|
The never-ending saga on the cathodyne output impedances: Chris Paul wrote me a letter, commenting on both Burkhard Vogel's LTE and Stuart Yaniger's article in Volume 0. Here is Chris' latest letter.
|
|
| Another reaction to Stuart Yaniger's article in Vol 0 about the Cathodyne (aka Concertina) phase splitter, this time by frequent contributor Burkhard Vogel from Stuttgart, Germany. Burkhard has analysed this circuit in a more formal way and comes to the conclusion that Stuart had it right. Vogel even added the complete MathCad derivation in the appendix which you can download. For those who donot have MathCad on their system, here's the PDF version. |
|
Burkhard Vogel from Stuttgart, Germany commented to Ovidiu Popa's article in Vol 1 "On the Noise performance of Low Noise Input Stages", and to Brad Wood's letter to the same article. Vogel's letter contains a complete MathCad noise analysis and the MathCad worksheet is also available for download from within the letter. The full document including Ovidiu's reply can be found here.
|
|
Dr. Ramkumar Ramaswamy wrote a nice article for Linear Audio "A universal Continuous-Time active filter", Vol 1, pp 77. I had an intersting discussion with Ramkumar about the meaning of the "Characteristic Frequency" of a filter. As a follow-up, Ramkumar has writter "On the Characteristic Frequency of a Filter". This article is available online. |
|
Menno van der Veen commented to Bruno Putzeys' article in Vol 1 "The F-word - or, why there is no such thing as too much feedback". In replying to Menno, Bruno en passant comes up with a conclusion in which way feedback really decreases distortion. Read it here.
|
|
| Another comment to Bruno Putzeys' article in Vol 1 "The F-word - or, why there is no such thing as too much feedback", this time from Marcel van de Gevel. Marcel adds a few pieces to the puzzle on where the 'feedback is bad' story originated. His comments and Bruno's reply is here. |
|
| Christopher Paul from Bayport, NY, USA commented on Stuart Yanigers article in Vol 0: "Split the Difference: The Truth about the Humble Cathodyne". Here are his views and Stuart's reply. |
|
Cyril Bateman commented on Ed Simon's article on resistor non-linearity in Vol 1. Cyril recalled some vintage testequipment documentation and application notes for measuring passive device non-linearities. He has graciously provided PDF copies of these documents. The document links are in his comment.
|
|
Both Burkhard Vogel, from Stuttgart, Germany, and Dave Kimber from London, UK commented on Frank Blohbaums article in Vol 0 "A New Low-Noise Circuit Approach for Pentodes". Their comments and Frank's replies are here.
|
|
Burkhard Vogel from Stuttgard, Germany wrote a letter with comments to Joachim Gerhard's article in Vol 0: "Down the Rabbit Hole - Adventures in the Land of Phonostages". Joachim replied here.
|
|
Peter van Willenswaard from Bergschenhoek, The Netherlands, commented on Stuart Yanigers article in Vol 0: "Split the Difference: The Truth about the Humble Cathodyne". Their views can be read here.
|
|
Brad Wood from Canoga Park, CA, USA, commented to the article by Ovidiu Popa in Vol 1 "On the Noise performance of Low Noise Input Stages". Ovidiu replied to each comment here.
|
|
| Samuel Groner from Zurich, Switzerland, commented on Ed Simon's article in Vol 1 "Resistor non-linearity - there's more to Ohm than meets the eye". The comments, along with Ed's reply, can be found here. |
|
|
