One of Walton's tried opamps was the LT1115, which share some things with the LT1028.
Haven't yet tried other sims for the AD797, like noise or impedance, which are dealt with by Walton at the end of his article.
As everybody knows, the AD797 is a can of worms which I do not wish to get into. I will anyway try it, hopefully with some guidance from this thread, to see if or what changes in the audio quality.
But I am curious about the LT1115, which I also have some, and behave quite well on the sim. The psrr curve is very much as good as that of the the AD797.
But Walton didn't try it on the four opamps he selected for the final comparisons: AD797, AD825, LME49710 and OPA134.
From that list only the AD825 seems still active, as well as the OPA134. The LME is obsolete. The OPA134 seems to be most affordable of all four chips, @ $2.95 each
Following the procedure I was taught, hopefully done well, I added the OPA134 to the library, hopefully being able to simulate and compare with the others.
But something is not going right, because it keeps calculating and doesn't seem to get to a final result.
So it seems I might need more help to get going.
My idea is to look for more candidates that we can use on the Super Reg. Let's hope I'm being helpful. Right now I'm the pawn on the field.
Haven't yet tried other sims for the AD797, like noise or impedance, which are dealt with by Walton at the end of his article.
As everybody knows, the AD797 is a can of worms which I do not wish to get into. I will anyway try it, hopefully with some guidance from this thread, to see if or what changes in the audio quality.
But I am curious about the LT1115, which I also have some, and behave quite well on the sim. The psrr curve is very much as good as that of the the AD797.
But Walton didn't try it on the four opamps he selected for the final comparisons: AD797, AD825, LME49710 and OPA134.
From that list only the AD825 seems still active, as well as the OPA134. The LME is obsolete. The OPA134 seems to be most affordable of all four chips, @ $2.95 each
Following the procedure I was taught, hopefully done well, I added the OPA134 to the library, hopefully being able to simulate and compare with the others.
But something is not going right, because it keeps calculating and doesn't seem to get to a final result.
So it seems I might need more help to get going.
My idea is to look for more candidates that we can use on the Super Reg. Let's hope I'm being helpful. Right now I'm the pawn on the field.
I've tried all opamps that you suggest in this application and had the greatest success with the OPA1611. IME it sits just below or equal to the AD797 in most respects but I've never had the stability problems with it that I and others have had with the AD797.
John
John
Can someone tell me if there's something wrong in the OPA134 that I can't make it work?
https://www.ti.com/product/OPA134?u...y2H0A-9TAQ9UcvnW3SBoCq8wQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds
https://www.ti.com/product/OPA134?u...y2H0A-9TAQ9UcvnW3SBoCq8wQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds
Can someone tell me if there's something wrong in the OPA134 that I can't make it work?
https://www.ti.com/product/OPA134?u...y2H0A-9TAQ9UcvnW3SBoCq8wQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds
Discussion on model and symbol creation of parts in LTspice has been moved here:
Installing and using LTspice IV (now including LTXVII). From beginner to advanced.
Can someone tell me if there's something wrong in the OPA134 that I can't make it work?
https://www.ti.com/product/OPA134?u...y2H0A-9TAQ9UcvnW3SBoCq8wQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds
I can't tell you what's wrong, but yeah, the OPA134 model is bad and very tricky to get working. However, I was able to get the OPA1611 to work and I'll attach the LTSpice simulation to this post. Here's a comparison between the AD825 and the OPA1611:
AD825 LTSpice AC Sim:

OPA1611 LTSpice AC Sim:

The schematics, LTSpice files, images, and the saved op-point are attached in a zip. What finally got the OPA1611 working (thanks again Jan) was using "savebias" to save the oppoint after it was stable and then running the AC sim on that. Additionally, I had to add some cap (~10nF) between the output and the inverting input to get the transient sim to not oscillate horribly, but this was reduced to 10femto for the AC sim.
You can use the OPA1611 schematic to start playing with the 134... if you can get it stable in transient simulation out to 1s, you can sim it in AC using "loadbias". TI's pSpice model for the 134 has terrible transient behaviour on the inputs, so it causes massive issues on startup.
Edit Note: Even with unity VCVS on the inputs, there's still startup issues. Someone with more experience with bad models might be able to work it out though.
Attachments
Last edited:
Rap, when you say that the OPA134 is hard to get working, what exactly do you mean? You mean stability and/or convergence in this particular schematic? I assume that the subckt itself works in the sense that it correctly acts as an opamp in a test circuit?
Jan
Jan
Hi,
If the sense + output must be connected together with the pos line, why not short directly the 2 output pins togheter directly on the pcb?
Thanks
If the sense + output must be connected together with the pos line, why not short directly the 2 output pins togheter directly on the pcb?
