Well I am not so in a hurry.
I already got passive Crossovers that have corrected EQ so no problem.
I was just having some thoughts on the subject.
I already got passive Crossovers that have corrected EQ so no problem.
I was just having some thoughts on the subject.
Schematics
Hi,
I (Think) finiched the schematics for the crossover.
They can be found here : http://www.delta-audio.com/Active_Filter_Two/Active filter TWO ver 1.1 schematics temp.pdf
Please comment, so I can start work on the PCB.
I know the schematics are still a mess, but i have not had time to clean it up yet
\Jens
Hi,
I (Think) finiched the schematics for the crossover.
They can be found here : http://www.delta-audio.com/Active_Filter_Two/Active filter TWO ver 1.1 schematics temp.pdf
Please comment, so I can start work on the PCB.
I know the schematics are still a mess, but i have not had time to clean it up yet
\Jens
Jens,
Couple of problems.
1. For both the HP and LP, the buffer is connected to the NI input, not the output!
2. No DC ground path at the inputs of IC2 and IC14 (both sets of inputs for both opamps)
And one comment:
If you provide a pad on the end of R002, jumperable to ground, you at least make it easier to use with balanced input. I support the general idea of not providing balanced out for simplicity's sake, but since adding balanced in only requires 2 more pads, why not?
Couple of problems.
1. For both the HP and LP, the buffer is connected to the NI input, not the output!
2. No DC ground path at the inputs of IC2 and IC14 (both sets of inputs for both opamps)
And one comment:
If you provide a pad on the end of R002, jumperable to ground, you at least make it easier to use with balanced input. I support the general idea of not providing balanced out for simplicity's sake, but since adding balanced in only requires 2 more pads, why not?
Schematics
Hello,
<
1. For both the HP and LP, the buffer is connected to the NI input, not the output!
<
This is done to remove the different gains that set the Q of the filter - is it a bad idea?
<
2. No DC ground path at the inputs of IC2 and IC14 (both sets of inputs for both opamps)
<
Not sure what you mean by this - please explain
<
If you provide a pad on the end of R002, jumperable to ground, you at least make it easier to use with balanced input. I support the general idea of not providing balanced out for simplicity's sake, but since adding balanced in only requires 2 more pads, why not?
<
I'll do that ASAP - nice idea thanks 🙂
Try looking at this : http://www.delta-audio.com/Active_Filter_One/Sallen_And_Key_ver_1.0.pdf last page
\Jens
Hello,
<
1. For both the HP and LP, the buffer is connected to the NI input, not the output!
<
This is done to remove the different gains that set the Q of the filter - is it a bad idea?
<
2. No DC ground path at the inputs of IC2 and IC14 (both sets of inputs for both opamps)
<
Not sure what you mean by this - please explain
<
If you provide a pad on the end of R002, jumperable to ground, you at least make it easier to use with balanced input. I support the general idea of not providing balanced out for simplicity's sake, but since adding balanced in only requires 2 more pads, why not?
<
I'll do that ASAP - nice idea thanks 🙂
Try looking at this : http://www.delta-audio.com/Active_Filter_One/Sallen_And_Key_ver_1.0.pdf last page
\Jens
Jens, if I understood your docs correctly, to change Fc without changing Q, I have to modify both R1 and R2?
Is there no way to keep the same Q, change the Fc by changing only one component's value?
Is there no way to keep the same Q, change the Fc by changing only one component's value?
Changing fc and Q
Hi,
If R1 = R2 =R and C1 = C2 = C you can set the Q via the gain and the fc via the R or C
Take a look at page 7 🙂
\Jens
Hi,
If R1 = R2 =R and C1 = C2 = C you can set the Q via the gain and the fc via the R or C
Take a look at page 7 🙂
\Jens
I'm not sure I understood.
If I change Fc (by changing R), will Q vary or not? (if I don't touch to C)
If I change Fc (by changing R), will Q vary or not? (if I don't touch to C)
Hmm, sorry if I jumped the gun. I was trying to get an answer out before I left work. 😉
You can disregard my concern about DC path also then. I see what is happening now.
You can disregard my concern about DC path also then. I see what is happening now.
To Bricolo
Hi
If R1 = R2 = R and C1 = C2 = C you can change fc without changing th Q.
The Q is set by the gain in the opamp.
\Jens
Hi
If R1 = R2 = R and C1 = C2 = C you can change fc without changing th Q.
The Q is set by the gain in the opamp.
\Jens
Re: To Bricolo
Allright, but isn't the gain fixed with the values of R anc C too?
