ß22 + σ22 design complete ••• Opinions welcome
Mar 27, 2010 at 1:37 AM Post #287 of 363
Quote:

Originally Posted by Beefy /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Just increase the quiescent current; deeper into class A.



I was actually going to suggest that! Well, without the fancy words, just deeper into Class A. I've learned something!
 
Mar 27, 2010 at 1:40 AM Post #288 of 363
Quote:

Originally Posted by The Monkey /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I was actually going to suggest that! Well, without the fancy words, just deeper into Class A. I've learned something!


yay! now onto gate capacitance!
 
Mar 27, 2010 at 1:43 AM Post #291 of 363
Quote:

Originally Posted by luvdunhill /img/forum/go_quote.gif
yay! now onto gate capacitance!


I thought gate capacitance was why cascoding is such a useful design choice?
 
Mar 27, 2010 at 1:45 AM Post #292 of 363
Quote:

Originally Posted by Beefy /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Just increase the quiescent current; deeper into class A.


It's already running at 160mA. Into 300 ohms, that's over 8 watts. Even into 32 ohms it's nearly 1 watt.

Don't think there's much out there that would ever take it out of class A.

se
 
Mar 27, 2010 at 1:49 AM Post #293 of 363
Quote:

Originally Posted by Koyaan I. Sqatsi /img/forum/go_quote.gif
It's already running at 160mA. Into 300 ohms, that's over 8 watts. Even into 32 ohms it's nearly 1 watt.

Don't think there's much out there that would ever take it out of class A.



Oh, absolutely. But Monkey asked, I answered.

Still, many people claim that for these MOSFETs, having a higher bias increases linearity and decreases distortion.
 
Mar 27, 2010 at 2:00 AM Post #295 of 363
The function of the output stage cascode is to create a constant voltage across the output device at all costs. It is the Vas stage job to drive the gate capacitance of the output stage, which can get hairy due to non linearities in gate capacitance. The choice of how to do this seems to have a important impact on design as a whole. Perhaps not as much as the chassis design, but still some.
 
Mar 27, 2010 at 2:00 AM Post #296 of 363
Quote:

Originally Posted by Koyaan I. Sqatsi /img/forum/go_quote.gif
It's already running at 160mA. Into 300 ohms, that's over 8 watts. Even into 32 ohms it's nearly 1 watt.

Don't think there's much out there that would ever take it out of class A.

se



If it puts 8 watts into 300 ohms (I thought it was 6W though), wouldn't it be higher than 1 watt at 32 ohms if the amp is capable of 50W at 8 ohms (if we had configured it that way and used bigger heatsinks and higher VA trafos)?
 
Mar 27, 2010 at 2:10 AM Post #297 of 363
Quote:

Originally Posted by Beefy /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Still, many people claim that for these MOSFETs, having a higher bias increases linearity and decreases distortion.


Even at 160mA, it's spec'd at around 0.001% into 33 ohms.

Do we really need to go back to the spec wars of the 70's?

se
 
Mar 27, 2010 at 2:13 AM Post #298 of 363
Quote:

Originally Posted by luvdunhill /img/forum/go_quote.gif
arc welding?


atsmile.gif


Remember when Audio magazine took a big Levinson amp and fed it a 1kHz sinewave and used it to arc weld two pieces of metal together?

se
 
Mar 27, 2010 at 2:15 AM Post #299 of 363
Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif
If it puts 8 watts into 300 ohms (I thought it was 6W though), wouldn't it be higher than 1 watt at 32 ohms if the amp is capable of 50W at 8 ohms (if we had configured it that way and used bigger heatsinks and higher VA trafos)?


I was basing it on the output stage bias current.

se
 
Mar 27, 2010 at 2:20 AM Post #300 of 363
Quote:

Originally Posted by Koyaan I. Sqatsi /img/forum/go_quote.gif
atsmile.gif


Remember when Audio magazine took a big Levinson amp and fed it a 1kHz sinewave and used it to arc weld two pieces of metal together?

se



I love that story. Even cooler perhaps is the fact that there was a Crown model that was actually used for welding for some aerospace application..
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top