Thanks
The sense line measures the voltage "on site" where the power is being used and uses that to do the regulation. Right Jan?
Brilliant.
Brilliant.
Interestingly enough I've recently been replacing all my AD825 based superregs with OPA1611 as I found them to have a lower output z and have better line regulation with no stability penalty. Your sims seem to back that decision up. Thanks.
John
John
The sense line measures the voltage "on site" where the power is being used and uses that to do the regulation. Right Jan?
Brilliant.
Yes.
Jan
Interestingly enough I've recently been replacing all my AD825 based superregs with OPA1611 as I found them to have a lower output z and have better line regulation with no stability penalty. Your sims seem to back that decision up. Thanks.
John
John would you have some measurements for that difference?
Jan
I can't tell you what's wrong, but yeah, the OPA134 model is bad and very tricky to get working. However, I was able to get the OPA1611 to work and I'll attach the LTSpice simulation to this post. Here's a comparison between the AD825 and the OPA1611:
AD825 LTSpice AC Sim:
OPA1611 LTSpice AC Sim:
The schematics, LTSpice files, images, and the saved op-point are attached in a zip. What finally got the OPA1611 working (thanks again Jan) was using "savebias" to save the oppoint after it was stable and then running the AC sim on that. Additionally, I had to add some cap (~10nF) between the output and the inverting input to get the transient sim to not oscillate horribly, but this was reduced to 10femto for the AC sim.
You can use the OPA1611 schematic to start playing with the 134... if you can get it stable in transient simulation out to 1s, you can sim it in AC using "loadbias". TI's pSpice model for the 134 has terrible transient behaviour on the inputs, so it causes massive issues on startup.
Edit Note: Even with unity VCVS on the inputs, there's still startup issues. Someone with more experience with bad models might be able to work it out though.
You have a 1nF capacitor from the inverting IN- to OUT - not in the Jung/Didden design
You haven't specified the ESR of the various electrolytics, this is important (very)
You have a 100pF capacitor across the load -- this isn't in the Jung/Didden design.
Best test for stability is to use an DC=25m AC=1 load current on the output and look at group delay, at the impedance peak, Q=tg*f*pi
Last edited:
In his V2.3 app notes Jan does mention HF filter networks C11-R15 / C12-R16 on the sense line. These components are on the V2.3b board.
WRT ESR... I believe the "importance" is that low ESR is not desirable. The electrolytics should be "ordinary".
WRT ESR... I believe the "importance" is that low ESR is not desirable. The electrolytics should be "ordinary".
Rap, when you say that the OPA134 is hard to get working, what exactly do you mean? You mean stability and/or convergence in this particular schematic? I assume that the subckt itself works in the sense that it correctly acts as an opamp in a test circuit?
Jan
Jan,
Yes it works for some circuits, but for this specific circuit there's internal oscillations that cause it to never reach stability in any reasonable amount of time/storage. Playing with abstol and reltol changes things, but nothing enough to get it to stabilize.
WRT ESR... I believe the "importance" is that low ESR is not desirable. The electrolytics should be "ordinary".
But that means you need to specify an ESR for the cap in LTspice.
Jan
Jan,
Yes it works for some circuits, but for this specific circuit there's internal oscillations that cause it to never reach stability in any reasonable amount of time/storage. Playing with abstol and reltol changes things, but nothing enough to get it to stabilize.
Funny. Never saw anything of that.
Jan
John would you have some measurements for that difference?
Jan
I have all the above and can measure Zout, and PSRR this afternoon.
Remember that AD825's datasheet promises only 66dB (2000X) of open loop gain. Its sister products AD744, AD797, and LT1128 all have considerably higher datasheet guaranteed open loop gains: 106dB, 126dB, and 137dB respectively. If you want gigantic ripple reduction numbers (a/k/a PSRR a/k/a line rejection), pick an opamp with gigantic open loop gain.
I haven't checked it, but the important parameter (for ripple rejection) would be the OL gain at say 100 or 120Hz. I have a feeling those numbers are DC numbers.
Still, you are making an important point.
Jan
Still, you are making an important point.
Jan
Any normal single-dominant-pole opamp with a gain bandwidth product > 200 kHz, will have OL gain > 2000X (i.e. 66dB) at 100 Hz. {math note: 100 Hz x 2000 gain = 200kHz GBWP}
Since AD744, AD797, and LT1128 have GBWP far far FAR greater than 200kHz, they also have OL gain far greater than AD825 at 100 Hz.
Since AD744, AD797, and LT1128 have GBWP far far FAR greater than 200kHz, they also have OL gain far greater than AD825 at 100 Hz.
- Home
- The diyAudio Store
- Super Regulator