JensRasmussen said:
Allright, but isn't the gain fixed with the values of R anc C too?
Q
Hi,
The Q is ONLY determined by the gain when R1 = R2 = R and C1 = C2 = C
So the answer to your question is no 🙂
\Jens
Hi,
The Q is ONLY determined by the gain when R1 = R2 = R and C1 = C2 = C
So the answer to your question is no 🙂
\Jens
Updated schematics and first layout
Hi,
Please take a look at, and comment on the latest schematics and the first version of the PCB.
Go here
http://www.delta-audio.com/Active filter two.htm
Thanks
Jens
Hi,
Please take a look at, and comment on the latest schematics and the first version of the PCB.
Go here
http://www.delta-audio.com/Active filter two.htm
Thanks
Jens
I am looking around for suitable Polypropylene or polystyrene capacitors for use in a customised version of the Mox.
Has anyone had any experience with the Panasonic P Series Polypropolene capcitors DigiKey Capacitors Part no P3103-ND used in active crossovers?
They are rated @ 50 volts and measure 8x4x7 mm, idea for pcb mounting.
The size and quality appear to attractive compared to large exotic capacitors. Altuallly I recall these are used in the Pearl RIAA Phono stage..
macka
Has anyone had any experience with the Panasonic P Series Polypropolene capcitors DigiKey Capacitors Part no P3103-ND used in active crossovers?
They are rated @ 50 volts and measure 8x4x7 mm, idea for pcb mounting.
The size and quality appear to attractive compared to large exotic capacitors. Altuallly I recall these are used in the Pearl RIAA Phono stage..
macka
Attachments
macka said:
I used them as bypass caps/ input caps in amps and I love them. They all measured the constant same values within 3% of stated spec. Good external quality look and feel. Highly recommended
Chris
Is there lack of interest?
Hello,
Since there has been no or very little response to the work done so far, I’m not going to pursue the project any further.
Thanks for the input given so far
The page and info on the construction of the filter will be removed from my homepage and a new page will be started with a filter for prototyping that meets my own needs based on my original project.
\Jens
Hello,
Since there has been no or very little response to the work done so far, I’m not going to pursue the project any further.
Thanks for the input given so far
The page and info on the construction of the filter will be removed from my homepage and a new page will be started with a filter for prototyping that meets my own needs based on my original project.
\Jens
I couldn't check the layouts you proposed (since I'm very busy with the Schuro-Reichelt group buy and the things to do to prepare my wedding
) but I confirm my interest in the MOX.
The response so far is probably low because probably not everyone understood that, besides working on your personal xover, you are still offering to make boards based on the MOX.
Cheers
Andrea
) but I confirm my interest in the MOX.The response so far is probably low because probably not everyone understood that, besides working on your personal xover, you are still offering to make boards based on the MOX.
Cheers
Andrea
Jens,
I think there is not much for people to comment about at the moment...the design specs are fixed, the layout is not controversial, and PCB routing isn't available for comment. If you decide to continue I do have a few comments but I haven't had the time in the last 24 hours to formulate them.
Perhaps a wiki should be setup to gauge the interest...people may not have comments but would like to buy boards. There were quite a few signups for the intial, aborted specs. For the record, I was thinking I would want 10 or so such boards.
If you are not interested in continuing I will probably take up the standard of a group order, so maybe you will be willing to pass on some of the work done to date.
I think there is not much for people to comment about at the moment...the design specs are fixed, the layout is not controversial, and PCB routing isn't available for comment. If you decide to continue I do have a few comments but I haven't had the time in the last 24 hours to formulate them.
Perhaps a wiki should be setup to gauge the interest...people may not have comments but would like to buy boards. There were quite a few signups for the intial, aborted specs. For the record, I was thinking I would want 10 or so such boards.
If you are not interested in continuing I will probably take up the standard of a group order, so maybe you will be willing to pass on some of the work done to date.
MOX filter,
Hi,
When the schematics and PCB are done, Ill post the gerber files for the PCB and A PDF of the schematics. Then someone else can set up a group order.
I don't have time for more projects right now, bacause I'm starting a new job. Therefor someone else with more time should set up the group order.
fair enough?
\Jens
Hi,
When the schematics and PCB are done, Ill post the gerber files for the PCB and A PDF of the schematics. Then someone else can set up a group order.
I don't have time for more projects right now, bacause I'm starting a new job. Therefor someone else with more time should set up the group order.
fair enough?
\Jens
I just wanted to let those interested know that although the details and PCB are still being finalized, a group order is still being planned. Stay tuned for details.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.