John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier

Status
Not open for further replies.
myhrrhleine said:



yup,both eyes and ears.
quite often, 'hearing loss' is just a bad habit
reverseable by retraining.

I think my mom has that problem ... and what about memory loss? It seems like the worse my mom's hearing gets the worse her mind gets. She refuses to get here ears checked out, and it worries me. Anyway, it's not that bad yet, I'm just concerned that she could have Alzheimer's. I read that caffeine can prevent memory loss and even repair damaged memory. Not sure how reliable that study was though.
 
Johnloudb said:


I think my mom has that problem ... and what about memory loss? It seems like the worse my mom's hearing gets the worse her mind gets. She refuses to get here ears checked out, and it worries me. Anyway, it's not that bad yet, I'm just concerned that she could have Alzheimer's. I read that caffeine can prevent memory loss and even repair damaged memory. Not sure how reliable that study was though.

good new; memory stays intact.
bad news; it's the 'recall' that goes. fixable though.
kinda off topic.
i bedder shaddup now.
 
OK Wavebourn I’m on my own coin now, I only had the abstract and a couple of figures anyway now I have the whole patent. The comparison fails in the first claim, we don’t sample the output current at all and there is no feed forward from a first amplifier. If I disconnect Cn from the output and buffer it with some follower arrangement it still works and the only connection to the output is the output stage. There simply does not need to be any second path to supply current to the output. National had a car audio amp that did something similar by sampling AC supply current and squirting compensating currents into the null pins (internally).

Cap load messes things up at MHz frequencies and is really irrelevant. BTW Cn can be > Cc and the distortion changes sign after going through a null.

Maybe this needs the whiteboard at the next BA (before the beer and wine 🙂)

Peace
 
scott wurcer said:
OK Wavebourn I’m on my own coin now, I only had the abstract and a couple of figures anyway now I have the whole patent. The comparison fails in the first claim, we don’t sample the output current at all and there is no feed forward from a first amplifier. If I disconnect Cn from the output and buffer it with some follower arrangement it still works and the only connection to the output is the output stage. There simply does not need to be any second path to supply current to the output. National had a car audio amp that did something similar by sampling AC supply current and squirting compensating currents into the null pins (internally).

Cap load messes things up at MHz frequencies and is really irrelevant. BTW Cn can be > Cc and the distortion changes sign after going through a null.

Maybe this needs the whiteboard at the next BA (before the beer and wine 🙂)

Peace

Nice idea; I would like to discuss current summing techniques the next BA instead of beer and wine; I would be glad to find the way to use it freely but avoid being accused in that current dumbing patent violation. 😉

hitsware said:
>What about "Ginkgo Biloba"?

It helps my eyesight.
I assume by effects to the brain part.
Blood supply?
 
Edamame off-topic

hitsware said:


BTW .......
In China cigarettes don't cause cancer.

Investigating FDA-related information I always think of mix of foods they consume in China when drugdealers' trials include every time one only ingredient... It reminds me double blind tests of an audio equipment when some separated component is being tested connected to many others that distort as well...
(Warning: pharmaceutical representatives don't like to be called drugdealers!)

Back to edamame: I add salt and garlic powder to an olive oil (few tablespoons per one frozen bag from Traders Joes), roll frozen beans in it, then bake 20 minutes in 400F. I don't know about healthy ingredients, do they survive freezing and baking, but it is very tasty!
 
traderbam said:
Scott,
I think there is an error in the AD797 rev G data sheet. The transfer function equation for Fig 32 on page 11 has the wrong sign. I know you folks at AD are accuracy fanatics.
Brian

Thanks, I'll double check it but these things are out of my direct hands these days.

Here's another way to look at this. I don't know if you have seen any articles on how poor layout or bad supply wiring can inject offset into an input stage, usually through the current mirror(s). I'm talking about pretty conventional op-amp topologies. Well in some cases the offset is opposite sign and since its related to output current can make the AOL look negative. This is not positive feedback, the actual "gain" from output voltage to the error signal is tiny. This is what is happening here, in an open loop sense the equivalent offset error is computed and injected back into the input (with the opposite sign). The output stage error is still there, it is not reduced at all. The delay inherent in this process is a vector error and leaves a residual. I'm sure this would show up in an exhaustive survey of EC schemes. If one had access to the right pins and a good high speed instrumentation amplifier this could work with almost any dominant pole op-amp with varying complications. The floating current mirror just had all the stuff right there.
 
alansawyer said:


Just a thought but is the patent still active after over 25 years ?

Anyone know if a time limit applies?

Long expired in this case. Expired patent mining is an interesting pursuit. Check the USPTO the dates vary due to a change in the law, also some search engines include a status code one of which is expired due to lack of maintainence payments :bigeyes:. At least one audio mfg. flogs loudly a patent that they stopped making payments on 10yrs ago.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.