Is S.E.D actually sci.electronics.DUMMIES ??

When I saw this original post....

From: "powerampfreak"
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Somebody explaining this design?
Date: 9 Mar 2007 12:08:35 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 11
Message-ID: .com

I commented, "Looks like crap to me ;-)"

The response from the hot air crowd, you know, the ones posing as
guru's, was an implication that I was incorrect.

So I posed a simple question... do a hand analysis of the gain of the
circuit.

It's a simple analysis (if you're not a faker :-)

It's been about 40 hours since I posted that request/taunt.

Nary a peep.

So I think this is TRULY...

sci.electronics.DUMMIES ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

Jim Thompson wrote:

Is S.E.D actually sci.electronics.DUMMIES ??

When I saw this original post....

From: "powerampfreak"
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Somebody explaining this design?
Date: 9 Mar 2007 12:08:35 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 11
Message-ID: .com

I commented, "Looks like crap to me ;-)"

The response from the hot air crowd, you know, the ones posing as
guru's, was an implication that I was incorrect.

So I posed a simple question... do a hand analysis of the gain of the
circuit.

It's a simple analysis (if you're not a faker :-)

It's been about 40 hours since I posted that request/taunt.

Nary a peep.

Phil Allison answered your question.

" ** The overall gain is: 6.82 times 4000 / Rg

Where Rg is the total resistance between the two emitters.

6.82 is the fixed gain of the op-amp stage = 150 / 22.

4000 is the effective differential collector load - ie 4.4k with 44k in
parallel.

At low gain settings, the max Rg value is limited by the two 4.7k ohms.

At circa 1000 times gain, Rg is affected slightly by the effective emitter
resistance of the two 4403 compounds - about 4 ohms in total.

So, at max control setting the gain is:

27,280 / 26 = 1049

For 100 times gain, Rg = 272 ohms "


Apparently the decline in your mental faculties means you can't work it out for
yourself. It's not exactly difficult.

Graham

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 08:44:49 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Is S.E.D actually sci.electronics.DUMMIES ??

When I saw this original post....

From: "powerampfreak"
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Somebody explaining this design?
Date: 9 Mar 2007 12:08:35 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 11
Message-ID: .com

I commented, "Looks like crap to me ;-)"

The response from the hot air crowd, you know, the ones posing as
guru's, was an implication that I was incorrect.

So I posed a simple question... do a hand analysis of the gain of the
circuit.

It's a simple analysis (if you're not a faker :-)

It's been about 40 hours since I posted that request/taunt.

Nary a peep.

So I think this is TRULY...

sci.electronics.DUMMIES ;-)

...Jim Thompson

In my haste I left out a few points...

(1) The namby-pamby's who never post a technical question/answer are
always after me to offer a technical post. Here 'tis! Where's your
response?

(2) Part of my "Looks like crap to me ;-)" comment was directed at the
amateurs who always have to go back to voltage-between-stages mode.
They can't cope with current as a signal.

(3) I'm off to get my (eye) lens replacement. Probably won't be back
for at least 4 hours. My bet is there will still be no analysis.

Wimpy wooses ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

Jim Thompson wrote:

(2) Part of my "Looks like crap to me ;-)" comment was directed at the
amateurs who always have to go back to voltage-between-stages mode.
They can't cope with current as a signal.

More modern versions replace R10 and R11 with 'links' and reduce the values of
R12 and R13 ( to ~12k in this instance).

Graham

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 09:22:48 -0700, Jim Thompson
Gave us:

(3) I'm off to get my (eye) lens replacement. Probably won't be back
for at least 4 hours. My bet is there will still be no analysis.

Wimpy wooses ;-)

I hope you ****ing have a problem with the procedure, go blind, and
NEVER post your retarded bull**** here again, ****head!

Oh, and it's WUSS, dip****!

As in You're a wussy boy. You're also a PUSSY boy. **** off, and
go blind, asswipe!

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:38:08 -0700, MassiveProng
wrote:

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 09:22:48 -0700, Jim Thompson
Gave us:

(3) I'm off to get my (eye) lens replacement. Probably won't be back
for at least 4 hours. My bet is there will still be no analysis.

Wimpy wooses ;-)

I hope you ****ing have a problem with the procedure, go blind, and
NEVER post your retarded bull**** here again, ****head!

---
He's not so bad, and that's just mean. Why not wish him the best?
If he's happy then that happiness will radiate out from him and will
affect everyone around him in a positive way.

On the other hand, if you wish for him to go blind, and he does,
then you'll think you had a hand in his misfortune for the rest of
your life and you'll believe that the responsibility for his
unhappiness was, at least partly, yours. That's just another weight
you'll have to bear forever.

Think about how _your_ life would change if you went blind at
someone's behest and you might change your viewpoint.


--
JF

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:02:57 -0500, John Fields
Gave us:

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:38:08 -0700, MassiveProng
wrote:

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 09:22:48 -0700, Jim Thompson
Gave us:

(3) I'm off to get my (eye) lens replacement. Probably won't be back
for at least 4 hours. My bet is there will still be no analysis.

Wimpy wooses ;-)

I hope you ****ing have a problem with the procedure, go blind, and
NEVER post your retarded bull**** here again, ****head!

---
He's not so bad, and that's just mean. Why not wish him the best?
If he's happy then that happiness will radiate out from him and will
affect everyone around him in a positive way.

On the other hand, if you wish for him to go blind, and he does,
then you'll think you had a hand in his misfortune for the rest of
your life and you'll believe that the responsibility for his
unhappiness was, at least partly, yours. That's just another weight
you'll have to bear forever.

Think about how _your_ life would change if you went blind at
someone's behest and you might change your viewpoint.


Yeah, except that since we both know that my remark isn't going to
cause his procedure to go awry, perhaps it will have an affect on his
inability to post anything but tripe.

I just get ****ed every time I pull headers and there's yet another
post, authored by him, that is like nothing more than a bag of ****
some adolescent kid left on one's doorstep, set aflame, while he sits
off in the shadows, waiting for the homeowner to come to the door and
stomp it out.

So yeah, it was mean, but so is his attitude lately (or longer).
Maybe he is getting up in years too much, and has had too many things
not go his way. Who knows why he pulls this ****...

"MassiveProng" wrote in
message ...
Who knows why he pulls this ****...

....This from the poster who has used the word "****" (and assorted other
vulgarities) several hundred times in the last month alone.

Any defense of that?

Tim

--
Deep Fryer: A very philosophical monk.
Website @ http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:02:57 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:38:08 -0700, MassiveProng
wrote:

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 09:22:48 -0700, Jim Thompson
Gave us:

(3) I'm off to get my (eye) lens replacement. Probably won't be back
for at least 4 hours. My bet is there will still be no analysis.

Wimpy wooses ;-)

I hope you ****ing have a problem with the procedure, go blind, and
NEVER post your retarded bull**** here again, ****head!

---
He's not so bad, and that's just mean. Why not wish him the best?
If he's happy then that happiness will radiate out from him and will
affect everyone around him in a positive way.

On the other hand, if you wish for him to go blind, and he does,
then you'll think you had a hand in his misfortune for the rest of
your life and you'll believe that the responsibility for his
unhappiness was, at least partly, yours. That's just another weight
you'll have to bear forever.

Think about how _your_ life would change if you went blind at
someone's behest and you might change your viewpoint.

MinimumDong's curse was to no avail.

I'm back, but seriously considering an exit.

There is minimal engineering here, and when I attempt to be a teacher
of my craft I get nothing but BS.

They are going to build a satellite of the community college nearby.
I think I'll go offer my services for free.

That and the newspaper column should keep me occupied.

After all this is "sci.electronics.DUMMIES" ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

Jim Thompson wrote:

snip


I'm back,

I hope all went well.

but seriously considering an exit.

I'm in no position to tell you what to do.
If you leave, you'll be missed.
Whatever you decide, best wishes.



There is minimal engineering here, and when I attempt to be a teacher
of my craft I get nothing but BS.


Some of us have not given you BS, and do appreciate
the teaching.

Ed

Jim Thompson wrote:

After all this is "sci.electronics.DUMMIES" ;-)


Someone needs to tell Eeyore. He thinks that its
sci.electronics.donkeys


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

Jim Thompson wrote:

There is minimal engineering here, and when I attempt to be a teacher
of my craft I get nothing but BS.

I'm waiting to hear a meaningful critique and see an improved design.


Graham

Late at night, by candle light, Jim Thompson
penned this immortal
opus:

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:02:57 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:38:08 -0700, MassiveProng
wrote:

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 09:22:48 -0700, Jim Thompson
Gave us:

(3) I'm off to get my (eye) lens replacement. Probably won't be back
for at least 4 hours. My bet is there will still be no analysis.

Wimpy wooses ;-)

I hope you ****ing have a problem with the procedure, go blind, and
NEVER post your retarded bull**** here again, ****head!

---
He's not so bad, and that's just mean. Why not wish him the best?
If he's happy then that happiness will radiate out from him and will
affect everyone around him in a positive way.

On the other hand, if you wish for him to go blind, and he does,
then you'll think you had a hand in his misfortune for the rest of
your life and you'll believe that the responsibility for his
unhappiness was, at least partly, yours. That's just another weight
you'll have to bear forever.

Think about how _your_ life would change if you went blind at
someone's behest and you might change your viewpoint.

MinimumDong's curse was to no avail.

I'm back, but seriously considering an exit.

There is minimal engineering here, and when I attempt to be a teacher
of my craft I get nothing but BS.


Maybe that's due to your being such a master of BS.

- YD.

--
Remove HAT if replying by mail.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jim Thompson wrote:

[.............]
I'm back,

I hope your eye recovers just fine.

but seriously considering an exit.

What? No more politics??

I must say, for a wanna-ba political commentator, your electronic
engineering is pretty acceptable.

Would I miss your political comments? Not likely. Would I miss insightfull
postings about electronics? Always.

After all this is "sci.electronics.DUMMIES" ;-)

Well, I quite like France, so you wouldn't want my support, anyway :-)

Best Regards

Jens
- --
Key ID 0x09723C12,
Analogue filtering / 5GHz RLAN / Mandriva Linux / odds and ends
http://www.tingleff.org/jensting/ +44 1223 211 585
"Daphne! You're leading again" Osgood, 'Some like it Hot'
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFF95ieimJs3AlyPBIRAlaOAKDTSYUogkmuXmo01mgqJi EblbGTNACgw1Qj
G3yQJGgqytB0IuANd4tD7Qs=
=RQr8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:02:57 -0500, John Fields wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:38:08 -0700, MassiveProng
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 09:22:48 -0700, Jim Thompson

(3) I'm off to get my (eye) lens replacement. Probably won't be back
for at least 4 hours. My bet is there will still be no analysis.

Wimpy wooses ;-)

I hope you ****ing have a problem with the procedure, go blind, and
NEVER post your retarded bull**** here again, ****head!

He's not so bad, and that's just mean. Why not wish him the best?
If he's happy then that happiness will radiate out from him and will
affect everyone around him in a positive way.

Problem with that is, JT and his ilk are only happy when they're killing
infidels, who is anybody who doesn't march in lockstep with his Lord
and Master's edicts.

It's fitting that he has eye problems - there is none so blind as he
who will not see, after all. And "heart attacks" - your heart doesn't
attack you; thaey're caused by heartlessness, which he seems to have in
spades, as do his beloved infallible rulers.

Thanks,
Rich

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message ...
Is S.E.D actually sci.electronics.DUMMIES ??

When I saw this original post....

From: "powerampfreak"
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Somebody explaining this design?
Date: 9 Mar 2007 12:08:35 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 11
Message-ID: .com

I commented, "Looks like crap to me ;-)"

The response from the hot air crowd, you know, the ones posing as
guru's, was an implication that I was incorrect.

So I posed a simple question... do a hand analysis of the gain of the
circuit.

It's a simple analysis (if you're not a faker :-)

It's been about 40 hours since I posted that request/taunt.

Nary a peep.

So I think this is TRULY...

sci.electronics.DUMMIES ;-)

I'd not noticed that post till now when I had to go search for it,
I dont look here for a few days sometimes,
I could end up spending most of the day reading and answering posts here,
wich I feel like ive ended up doing on a few occasions,
It amases me how the likes of Win and several others make so many posts wich
go into such detail,
maybe they read/think/type a lot faster than me ?

but this looks like a piece of pie to me,
the input stage is just a differential pair made with Sziklai darlington
the rest is just taking the ratio of the right resistors .... there easy as
cake.

Colin =^.^=

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:32:05 GMT, "colin"
wrote:

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message ...
Is S.E.D actually sci.electronics.DUMMIES ??

When I saw this original post....

From: "powerampfreak"
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Somebody explaining this design?
Date: 9 Mar 2007 12:08:35 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 11
Message-ID: .com

I commented, "Looks like crap to me ;-)"

The response from the hot air crowd, you know, the ones posing as
guru's, was an implication that I was incorrect.

So I posed a simple question... do a hand analysis of the gain of the
circuit.

It's a simple analysis (if you're not a faker :-)

It's been about 40 hours since I posted that request/taunt.

Nary a peep.

So I think this is TRULY...

sci.electronics.DUMMIES ;-)

I'd not noticed that post till now when I had to go search for it,
I dont look here for a few days sometimes,
I could end up spending most of the day reading and answering posts here,
wich I feel like ive ended up doing on a few occasions,
It amases me how the likes of Win and several others make so many posts wich
go into such detail,
maybe they read/think/type a lot faster than me ?

but this looks like a piece of pie to me,
the input stage is just a differential pair made with Sziklai darlington
the rest is just taking the ratio of the right resistors .... there easy as
cake.

Colin =^.^=


So write an equation. Then the defect/poor-"design" will be obvious.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message ...
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:32:05 GMT, "colin"
wrote:

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message ...
Is S.E.D actually sci.electronics.DUMMIES ??

When I saw this original post....

From: "powerampfreak"
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Somebody explaining this design?
Date: 9 Mar 2007 12:08:35 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 11
Message-ID: .com

I commented, "Looks like crap to me ;-)"

The response from the hot air crowd, you know, the ones posing as
guru's, was an implication that I was incorrect.

So I posed a simple question... do a hand analysis of the gain of the
circuit.

It's a simple analysis (if you're not a faker :-)

It's been about 40 hours since I posted that request/taunt.

Nary a peep.

So I think this is TRULY...

sci.electronics.DUMMIES ;-)

I'd not noticed that post till now when I had to go search for it,
I dont look here for a few days sometimes,
I could end up spending most of the day reading and answering posts here,
wich I feel like ive ended up doing on a few occasions,
It amases me how the likes of Win and several others make so many posts
wich
go into such detail,
maybe they read/think/type a lot faster than me ?

but this looks like a piece of pie to me,
the input stage is just a differential pair made with Sziklai darlington
the rest is just taking the ratio of the right resistors .... there easy
as
cake.

Colin =^.^=


So write an equation. Then the defect/poor-"design" will be obvious.

Wel ok if you insist, im kinda busy with my lightspeed converter so il just
give it a quick going over,
in the first stage ignoring emitter resitance as its a darlington,
current is due to the input voltage apearing accros the resistance between
emitters,
wich is (r2+r6) in parallell with (R9+vr1)
this current flow through the collector load
consisting of (r4+r8) in parallel with (R10,R11)
and produces a voltage - good old ohms law again,
this differential voltage is amplified by the op amp stage in the ratio of
its feedback resistors,
ie r13/r10. to produce a single ended op voltage.

see - its just a question of resistance ratios.
now when do I get my pie or cake ?

Colin =^.^=

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 17:00:54 GMT, "colin"
wrote:

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message ...
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:32:05 GMT, "colin"
wrote:

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message ...
Is S.E.D actually sci.electronics.DUMMIES ??

When I saw this original post....

From: "powerampfreak"
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Somebody explaining this design?
Date: 9 Mar 2007 12:08:35 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 11
Message-ID: .com

I commented, "Looks like crap to me ;-)"

The response from the hot air crowd, you know, the ones posing as
guru's, was an implication that I was incorrect.

So I posed a simple question... do a hand analysis of the gain of the
circuit.

It's a simple analysis (if you're not a faker :-)

It's been about 40 hours since I posted that request/taunt.

Nary a peep.

So I think this is TRULY...

sci.electronics.DUMMIES ;-)

I'd not noticed that post till now when I had to go search for it,
I dont look here for a few days sometimes,
I could end up spending most of the day reading and answering posts here,
wich I feel like ive ended up doing on a few occasions,
It amases me how the likes of Win and several others make so many posts
wich
go into such detail,
maybe they read/think/type a lot faster than me ?

but this looks like a piece of pie to me,
the input stage is just a differential pair made with Sziklai darlington
the rest is just taking the ratio of the right resistors .... there easy
as
cake.

Colin =^.^=


So write an equation. Then the defect/poor-"design" will be obvious.

Wel ok if you insist, im kinda busy with my lightspeed converter so il just
give it a quick going over,
in the first stage ignoring emitter resitance as its a darlington,
current is due to the input voltage apearing accros the resistance between
emitters,
wich is (r2+r6) in parallell with (R9+vr1)
this current flow through the collector load
consisting of (r4+r8) in parallel with (R10,R11)
and produces a voltage - good old ohms law again,
this differential voltage is amplified by the op amp stage in the ratio of
its feedback resistors,
ie r13/r10. to produce a single ended op voltage.

see - its just a question of resistance ratios.
now when do I get my pie or cake ?

Colin =^.^=


So write it as a single equation. You're waffling ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message ...
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 17:00:54 GMT, "colin"
wrote:

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message ...
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:32:05 GMT, "colin"
wrote:

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message ...
Is S.E.D actually sci.electronics.DUMMIES ??

When I saw this original post....

From: "powerampfreak"
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Somebody explaining this design?
Date: 9 Mar 2007 12:08:35 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 11
Message-ID: .com

I commented, "Looks like crap to me ;-)"

The response from the hot air crowd, you know, the ones posing as
guru's, was an implication that I was incorrect.

So I posed a simple question... do a hand analysis of the gain of the
circuit.

It's a simple analysis (if you're not a faker :-)

It's been about 40 hours since I posted that request/taunt.

Nary a peep.

So I think this is TRULY...

sci.electronics.DUMMIES ;-)

I'd not noticed that post till now when I had to go search for it,
I dont look here for a few days sometimes,
I could end up spending most of the day reading and answering posts
here,
wich I feel like ive ended up doing on a few occasions,
It amases me how the likes of Win and several others make so many posts
wich
go into such detail,
maybe they read/think/type a lot faster than me ?

but this looks like a piece of pie to me,
the input stage is just a differential pair made with Sziklai darlington
the rest is just taking the ratio of the right resistors .... there
easy
as
cake.

Colin =^.^=


So write an equation. Then the defect/poor-"design" will be obvious.

Wel ok if you insist, im kinda busy with my lightspeed converter so il
just
give it a quick going over,
in the first stage ignoring emitter resitance as its a darlington,
current is due to the input voltage apearing accros the resistance between
emitters,
wich is (r2+r6) in parallell with (R9+vr1)
this current flow through the collector load
consisting of (r4+r8) in parallel with (R10,R11)
and produces a voltage - good old ohms law again,
this differential voltage is amplified by the op amp stage in the ratio of
its feedback resistors,
ie r13/r10. to produce a single ended op voltage.

see - its just a question of resistance ratios.
now when do I get my pie or cake ?

Colin =^.^=

So write it as a single equation. You're waffling ;-)

jeez, you want me to expand out simple ohms law and stuff ?
....
ree = 1/(1/(r2+r6)+1/(r9+vr1))
rcc = 1/(1/(r4+r8)+1/(r10+r11))
gain = rcc/ree * r12/r11

I should of just said the gain is 42 that would of been easier,
ot would probably be right for some value of vr1 too !

Colin =^.^=

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 08:44:49 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Is S.E.D actually sci.electronics.DUMMIES ??

When I saw this original post....

From: "powerampfreak"
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Somebody explaining this design?
Date: 9 Mar 2007 12:08:35 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 11
Message-ID: .com

I commented, "Looks like crap to me ;-)"

The response from the hot air crowd, you know, the ones posing as
guru's, was an implication that I was incorrect.

So I posed a simple question... do a hand analysis of the gain of the
circuit.

It's a simple analysis (if you're not a faker :-)

It's been about 40 hours since I posted that request/taunt.

Nary a peep.

So I think this is TRULY...

sci.electronics.DUMMIES ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Yep it is.... sci.electronics.DUMMIES

Where are all the gurus when you want a real engineering answer?
Sucking on their thumbs and bowing to Gore ?:-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 08:44:49 -0700, Jim Thompson
Gave us:

Is S.E.D actually sci.electronics.DUMMIES ??

When I saw this original post....


Yet another retarded, cross posted, off topic ****tard post 'eh
ThompsTard!?

Do you have a life, ****head? If so, it must be pretty ****ing drab,
and then your retarded ass has the gall to even think you have the
aptitude to assess others!

Get off it, you dumb ****!

As to your post title, YOU QUALIFY!

View in a fixed-width font such as Courier.

On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 00:35:04 GMT, Fred Bloggs
wrote:

View in a fixed-width font such as Courier.


.
.
. .-----.
. | |
. --- |
. R2
. | ve -ve
. +------+----------+---Rg----
. | | |
. | | gm1vbe1 |
. hie1 /|\ |
. vd | \v/ |
. -- ----' | |
. 2 | |
. +-----. |
. | | |
. R3 hie2 /|\ gm2vbe2
. | | \v/
. | | |
. +-----+----+---- -vo/2
. |
. |
. R4
. |
. |
. ---
.
.
.
. R4
. ----------
. vo R2||(Rg/2)
. Av= -- = -------------------------------
. vd 1 1
. 1+ --------- x -------------------
. R2||(Rg/2) gm1(1+gm2(R3||hie2))
.
.
.
.
.


Gack! You really know how to over-complicate a simple analysis don't
you ?:-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

The usual way of gaining, and broadbanding the gain of, the compound
follower:

View in a fixed-width font such as Courier.

On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 11:34:29 GMT, Fred Bloggs
wrote:

The usual way of gaining, and broadbanding the gain of, the compound
follower:

View in a fixed-width font such as Courier.


.
.
. .-----.
. | |
. --- |
. R2
. | ve -ve
. +----+----------+---Rg----
. | | |
. | | gm1veb1 |
. hie1 /|\ R4
. vd | \v/ |
. -- ----' | +---- -vo/2
. 2 | |
. +-----. |
. | | | gm2vbe2
. R3 hie2 /|\
. | | \v/
. | | |
. '-----+----'
. |
. ---
.
.
.
.
. vo
. Av= -- = ????? --Thompson insert answer here
. vd

Let's hold-off a bit and see if anyone else can get the answer ;-)

(Since I do this all the time in CMOS... one presently in the hopper
uses this very thing at a 2.2V supply, but has current sources in
appropriate places.)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

Jim Thompson wrote:

Is S.E.D actually sci.electronics.DUMMIES ??

When I saw this original post....

From: "powerampfreak"
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Somebody explaining this design?
Date: 9 Mar 2007 12:08:35 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 11
Message-ID: .com

I commented, "Looks like crap to me ;-)"

The response from the hot air crowd, you know, the ones posing as
guru's, was an implication that I was incorrect.

So I posed a simple question... do a hand analysis of the gain of the
circuit.

It's a simple analysis (if you're not a faker :-)

It's been about 40 hours since I posted that request/taunt.

Nary a peep.

Perhaps because:

1) You were not the original poster and the above analysis was not
necessary to answer the question.

2) Many of us are employed and/or have more intersting things to do.

3) You don't run this newsgroup, so nobody feels obligated to jump when
you issue a command.

4) It didn't look like a neo-con rant, so we were all confused.


--
Paul Hovnanian
------------------------------------------------------------------
If everything is coming your way then you're in the wrong lane.

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 19:03:42 -0700, "Paul Hovnanian P.E."
wrote:

[snip]

Perhaps because:

1) You were not the original poster and the above analysis was not
necessary to answer the question.

2) Many of us are employed and/or have more intersting things to do.

3) You don't run this newsgroup, so nobody feels obligated to jump when
you issue a command.

4) It didn't look like a neo-con rant, so we were all confused.


I'm curious. Do you think I'm unemployed? I typically work a 60 hour
week.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

"Jim Thompson"


I'm curious. Do you think I'm unemployed? I typically work a 60 hour
week.


** YOU LIE !!

Being a total asshole takes 168 hours a week , minimum.




........ Phil

On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 13:20:44 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote:


"Jim Thompson"


I'm curious. Do you think I'm unemployed? I typically work a 60 hour
week.


** YOU LIE !!

Being a total asshole takes 168 hours a week , minimum.

---
So you work 8 days a week? ;-)


--
JF

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 21:40:51 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 13:20:44 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote:


"Jim Thompson"


I'm curious. Do you think I'm unemployed? I typically work a 60 hour
week.


** YOU LIE !!

Being a total asshole takes 168 hours a week , minimum.

---
So you work 8 days a week? ;-)

Besides, I'm not a "total" asshole, I'm a "PERFECT" asshole ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 19:17:40 -0700, Jim Thompson
Gave us:

I'm curious. Do you think I'm unemployed? I typically work a 60 hour
week.


Yet you have time to take retarded dumps in here.

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message ...
Is S.E.D actually sci.electronics.DUMMIES ??

When I saw this original post....

From: "powerampfreak"
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Somebody explaining this design?
Date: 9 Mar 2007 12:08:35 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 11
Message-ID: .com

I commented, "Looks like crap to me ;-)"

The response from the hot air crowd, you know, the ones posing as
guru's, was an implication that I was incorrect.

So I posed a simple question... do a hand analysis of the gain of the
circuit.

It's a simple analysis (if you're not a faker :-)

It's been about 40 hours since I posted that request/taunt.

Nary a peep.

So I think this is TRULY...

sci.electronics.DUMMIES ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--

Best, at the moment that I can guess.....

Short circuit the gain setting pot/capacitor and throw away the NPN
transistors. It's a differential pair. The gain is gmRC. gm is set by the
'tail' resistor which is R2||R6.

Put the NPNs back in again. It's still a differential amplifier but the NPNs
'pin' the PNP currents at Vbe/Rbe which makes gm some different value......,
gm' less than before.

However the NPNs 'boost' that value by approximately their Beta....Bnpn [1]
So

Av = BnpnRCgm' = BnpnRCIcpnp/25E-3 = BnpnRCVbe/25E-3Rbe

That might be a factor of two out because it's a diferential amplifier.

Open circuit the gain setting network and it's just a pair of 'thingy'
amplifiers with

Av = RC/RE

In between........ I couldn't be bothered.


[1] Wildish guess that 'feels' right because there is some feedyback thing
going on and I think gm is a measure of re, or something.

I won't push my luck further on 'second' order effects because I probably
haven't got the first order ones right.

On the basis of the above analysis..... the gain is going to vary all over
the shop as Bnpn (and other stuff) varies. So yes it is crap.

DNA

Genome wrote:

On the basis of the above analysis..... the gain is going to vary all over
the shop as Bnpn (and other stuff) varies. So yes it is crap.

WRONG !

Every serious pro-audio mixer has a mic pre-amp circuit that's not a heck of a
lot different to this since the late 1970s.

It performs really rather well. Has no-one yet considered simulating it ?

Graham

Eeyore wrote:

Genome wrote:


On the basis of the above analysis..... the gain is going to vary all over
the shop as Bnpn (and other stuff) varies. So yes it is crap.


WRONG !

Every serious pro-audio mixer has a mic pre-amp circuit that's not a heck of a
lot different to this since the late 1970s.

It performs really rather well. Has no-one yet considered simulating it ?


Not really concerned with assessment of basic performance, the basic
configuration is crude, problematic, lacks precision, and operator
tuning significantly alters operating characteristic. Then the one
component with well-matched differential components is underutilized.

Fred Bloggs wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Genome wrote:

On the basis of the above analysis..... the gain is going to vary all over
the shop as Bnpn (and other stuff) varies. So yes it is crap.

WRONG !

Every serious pro-audio mixer has a mic pre-amp circuit that's not a heck of a
lot different to this since the late 1970s.

It performs really rather well. Has no-one yet considered simulating it ?

Not really concerned with assessment of basic performance,

Why not ?


the basic configuration is crude, problematic, lacks precision, and operator
tuning

Tuning ?


significantly alters operating characteristic. Then the one component with
well-matched differential components is underutilized.

So Mr Expert. Design a better one.

I'm waiting with bated breath.

Graham

On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 12:13:24 GMT, Fred Bloggs
wrote:



Eeyore wrote:

Genome wrote:


On the basis of the above analysis..... the gain is going to vary all over
the shop as Bnpn (and other stuff) varies. So yes it is crap.


WRONG !

Every serious pro-audio mixer has a mic pre-amp circuit that's not a heck of a
lot different to this since the late 1970s.

It performs really rather well. Has no-one yet considered simulating it ?


Not really concerned with assessment of basic performance, the basic
configuration is crude, problematic, lacks precision, and operator
tuning significantly alters operating characteristic. Then the one
component with well-matched differential components is underutilized.

But I bet you'll find it in Win's GOOD DESIGNS section ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Genome wrote:

On the basis of the above analysis..... the gain is going to vary all
over
the shop as Bnpn (and other stuff) varies. So yes it is crap.

WRONG !

Every serious pro-audio mixer has a mic pre-amp circuit that's not a heck
of a
lot different to this since the late 1970s.

It performs really rather well. Has no-one yet considered simulating it ?

Graham


So, your counter to my 'analysis' is....

"WRONG

Every serious pro-audio.........."

Is that some sort of donkeymoron[1]?

How does the fact that someone uses something prove an analysis of it is
incorrect?

DNA

[1] cf oxymoron. Example 'serious pro-audio'

Good grief, the concept of 'pro-audio' is bad enough, getting serious about
it is just being silly.

Genome wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
Genome wrote:

On the basis of the above analysis..... the gain is going to vary all
over the shop as Bnpn (and other stuff) varies. So yes it is crap.

WRONG !

Every serious pro-audio mixer has a mic pre-amp circuit that's not a heck
of a lot different to this since the late 1970s.

It performs really rather well. Has no-one yet considered simulating it ?

So, your counter to my 'analysis' is....

"WRONG

Every serious pro-audio.........."

Is that some sort of donkeymoron[1]?

How does the fact that someone uses something prove an analysis of it is
incorrect?

I'll look forward to seeing your improvement on Phil's design. Trust me, if you
come up with a blinder, I'll be the first to give it credit.

Graham

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Genome wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
Genome wrote:

On the basis of the above analysis..... the gain is going to vary all
over the shop as Bnpn (and other stuff) varies. So yes it is crap.

WRONG !

Every serious pro-audio mixer has a mic pre-amp circuit that's not a
heck
of a lot different to this since the late 1970s.

It performs really rather well. Has no-one yet considered simulating it
?

So, your counter to my 'analysis' is....

"WRONG

Every serious pro-audio.........."

Is that some sort of donkeymoron[1]?

How does the fact that someone uses something prove an analysis of it is
incorrect?

I'll look forward to seeing your improvement on Phil's design. Trust me,
if you
come up with a blinder, I'll be the first to give it credit.

Graham


Perhaps you can clarify something for me?

In the equation.

'your response' = irrelevancy^N

What value of N did you think you were using?

I know, well I think, it's not an integer because my best guess is something
between 2 and 3.

DNA