Driver to drive?

[Paul Hovnanian P.E.]

Don Klipstein wrote:

In article <48FCC4ED.B207D5E@hovnanian.com>, Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
ehsjr wrote:

[snip]

A simple approach may be best for you. An LED needs to have
the current limited to a (relatively wide) range, and needs
to be protected against reverse voltage. Placing a diode in
antiparallel with the LED accomplishes the latter.

Or another LED wired the other way around for 2X the light.

What I like to do is use a bridge rectifier to have both halves of the
AC cycle bcoming DC for the LED. A bridge rectifier will protect the LED
from reverse voltage while also never giving the LED reverse voltage.

Put the resistor upstream from the bridge rectifier, so that the
resistor limits current if the bridge rectifier shorts. And 400 volt
bridge rectifiers are cheap.

Or capacitor. This is an often used technique for powering an LED from
mains voltage when the option is finding someplace to dump all that I^2R
heat.

Some budget designs demand absolute minimum parts counts. A bridge
rectifier can count as one, but wall warts might be out of the question.

--
Paul Hovnanian mailtoaul@Hovnanian.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
If Mama Cass had just split that ham sandwich with Karen Carpenter,
they'd both be alive today.

 

[john jardine]

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message
news:vdppf4pn40dqedjtlot0m9lth6e0sclri7@4ax.com...

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 19:34:52 GMT, "Kevin Aylward"
kaExtractThis@kevinaylward.co.uk> wrote:

John Fields wrote:
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 02:33:36 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:



John Larkin wrote:

Not if the "additional" pole is at a much higher frequency than the
previous pole inherent to the capacitances of a heap of fets driven
by some wimpy resistive source. Increasing the bandwidth of the
output stage - the serious speed problem - by, say, 20:1 has got to
help the overall loop.

Just buffering Ciss helps a ton.


There's no free lunch here: we're adding GBW, and paying for it. But
not much, since opamps are cheap.

I confess I do that kind of thing. Just not put op-amps round the
actual output devices myself so far but it sounds interesting.
They'd have to be damn fast though.

---
Hey, Mr. Expert, here's a circuit I designed about 30 years ago, but
in bipolar, that does what Larkin's talking about.

No it doesn't, not unless Larkin's taking about something completely
different other than what I am talking about.

What you have here is a simple amplifier driving mosfets. This is totally
standard, and not at issue in this discussion. It is not one amplifier
driving another amplifier, where the 2nd amp encloses the output devices
and
forces a closed loop UG buffer, for example, like *my* circuit here.

http://www.kevinaylward.co.uk/ee/circuits/VeryLowDistortionAmp2.jpg

Note, the zener diode fed, (single transistor) buffer-in-the-loop around
the
output mosfets.

The point I am making is that this type of loop within a loop, does not
allow the overall speed of the complete amplifier to be made faster, if
the
amplifier would otherwise already be optimumally designed for speed,
despite
the allegation that it increases the net response of the output devices.
It
doesn't, as a simple calculation will show. What it does buy is better LF
*accuracy* at the expense of speed.

Kevin Aylward
www.blonddee.co.uk
www.kevinaylward.co.uk
www.anasoft.co.uk -SuperSpice


Well, neither. I was suggesting a fast opamp *per fet*, with feedback
from the source, to make each fet look like an ideal transconductance
device, perfectly linear, no offset or threshold, all exactly matched,
with very low input capacitance.

But how does improving and parallelizing gate drives cost speed? It
makes my amps faster and a lot more stable. Your amp (the one you
never built) has a couple of wimpy current sources driving 10 fets in
parallel; I'm suggesting a beefy voltage source per fet gate, with
local feedback.

John


Servo arrangement summat like this?.

http://img518.imageshack.us/my.php?image=eloadte9.png
[An 'electronic load' project (scrapped). Occasionally blew opamps
consequent to particular dynamics on the Red wire. Traced to Drain/gate
feedback transients coupled with slightly dissimilar current source slew
rates.]

 

[John Fields]

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:37:04 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

I am a true audio expert Michael, John Fields is not. Each to their own.

You say you are, and so do thousands of others. Have you seen the
state of the art Harris broadcast audio consoles?

Probably only bought in the USA btw.


