Referring to the image of the post 11, I would like to emphasize some aspects.
Behind a seemingly remarkable difference, I think a close kin is concealed. My circuit looks like a Transnova as seen in the mirror: everything looks the other way round: what's underneath goes over, what goes inside then goes out, in short it's all upside down. A Trasnova in the country of Alice, an antimateric version!
Even the currents turn the other way around: the first seem to come in, the second to come out.
About this last aspect, I do not know the true story of the TRANS-NOVA name given to the circuit, but I like to imagine that it was so named by the inventor for the following reason: because of its topology (see the arrows of the Audio current in the drawing) the audio signal output seems to come from far (ie from the center of the power supply) to the close ground (connected to the sources in the attached drawing).
This fact was basically opposed to what happened in the more traditional output circuits. So the circuit was named "TRANS-NOVA" from the Latin "TRANS" meaning far, exterior and "NOVA" because it was just a new circuit.
Following the same logic, my circuit, where the output signal appears instead to come from the inside (near the output devices) to head to the ground at the farthest point should be named "CIS-NOVA" from the Latin word " CIS "which means just close, from inside and" NOVA ", for the same reason as above.
Francesco
Behind a seemingly remarkable difference, I think a close kin is concealed. My circuit looks like a Transnova as seen in the mirror: everything looks the other way round: what's underneath goes over, what goes inside then goes out, in short it's all upside down. A Trasnova in the country of Alice, an antimateric version!
Even the currents turn the other way around: the first seem to come in, the second to come out.
About this last aspect, I do not know the true story of the TRANS-NOVA name given to the circuit, but I like to imagine that it was so named by the inventor for the following reason: because of its topology (see the arrows of the Audio current in the drawing) the audio signal output seems to come from far (ie from the center of the power supply) to the close ground (connected to the sources in the attached drawing).
This fact was basically opposed to what happened in the more traditional output circuits. So the circuit was named "TRANS-NOVA" from the Latin "TRANS" meaning far, exterior and "NOVA" because it was just a new circuit.
Following the same logic, my circuit, where the output signal appears instead to come from the inside (near the output devices) to head to the ground at the farthest point should be named "CIS-NOVA" from the Latin word " CIS "which means just close, from inside and" NOVA ", for the same reason as above.
Francesco
Transnova is actually an acronym which stands for TRANSconductance NOdal Voltage Amplifier.
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/hafler-transnova-9500-power-amplifier
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/hafler-transnova-9500-power-amplifier
Thanks mos57 and minek123 for your posts which triggered the following thoughts:
1. Best to use the term "joined opposed drains" or "complementary common source" instead of TransNova for the schematics of Mr. Corrado [mos57]. Why? A MOSFET is a voltage-variable current source [pentode-like] as used by Mr. Strickland in TransNova. By contrast a V-FET or SIT is a voltage-variable power resistor [triode-like] as used by Mr. Corrado. These two amps can't have the same name because of the aforementioned difference in the electrical characterestics of their FETs and/or their modus operandi.
2. How would you identify the attached schematic? It is not a transconductance power output stage amp a la Mr. Strickland. It is a power output stage using simulated V-Fets. May see it as a hybrid Strickland-Corrado amp. Here's the scoop: Negative feedback from the drain of a MOSFET to its gate falls under "Schade-feedback " from the tube era. This feedback converts the pentode-like electrical characteristics of both MOSFETs to electrical characteristics like those of V-FET [triodish]. In past posts of mine in this Forum, I called "Schade feedback" in MOSFETs as "Pass Feedback"; because Mr. Pass used it to simultaneously to bias and simulate SITs in several of his diy applications. And so, the attached schematic
maybe been seen as a Corrado-Pass-Strickland hybrid from their contributions to it.
1. Best to use the term "joined opposed drains" or "complementary common source" instead of TransNova for the schematics of Mr. Corrado [mos57]. Why? A MOSFET is a voltage-variable current source [pentode-like] as used by Mr. Strickland in TransNova. By contrast a V-FET or SIT is a voltage-variable power resistor [triode-like] as used by Mr. Corrado. These two amps can't have the same name because of the aforementioned difference in the electrical characterestics of their FETs and/or their modus operandi.
2. How would you identify the attached schematic? It is not a transconductance power output stage amp a la Mr. Strickland. It is a power output stage using simulated V-Fets. May see it as a hybrid Strickland-Corrado amp. Here's the scoop: Negative feedback from the drain of a MOSFET to its gate falls under "Schade-feedback " from the tube era. This feedback converts the pentode-like electrical characteristics of both MOSFETs to electrical characteristics like those of V-FET [triodish]. In past posts of mine in this Forum, I called "Schade feedback" in MOSFETs as "Pass Feedback"; because Mr. Pass used it to simultaneously to bias and simulate SITs in several of his diy applications. And so, the attached schematic
maybe been seen as a Corrado-Pass-Strickland hybrid from their contributions to it.
Attachments
Very good Minek, you're right !!!
Now that I think about it, many years ago, on a magazine of audio constructions, the meaning of the Transnova word was explained, but clearly I had forgotten it.
On the other hand, the fact that the stage, operating in transconductance, has a voltage gain, does not justify the need for its own name, because Acoustat and Hafler are neither the first nor the only output stages that amplify in voltage . The first thing that comes to my mind is the Musical Fidelity: here's an example http://www.amplimos.it/images/musical_fidelity_a370.jpg
The particularity of Trasnova is rather, in my opinion, the different way in which amplification is achieved.
The term Cis-nova, as a result of the considerations made in previous posts, was ispired by a work of an Italian Physicist in whose theory is explained the definitions of matter, antimatter, trans-matter, cis-matter.