audio buffer layout

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#42
PMA said:
digi01,
I guess you all well aware of this circuit (Audio Buffer)
Pavel Macura
Click to expand...

I have never seen this page.thank you.


peranders said:
Personally I think "Audio buffer" isn't a name really, more like a description of a function.
Click to expand...

Yes,it is a description of a function in design progress."Audio"+"Buffer",just two words placed together one by one.
Real PCB will not carve these two words.

digi
 
#43
stop it!

Originally posted by PMA
digi01,
I guess you all well aware of this circuit (Audio Buffer)
Pavel Macura
Click to expand...

Well its good to see a nice conservative approach to intellectual property, but come on, give me a break! The term "audio buffer" is clearly generic, meaning it describes generally that its about buffering audio signals. As such its not protectable and no IP attaches. Digi01 could use "Audio Buffer" etched in perminent ink even if someone else used "audio buffer (TM)." You just can't protect something that is generic. Its like if Krell started using "Amplifier (TM)," it couldn't prevent others from calling things that amplify an Amplifier (capital letter on purpose).

Even so, I bet you could find a lot of "audio buffers" out there in commerce, and the failure of the original person to police those uses means that the term could be abandoned.

So in my opinion, this is kind of a joke, if people want to refer to any type of audio buffer- call it an "audio buffer" if you want.
 
#44
Sheldon said:


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
Click to expand...

Indeed, the error of using generic functional terms as product names - how in the world would you protect such name as IP. If some people think they can patent such a generic functional term, I would say, think harder!

Let's be reasonable enough!
 
#47
optimized layout,almost done😎 the PCB board size is as same as my series design - 3886igc,regulator and BLDdriver.
 

Attachments

  • buffer.gif
    buffer.gif
    9 KB · Views: 926
#48
re audio buffer

a google search on audio buffer yields mostly digital buffering on data streams but interestingly there is an audio buffer circuit
using a single opamp. This was posted by a radio amateur (ham)
to improve sound quality for transmission. He calls it audio buffer (lower case) but copyright 2000- this is is 2 years earlier than PMA.

So while PMA may well have a far better circuit design the name and function are identical to our 'ham' posting of 2000.

May this help resolve the "mouse-frog war" as Upopa so nicely put it.
 
#50
Bas, I think you miss the point.

The concern was that digi01 had used the same name as Pavel
who had used it previously in 2002, Pavel felt he had ownership implied and digi01 would have been polite to discuss his use of the name.

I found a site where it had been used in the same context 2 years prior to Pavel in 2000. There may be others.

This constitutes prior use, therefore it seems reasonable that Pavel really has no claim to the use of the name: audio buffer.

This in no way is meant to put down Pavel. I have high regard
for Pavel. But fair is fair.
 
#54
I don't know how good or bad it is really but I would have placed the buffer after the opamp, not beside it. I would also have a whole groundplane... because I like it.

May I ask why you haven't chosen the TO220 version of BUF634, takes up less space and is more current capable. If you for some reason want to use the DIL08 version, why don't you add option for TO220?

I would also recommend that you have decoupling caps from supply to ground and not as you have now. Current is taken from supply to ground since the load is connected to ground.

I think you also should add option for a input LP filter. This is wise to have. You don't have to use but it's good to have it there if you must filter the input signal. Suitable frequency is 50-200 kHz.

Input coupling cap isn't so bad either to have room for. I think Upupa's solution (which is more or less identical to my QRV_04 amp) is a good start. If you feel that some parts are unnecessary, just omit them. Costs nothing and in your case space isn't an issue, or is it?
 
#58
Hmm I was looking for a way to print the entire thing at one time. To print I had to cut out each image and resize them myself. Has anyone tried these layouts yet or am I the first 🙂 Judging from the resistor spacing it looks to be 1/8w, guess the original parts list has changed.


Adam
 
#59
Hi astouffer,Thank you for your interest in my designs.
this project is still in progress,I will post the print version tonight🙂 the source file is in my notebook computer.

P.S.I am on holiday now,hardly surf the NET.please contact me via e-mail.

Judging from the resistor spacing it looks to be 1/8w.
Click to expand...

Yes,the resistors are 1/8W (vertical mounting) or use 0805 SMD resistors.

ZANG
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom