John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
gpapag

gpapag

Member
Joined 2002
Paid Member
You are arguing all these days over what exactly? (“For the poets don’t like to be understood”)
If you would spare 1:17:57 away from this forum and notice what is been said here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdZMXWmlp9g

George
 

Attachments

  • Richard Feynman 1.JPG
    Richard Feynman 1.JPG
    22 KB · Views: 254
scott wurcer

scott wurcer

R.I.P
Joined 2004
gerhard said:
I have found my note, he said 0.5V. Just so in passing, it was no bragging contest.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I simply meant I have never seen any effect that would qualify as huge. For instance the 5534 does not have a reputation for huge 1/f noise difference with common mode voltage. Most op-amps will have cascodes and operate at ~0 Vcb, but AFAIK the 5534 and LM833 do not and neither has a high 1/f corner.

EDIT -reference with measurements of opposite effect, http://tf.boulder.nist.gov/general/pdf/1139.pdf
 
Last edited:
B

bcarso

diyAudio Member RIP
Joined 2005
OPA1642

Speaking of common-mode effects, has anyone looked carefully at the TI OPA1642? From the simplified schematic on the datasheet, it appears the input stage is a rather simple NJFET pair and a ballasted PNP current mirror --- no cascoding etc. So I would expect the common-mode distortion to be fairly high.

However, they may have omitted some crucial details.
 
PMA

PMA

Member
Joined 2002
pmacura.cz/audiopage.html
Paid Member
bcarso said:
Speaking of common-mode effects, has anyone looked carefully at the TI OPA1642? From the simplified schematic on the datasheet, it appears the input stage is a rather simple NJFET pair and a ballasted PNP current mirror --- no cascoding etc. So I would expect the common-mode distortion to be fairly high.

However, they may have omitted some crucial details.
Click to expand...

Please see the attached file, OPA1641 was measured.
 

Attachments

  • bobopamp_ccif2_measurement_pma.pdf
    55.7 KB · Views: 104
scott wurcer

scott wurcer

R.I.P
Joined 2004
bcarso said:
Speaking of common-mode effects, has anyone looked carefully at the TI OPA1642? From the simplified schematic on the datasheet, it appears the input stage is a rather simple NJFET pair and a ballasted PNP current mirror --- no cascoding etc. So I would expect the common-mode distortion to be fairly high.

However, they may have omitted some crucial details.
Click to expand...

The input common mode range is only 3.5V to the + rail so possibly the schematic is over simplified as there might be room for a cascode.
 
B

bcarso

diyAudio Member RIP
Joined 2005
I was looking at the part for a budget MM phono pre application, and noted the 5.1nV/sq rt Hz noise density, the preceding part having been the OPA2134.

But I think I will allow a trifle higher parts count and use an AD797 or LME49990 preceded by a BF862 cascoded source follower and servo. The overall input voltage noise will still be acceptably small, although could be reduced by a more elaborate series feedback arrangement for the JFET. Things rapidly spiral into complexity, and I'd like frequency compensation to be simple for a change.
 
gerhard

gerhard

Member
Joined 2005
hoffmann-hochfrequenz.de
bcarso said:
I was looking at the part for a budget MM phono pre application, and noted the 5.1nV/sq rt Hz noise density, the preceding part having been the OPA2134.

But I think I will allow a trifle higher parts count and use an AD797 or LME49990 preceded by a BF862 cascoded source follower and servo. The overall input voltage noise will still be acceptably small, although could be reduced by a more elaborate series feedback arrangement for the JFET. Things rapidly spiral into complexity, and I'd like frequency compensation to be simple for a change.
Click to expand...


cascoded source follower? :confused:


< http://www.analog.com/library/analogDialogue/archives/47-10/discrete_amplifier.pdf >

regards, Gerhard
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom