Mr. Pass: In figure 4 of this patent, which current source is the high current one? Could the alternative bias path be a resistor (or a lightbulb) or is that too low impedance?
Thanks for your time!
Mike
Thanks for your time!
Mike
mrothacher said:
1) I don't remember, and my only copy of the full patent is
in a frame.
2) Yes, but a CCS is better and more efficient, properly done.
The way I read it, the current above and below the output (95 in Fig. 4) must balance at zero signal input. With that in mind, the lower current source (101) must carry current sufficient to match the upper current source (97), plus a smaller amount for the cascode device (91).
Assuming that I've got all that right, 101 is the larger current source, but not necessarily by a whole lot.
There's still a net savings in dissipation, however, because the heavy current in the circuit above the output line (95) isn't covering the full rail voltage.
Asymmetrical rails, anyone? That could lead in a whole 'nother direction. Might be fun.
A low Z path (i.e. a light bulb) around the output MOSFET (87) would effectively short--or at least draw off a large portion of--the intended output.
Light bulbs in a Circlotron? How about as emitter/Source/cathode resistors?
Grey
Assuming that I've got all that right, 101 is the larger current source, but not necessarily by a whole lot.
There's still a net savings in dissipation, however, because the heavy current in the circuit above the output line (95) isn't covering the full rail voltage.
Asymmetrical rails, anyone? That could lead in a whole 'nother direction. Might be fun.
A low Z path (i.e. a light bulb) around the output MOSFET (87) would effectively short--or at least draw off a large portion of--the intended output.
Light bulbs in a Circlotron? How about as emitter/Source/cathode resistors?
Grey
Thank you both.
I had always (wrongly) assumed this patent was related to the Aleph 0.
Looking at Aleph 0 schematic:
Could the Aleph 0 be thought of like a power op amp with a big pull-down resistor? If so, I wonder if this would work with something like ZV5? Just pondering out loud. Thanks again.
Mike
I had always (wrongly) assumed this patent was related to the Aleph 0.
Looking at Aleph 0 schematic:
Could the Aleph 0 be thought of like a power op amp with a big pull-down resistor? If so, I wonder if this would work with something like ZV5? Just pondering out loud. Thanks again.
Mike
Hi Grey:
I read in an NP post somewhere that he's never employed this patent in a commercial product. I took that to mean that it is not employed in the A0.
...now how about my giant pulldown resitor idea (analogy)?
I read in an NP post somewhere that he's never employed this patent in a commercial product. I took that to mean that it is not employed in the A0.
...now how about my giant pulldown resitor idea (analogy)?
Hey that schematic looks like some of the old SAE's that I used to repair......! I think this guy is in the wrong forum...thats definately not an Aleph... Looks more like a vintage Bongornio to me(spelling?).
Mark A. Gulbrandsen said:
Im glad to hear that this schematic dosnt have anything to do with Aleph, cause i spent quite a bit of time trying to figure where the resemblence were 😀 with no succes
Magura🙂
mrothacher said:
For resistor, read big constant current source, and you've got the
Aleph 0. Aleph 0s, also.
It will amuse you to know that the X150.5 amp uses that
approach to provide single-ended bias at lower wattages.
And yes, it will work with ZV5.
"Everything old is new again" (musical note icon)
/pass/: burns electricity, but recycles good ideas.
I forgot to mention, this has nothing to do with the title
of the thread, as 5,343,166 is something else altogether.
5,343,166 is a convolution of the Sano patent. Just as the
"Stasis" patent was created by taking the description of
cascode operation and replacing "current" with "voltage"
and vice versa in its description, , 5,343,166 takes the Sano
patent and again replaces "current" with voltage" and so on.
/pass/: Still waiting for HaloJoy to come back and still looking for
patents that use the words "voltage" and "current" 😉
of the thread, as 5,343,166 is something else altogether.
5,343,166 is a convolution of the Sano patent. Just as the
"Stasis" patent was created by taking the description of
cascode operation and replacing "current" with "voltage"
and vice versa in its description, , 5,343,166 takes the Sano
patent and again replaces "current" with voltage" and so on.
/pass/: Still waiting for HaloJoy to come back and still looking for
patents that use the words "voltage" and "current" 😉
Awesome! Thank you.
P.S. I predict "The Zen Variations" will be the best selling diy audio book in history. It's really fun mixing and matching your concepts. Don't forget to save some surprises for the book! (maybe The Beast With A Million Watts)🙂
P.S. I predict "The Zen Variations" will be the best selling diy audio book in history. It's really fun mixing and matching your concepts. Don't forget to save some surprises for the book! (maybe The Beast With A Million Watts)🙂
Nelson Pass said:
Mr. Pass, thanks for very nice hint !
X150 has 40 output transistors, X150.5 has them only 24. Is is new direction for better sound ? Or 24 is for one channel only and additional 4 transistors are these clever CCS's ?
Mr. Pass,
I see many attempts from you to built more efficient good sounding amps. This patent is one example, how you try to reduce energy burned out in ordinary classA power amp, while maintaining the sonics of classA. The "Cascode" patent also tries to make good sounding amp with less heat.
In many times in many threads, I found your're saying "raw bias is important". When I asked about the "Smart bias" patent, you said this one more time, that "raw bias" affect sonics more than any biasing scheme. I experimented and found this is true.
Is there really no way to make a good sounding "Cold Amp"?
I see many attempts from you to built more efficient good sounding amps. This patent is one example, how you try to reduce energy burned out in ordinary classA power amp, while maintaining the sonics of classA. The "Cascode" patent also tries to make good sounding amp with less heat.
In many times in many threads, I found your're saying "raw bias is important". When I asked about the "Smart bias" patent, you said this one more time, that "raw bias" affect sonics more than any biasing scheme. I experimented and found this is true.
Is there really no way to make a good sounding "Cold Amp"?
lumanauw said:
I imagine there is. If you post this question in the Chip Amp
forum, you will probably receive an affirmative. 😎
Hi, Mr. Pass,
Yes, the chip amp guys will tell that chip amps will compare to your Aleph😀
But that amp (for me) lack of that "heavy+smooth sound" characteristic, compared to quite biased discrete designs. I think that caused typically by crossover distortion. I've made chip amps, and I found that to make good sounding chipamp, the whole components have tobe expensive ones. This means "expensive cosmetics" are a must for making good sounding chipamp. It also mean the sonic is artificial from the chipamp itself. I think the good amps should be able to sound good even with standard component (that means the design itself is good).
I also think that chip amps have one fundamental shortness that cannot be changed. All components are made of semiconductor, including Resistor and Capacitor. I read that resistors and capacitors are not suitable to be made by semiconductor, and we cannot change that in chipamps.
I begin to wonder, if the transistor's operating temperature is the important thing to sonics. You said "touching the heatsink" is one way to adjust bias, (without knowing what current there is)😀
What is the cause of "hear-able effect" of transistor's operating temperature (that is not evident in theories)?
Yes, the chip amp guys will tell that chip amps will compare to your Aleph😀
But that amp (for me) lack of that "heavy+smooth sound" characteristic, compared to quite biased discrete designs. I think that caused typically by crossover distortion. I've made chip amps, and I found that to make good sounding chipamp, the whole components have tobe expensive ones. This means "expensive cosmetics" are a must for making good sounding chipamp. It also mean the sonic is artificial from the chipamp itself. I think the good amps should be able to sound good even with standard component (that means the design itself is good).
I also think that chip amps have one fundamental shortness that cannot be changed. All components are made of semiconductor, including Resistor and Capacitor. I read that resistors and capacitors are not suitable to be made by semiconductor, and we cannot change that in chipamps.
I begin to wonder, if the transistor's operating temperature is the important thing to sonics. You said "touching the heatsink" is one way to adjust bias, (without knowing what current there is)😀
What is the cause of "hear-able effect" of transistor's operating temperature (that is not evident in theories)?
Some people have "miss-known" Nelson Pass as an "electric bill" audio designer😀
I see him as trying to achieve the best sonics, and electric bill do not rank above sonics.
Look at his patents and patent dates. Can we say he has no concern with the dissipation of classA?. NP surely knows about efficiency (and really try to reduce not-producing-anything heat), but he don't comprimise in sonics😀
I see him as trying to achieve the best sonics, and electric bill do not rank above sonics.
Look at his patents and patent dates. Can we say he has no concern with the dissipation of classA?. NP surely knows about efficiency (and really try to reduce not-producing-anything heat), but he don't comprimise in sonics😀
- Status
- Not open for further replies.