audio buffer layout

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#22
hi digi01,

i suppose the Audio Buffer that you had posted here can be used as a preamplifer to an amplifier. if i were to do that is there any modification required on the schematic?

the reason i'm asking is because i had built a 6 channel amplifier based on tda7294 with gain of about 33. and i wish to built a preamp. as an input to the tda7294 amp.

thanks in advance 🙂
 
#29
Personally I think "Audio buffer" isn't a name really, more like a description of a function.

If digi had called it "PMA Audio buffer" and you happened to called it the same or just "Audio buffer", then I would have objected.

You can't really claim anything using this name. It's like calling a design for "Power amplifier".

I know you have commercial interests in this buffer design but as far as I know you have not offered any group deals and the design is pretty directly from the datasheet of BUF634. digi has made his own "buffer" here.

I have also a varaint of the BUF634 theme and I can't really claim any high degree of designing. It's straight from the datasheet, LM317/337 regulators etc.
 
#30
I have not complaint against his circuit design. The design is, as stated, similar to Burr-Brown application note. But the exactly same name used by digi01 profits from popularity of the "Audio buffer" design, this is more than apparent. I was just appealing to common human modesty, nothing more, nothing less. This has not much to do with business interests.
 
#31
I see what you mean but I still think "Audio buffer " is OK to use for everyone else, not only by you. You can't really claim any name rights using "Audio buffer" as the name of your product. If your product really is popular I don't think you have a problem in your sales as long as it's so good as people expect. If digi happen to make a better product than yours, I'll believe it's called competition and maybe you'll have to upgrade yours.

If you get your customers mainly from here I'm pretty sure they can see the difference between your pcb and digi's and if you don't get customers from here you don't have a problem at all as I see it.

Maybe you should distinguish your designs with a more odd name?

It's common practice in the commercial world that you have a type number and a name. I for instance have three letters and two numbers but this is mainly for keeping order of my project files.
 
#33
PMA said:
I have not complaint against his circuit design. The design is, as stated, similar to Burr-Brown application note. But the exactly same name used by digi01 profits from popularity of the "Audio buffer" design, this is more than apparent. I was just appealing to common human modesty, nothing more, nothing less. This has not much to do with business interests.
Click to expand...

Good lesson if you ever want to do something truely commercial. Don't try to use the actual descriptive name of an object as a trademark. It can be part of a trademark, but the descriptive part alone cannot be protected. Peranders is right here. Besides being legally invalid, it's unreasonable to expect others to avoid using a common description as a working name, or part of their trademark. If you had chosen an uncommon descriptive name such as Impedence Matcher, and others co-opted it, you still wouldn't have a good legal position, but you would have a point regarding courtesy and respect.

Sheldon
 
#34
Re: Audio Buffer

Elso Kwak said:
Gentlemen, What is so special about a datasheet application of a OPA627 and a BUF634?
Anyway you could build the whole thing as a one-stage discrete opamp, less phase shift too.......Better sounding too.......and more original!
:checked:
Click to expand...

The boards in question make it easy for Diy'ers to put together projects in a tidy fashion. That's worthwhile. Convenience is a good thing. I don't get the impression that anything "special" beyond that is claimed. Better approaches are, of course, always welcome.

Sheldon
 
#38
Peter Daniel said:
Audio buffer isn't a name, but a description. However, " Audio Buffer" can be regarded as a name (note a capital letter in a word 'buffer').
Click to expand...

Personally i think even "The Audio Buffer (tm)" wouldn't make it past the front desk of any trademark office...

If digi would like to change the thread title & item description in deference to PMA that is up to him...

dave
 
#39
If "audio buffer" can be a name for a product then so could "audio amplifier" and no would argue that "audio amplifier" is OK so I dont think "audio buffer" can constitute a proper name at all.

I say give him a break already and dont let this thread turn into one those threads (you know what I mean):smash:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom