear bias voltage modulation is the root cause of increased distortion.

Quote:
 As obvious in the equations above , quasi linearization of the characteristic imply gm variation being mitigated by increasing the emitters resistors values, which will induce lower gm ------ > lower but also more linear gain characteristic. Is there something wrong in this view?....
Nope.

Cheers,
E.
__________________
http://www.data-odyssey.nl/

Edmond Stuart
diyAudio Member

Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Amsterdam
Quote:
 Originally Posted by davidsrsb To me the non linearity is low enough to be controlled by overall NFB. What I really like about this circuit, is how by combining a n channel VMOS source follower on positive half and n channel common source on the negative half we get a low cost all n channel output stage without the bias stability problems.
That's exactly what Marcel van de Gevel did.
See: 'Audio power with a new loop', Electronics World, Feb. 1996, pp. 140..143.
Perhaps you did mean this circuit, right?

Cheers,
E.
Attached Images
 Gevel.png (324.3 KB, 270 views)
__________________
http://www.data-odyssey.nl/

 3rd January 2013, 02:53 PM #145 davidsrsb   diyAudio Member   Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Kuala Lumpur The EDN article figure 4 on The Class i low-distortion audio output stage (Part 2) | EDN shows both output configurations. If you combine the two in push pull the sliding bias appears to work just fine. The output devices can be vfets instead on bipolar. I would not use laterals in this circuit as the higher Vgson is inefficient and they work very well in conventional class AB anyway.
 3rd January 2013, 07:30 PM #146 Edmond Stuart   diyAudio Member     Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Amsterdam I also wouldn't use laterals in this particular application as the higher Vgson is inefficient. Besides, I think that in 'some circles' laterals are rather overrated. Anyhow, they are not my cup of thee. I prefer verticals. Cheers, E. __________________ http://www.data-odyssey.nl/
 3rd January 2013, 11:09 PM #147 davidsrsb   diyAudio Member   Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Kuala Lumpur I don't think overrated but I would say seriously overpriced
diyAudio Member

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Krakow
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Edmond Stuart That's exactly what Marcel van de Gevel did. See: 'Audio power with a new loop', Electronics World, Feb. 1996, pp. 140..143. Perhaps you did mean this circuit, right? Cheers, E.
Hi!
could anybody provide the link for Marcel's article?,
I lost the article from EW somehow, and would like to read it again...
thank you in advance!
__________________
regards, Pawel

 12th February 2017, 03:11 PM #149 Edmond Stuart   diyAudio Member     Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Amsterdam __________________ http://www.data-odyssey.nl/

 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         Dx Classic Amplifiers         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 tiefbassuebertr Solid State 75 3rd December 2016 06:49 AM tiefbassuebertr Solid State 37 27th July 2012 08:04 AM ray_moth Tubes / Valves 19 23rd January 2009 07:52 PM Brisso57 Solid State 4 14th February 2007 10:30 AM

 New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:00 PM.

 Home - Contact Us - Advertise - Rules - diyAudio Store - Sponsors - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Top - Opt-out policy

Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 15.00%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.