Hi to Everyone !
I have one generic questions on circuit design that is: why minimalist circuits are not very popular ?
For minimalism read low active devices count.
Apart from the Nelson Pass school I see circuits with lots of active devices, even for a simple line preamp so to speak
Are they intrinsically limited ?
Having less components, aren't they easier to fine-tune ?
Thank you very much indeed
Kind regards,
gino
I have one generic questions on circuit design that is: why minimalist circuits are not very popular ?
For minimalism read low active devices count.
Apart from the Nelson Pass school I see circuits with lots of active devices, even for a simple line preamp so to speak
Are they intrinsically limited ?
Having less components, aren't they easier to fine-tune ?
Thank you very much indeed
Kind regards,
gino
Last edited:
I think in the diy road minimalist circuits are very popular, just check the "chip-amp" section. it can not be simpler!!! I have seen many amps designs that the goal is "minimalist", but if it has fewer parts...those parts "should" be high quality and tight tolerance. I like and love when I see an amplifier using not too many parts. The simple...the better for me 😉
Hi ! actually the construction cannot be simpler but I was referring to minimalism in the design
An opamp is everything but a simple circuit
Some opamps have even 100 transistors on the same chip
So the circuit is not minimalist
I meant circuits made with few single active devices
This I understand and agree.
If the components are few the selection must be accurate.
Honestly, tube designs are more on this philosophy
For instance if we take a single ended tube amp it can be done even with only two active devices.
I sometimes see service manuals of solid state amps ... ok that the bjts are cheap but their number is even embarrassing
It can very well be that for solid state minimalism is not the optimum choice
Otherwise I would expect many more examples around.
Regards,
gino
Last edited:
Well check all amps class A from NELSON PASS. they are in the minimalism list for sure!😉
and it is not so true that more complicated amplifiers have far better performance!
Last edited:
There is a rule of thumb which says that for any BJT, 1mV peak of signal voltage causes 1% of second harmonic distortion (5mV gives 5% etc.). That means that most simple circuits simply can't work if you want the output to be anything like an amplified version of the input. Minimalism is an engineering dead end.
Of course, there may be merit in not making a circuit more complex than it needs to be but that is a different question.
Of course, there may be merit in not making a circuit more complex than it needs to be but that is a different question.
If I am not wrong also the Blowtorch preamp design is in some ways minimalist
Only one amplification stage ?
From the interest caused by it I would have expected and hoped a new era in design
I remember a simple schema even mocked without any real basis
Maybe it was too simple
Only one amplification stage ?
From the interest caused by it I would have expected and hoped a new era in design
I remember a simple schema even mocked without any real basis
Maybe it was too simple
Please let me explain what I intend for minimalism
I meant designs with low devices count
Let's take a line preamp
I have seen line preamps with one mosfet and other with 20 active devices per channel.
Quite a difference. And incidentally that one with one mosfet was the better sounding by a good margin. 😉
This should mean something.
Or not ?
Is it reasonable to use 20 transistors for a line stage ?
Regards,
g
Last edited:
an amplifier using 400 parts does not mean it will sound better than one using 20 parts! it is all in the design, topology, parts used etc 😉.
Human prejudice
Just that...pure prejudice.
Preconception... they think they will not look clever accepting, trying or designing something simple..they think people will believe they have not knowledge..then they complicate as much as they can.
As i already understood the trick, i just do not pay attention to them.
Ahahahahhah!
Carlos
Just that...pure prejudice.
Preconception... they think they will not look clever accepting, trying or designing something simple..they think people will believe they have not knowledge..then they complicate as much as they can.
As i already understood the trick, i just do not pay attention to them.
Ahahahahhah!
Carlos
Last edited:
how about moving this to the Lounge? - so far it looks all too familiar and not likely to help anyone interested in cirucit design for audio, SS or tube
Last edited:
Of course. The BOZ.
But with a regulated power supply, something not very purist approved.
That simple schema with the right power supply is really impressive
I would expects some followers
Instead ...
Regards,
g
Last edited:
i plan to build a J-fet BOZ soon. just to try it. i have most of the parts ready. that one will be with regulated 16V PSU.
I find its even easier to build a simpler machine these days with the even wider choices of highly linear semiconductors. With some knowledge of ohms law, knowledge of the parts at hand and a basic understanding of bode/nyquist along with datasheets for the clues on ideal operating currents anyone can design a very good simple amp. I'm not sure it is not popular, I wasn't aware of that as I see many great simple designs out there, but you must mean commercially.
Colin
Colin
..plus dozens of local and global fb..trying to linearize those semi-conductors😀
just look at (or inside) of todays sold hifi "equipment", IC everywhere and suspicious claims about 5-6-7*100-150W , but looking at powersupply transformer seems somewhat underrated.
would like to see it pumping that power at 24/7
... and made of hundreds or thousand smd components, picked and designed with only one thing in mind : lowest BOM
minimalist approach? welcome to tubes, where are few components used, but quality of each one is very important.
working in ems company,so i am quite familiar with this "mess"
I think it's to do with degrees of freedom. The more minimal your design, the more likely it is that in order to change one parameter, you will affect several others, and lose the ability to set parameters arbitrarily. By compartmentalising each function with its own sub-circuit, (or piece of software code, or speaker driver) you give yourself the chance to achieve the truly optimal system.
In the past I have been baffled by engineers' apparent instinct to minimise parts count/cost, or avoid ICs, at the very start of projects, regardless of whether it was going to be an issue in the finished product. My attitude is that components are very cheap compared to engineers' time, and every day spent trying to cram code into a too-small microcontroller, or ameliorating the effects of source impedance when an op amp buffer would have cost $0.10, is a huge waste unless the product is going to sell by the thousands. In DIY it simply isn't an issue.
I know that in audio there is a notion that says that every extra component in the signal path is somehow thickening the nice wiggly line on the oscilloscope trace, and fogging up the music, but I got over that particular superstition some time ago.
In the past I have been baffled by engineers' apparent instinct to minimise parts count/cost, or avoid ICs, at the very start of projects, regardless of whether it was going to be an issue in the finished product. My attitude is that components are very cheap compared to engineers' time, and every day spent trying to cram code into a too-small microcontroller, or ameliorating the effects of source impedance when an op amp buffer would have cost $0.10, is a huge waste unless the product is going to sell by the thousands. In DIY it simply isn't an issue.
I know that in audio there is a notion that says that every extra component in the signal path is somehow thickening the nice wiggly line on the oscilloscope trace, and fogging up the music, but I got over that particular superstition some time ago.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.