however, on that same web site is Leach's RIAA preamp which uses 2N5457 JFETs at the front end.
mlloyd1
mlloyd1
ash_dac said:Hi,
From the Leach amp pages...
"Because FET parameters are so unpredictable and FETs are more susceptible to flicker noise, I prefer the BJTs with emitter resistors." http://users.ece.gatech.edu/~mleach/lowtim/bckgrnd.html
Is the unpredictability a problem inherent in the manufacturing of FET's ?
http://users.ece.gatech.edu/~mleach/ece4391/noise_b.pdf
ash_dac said:Is the unpredictability a problem inherent in the manufacturing of FET's ?
It is _much_ easier to control the dimensions of vertical structures
by choosing diffusion time rather than controlling horizontal structures
with masks, exposure and etching. This was THE breaktrough of the
planar process.
FET channel length and width usually depend on horizontal structures.
This unlucky fate is shared by lateral PNPs that exist in some low cost
bipolar processes, where the extra diffusion steps needed to produce
nice PNPs are to be avoided.
Gerhard
mlloyd1 said:however, on that same web site is Leach's RIAA preamp which uses 2N5457 JFETs at the front end.
mlloyd1
He used them in this application to mate better with a phono cartridge. Less base current, lower noise with cartridge source, etc.
I am very surprised that anyone in the last 30 years, would use a 2N5457 fet for a phono input. It IS too noisy, but many fets, both American or Japanese, are better than almost any bipolar transistor, 1/f noise included.
What about the power amplifier compensation?
Ho Hum...
I have never personally seen any spectrum anaylisis of outputs to the VAS of jfets/mosfet (matched/unmatched - with all it's incipient problems) cascodes versus single bjts with and without current mirrors. Just another ten dimensions are added etc....
I think the multiple Vgs spreads compared with the single Vbe of BJTs means in a differential it is a sub optimal subtractor - much more incorrect from the audio signal. Monolithic op amps are a very different technology.a
There not the same.
What the hell has input noise to do with a power amplifer anyway?
Ho Hum...
I have never personally seen any spectrum anaylisis of outputs to the VAS of jfets/mosfet (matched/unmatched - with all it's incipient problems) cascodes versus single bjts with and without current mirrors. Just another ten dimensions are added etc....
I think the multiple Vgs spreads compared with the single Vbe of BJTs means in a differential it is a sub optimal subtractor - much more incorrect from the audio signal. Monolithic op amps are a very different technology.a
There not the same.
What the hell has input noise to do with a power amplifer anyway?
john curl said:I am very surprised that anyone in the last 30 years, would use a 2N5457 fet for a phono input. It IS too noisy, but many fets, both American or Japanese, are better than almost any bipolar transistor, 1/f noise included.
It WAS designed 30 years ago, when those noisy LPs were sold.
Yes - low noise RIAA preamp has always been greater challenge than a simple link level stage with linear gain 2x or so.
An even greater problem is with the reproduce noise of analog tape recorders. This is even more difficult than RIAA reproduction, because of the absolute output vs inductance and the lack of high frequency falloff after a 50us time constant or so. In those early days, we sometimes used selected fets, but it was marginal. By 1973, however, we found solutions to this problem and dropped the input noise with fets to less than 2nV/rt Hz. Today, we can do about 1nV/rt Hz differential, and 0.4nV/rt Hz for special function inputs like moving coil.
Back to the Butler input / OP275
Hi,
Butler design:-
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5101126.pdf
The text is in patent speak but suggests that the BJT works for low input signals, and the FET works for higher input signals.
Is there any value in this approach ?
see also:-
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=68156&highlight=
Hi,
Butler design:-
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5101126.pdf
The text is in patent speak but suggests that the BJT works for low input signals, and the FET works for higher input signals.
Is there any value in this approach ?
see also:-
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=68156&highlight=
like that weird Holman RIAA preamp from many years ago with a jfet on one side of the input diff amp and a bipolar on the other side?
mlloyd1
mlloyd1
john curl said:This design is problematic, for reasons other than noise.
mlloyd1 said:like that weird Holman RIAA preamp from many years ago with a jfet on one side of the input diff amp and a bipolar on the other side?
mlloyd1
Sounds weird. There was a swedish amp doing a similar thing, using a Rush cascode consisting of one Jfet and one BJT.
Christer, the Holman circuit was just a cheap way of doing things. It is bad, because it does not properly cancel the even harmonics. The Butler design starves the bipolars, so that when they give up, the fet pair takes over. This causes FIM distortion i.e. Barrie Gilbert, just like the old fahioned 741, except that you don't actually get to slew rate limiting as fast. This is just what Matti Otala was concerned about in the slew rate vs TIM controversy. TIM measures the actual distortion at all measured levels, but slew rate 'predicts' distortion below slew rate limiting based on a class A model of a bipolar diff pair. The Butler circuit would measure high TIM, YET have a fairly high slew rate. Therefore, just a slew rate spec. is not enough, in all cases.
John, yes I find it hard to see a point in using different types of devices in a diff pair. That seems to defeat the whole idea and all the nice properties of it. As for the circuit I referred to, with a Rush cascode, I have the same concern. But to their excuse I can at least say that i think it migh have been intended as a clever way of avoiding level shifting. That is, if the quiescent Vgs of the JFET cancels the Vbe of the BJT, then the both inputs might have been at the same Q voltage.
I don't know if that was the case though. I only have a reverse engineered schematic from photos and never had a chance to measure it.
I don't know if that was the case though. I only have a reverse engineered schematic from photos and never had a chance to measure it.
Christer, of course a cascode is not a diff pair, and the effects of mixing devices is significantly different. I have no idea what the 'Rush cascode' is.
Analog Devices, in their newer opamp circuits like AD8033, do use combination of JFETs and BJTs in the input stage. The reason is to get rail-to-rail input common mode performance and to prevent phase inversion. Of course input stage properties do change when it switches from JFETs to BJTs, but it is really better than input stage collapse. Especially for lower supply voltages like +/-5V one will appreciate this feature. The 8033 is my favourite for input stages for measurement purposes. The 8033 is 80MHz, 80V/us JFET input opamp.
I have not really used these devices, but Walt Jung clued me in about the potential problems. It is possible that some devices lack serious compromises. I don't know for sure.
john curl said:Christer, of course a cascode is not a diff pair, and the effects of mixing devices is significantly different. I have no idea what the 'Rush cascode' is.
Well a Rush cascode is not really a cascode, but rather very similar to a diff pair if you look at the equations although looking quite different in a schematic. I had never heard of it either until I once posted this schematic of the amp I was referring to, and Hugh Dean told me that this type of input stage is called a Rush cascode. Although it normally consists of two complementary BJTs, not a JFET and a BJT as in this case:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=130914&stamp=1045587290
This guy uses a "normal" Rush cascode in the third figure, although not giving any name for it.
http://www.4qdtec.com/opamp.html
Here is Hugh's educating comment on the topology
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=131231#post131231
And BTW, here is how NAD used it in their phono stage:
http://www.tcaas.btinternet.co.uk/nad3020pre.gif
Christer said:
Here is Hugh's educating comment
😉
(P.S.: Very sorry, I could not help quoting .. 😉 )
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Home
- Amplifiers
- Solid State
- FET inputs or bipolar inputs on a power amp?