Digitize every input, do everything in the CPU,

'the' CPU ? LMAO !


and convert back to analog. Factory service of the boards only.

They're hardly the first. The Neve company I was with for 3 years as a project
leader over 20 years ago was the first and I worked on a couple of their
digital projects, one of only 2 of the conventional analogue team to be
'allowed' to. The digital team was mostly run almost as a separate company
within a company.

So, your 'state of the art' is a bit ancient for me.

---
And yet you didn't know that the sum of output currents from active IOs
can't exceed the stated maximum current into Vcc or out of GND of logic
chips?

Curious, that...

JF

 

[mark krawczuk]

who gives a turd how ya post , personally i dont give a rats.


"FatBytestard" <FatBytestard@somewheronyourharddrive.org> wrote in message
news:gl5u84p3eg3va793v4usuqgp2k1kk2cfc1@4ax.com...

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:16:41 +1000, "ZACK." <youwillfindme@home.com.au
wrote:

my brother tried to get the lead out of
a 22 bullit with a hammer, and it fired.

Why are you a top posting retard? Oh yeah... the bullet hit you in the
head.

We used to fire boxes of .22s with a flat rock and a hammer.

I modified my .22 pellet pistol to accept a .22 short cartridge.

Getting it to fire was the interesting part.

 

[ehsjr]

Jon Slaughter wrote:

Is there a cheap source for fiber optic that is't used for communication but
lighting? I need it in small lengths(< 1 in but of course I can cut it) and
don't mind imperfections. In fact I imagine even scrap would work. 1mm to
2mm in diameter too.


Although need it without the sheath or some easy way to remove it. Would be
nice if it had a coating on it so I could handle it but a very thin one that
was bonded to the fiber)

Thanks,
Jon

http://www.goldmine-elec-products.com/prodinfo.asp?number=G755

HTH

 

[mark krawczuk]

NO ONE EXCEPT you complains about top posting .

"FatBytestard" <FatBytestard@somewheronyourharddrive.org> wrote in message
news:k3ov849v3h34cfrpctfnra9as2loib5ldm@4ax.com...

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 11:48:35 +1000, "ZACK." <youwillfindme@home.com.au
wrote:


"FatBytestard" <FatBytestard@somewheronyourharddrive.org> wrote in message
news:gl5u84p3eg3va793v4usuqgp2k1kk2cfc1@4ax.com...
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:16:41 +1000, "ZACK." <youwillfindme@home.com.au
wrote:

my brother tried to get the lead out of
a 22 bullit with a hammer, and it fired.

Why are you a top posting retard? Oh yeah... the bullet hit you in the
head.

i will top side bottem left right round post
if i wont to.


We used to fire boxes of .22s with a flat rock and a hammer.

I modified my .22 pellet pistol to accept a .22 short cartridge.

Getting it to fire was the interesting part.


Yes, and U can B referred 2 as a ReTaRd too.

 

[Joel Koltner]

"john jardine" <john.jardine@idnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:0351c477$0$15765$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...

A year ago it used to be 'nearly acceptable' now it's not even nearly.
Constant freezing, blocking out, loss of sound, paint-it-by-numbers colours
and Max Headroom staccatos.

Sounds like you're suffering from heavy multi-path distortion just like Joerg
is. If it's dynamically changing multipath, all the signal strength in the
world won't help, and the receivers' "echo cancellers" aren't fact enough to
track it and remove it. Result: Poor picture quality.

 

[Jamie]

Eeyore wrote:

Jamie wrote:


Eeyore wrote:

You clearly haven't the tiniest clue about the economics of high-volume manufacturing.
Or the importance of pcb layout. Not to mention the cost savings of offshore
manufacturing too.

One product of mine (in its various channel sizes) sold over 100,000 units.

If you really had that much involvement in projects as you speak of,
I'll wager the majority of them are off of some one else's back.!


You're as much of a cnut as I always thought.

Here's an example of the above btw.
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Studiomaster-Club-2000-18-channel-mixing-desk-excellent_W0QQitemZ220296706076QQihZ012QQcategoryZ23785QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

It was available with various numbers of channels (the above is the largest) and a DSP
reverb option.

Totally my own design thank you, although obviously I had guys working on stuff like pcb
layout and metalwork for me as part of a 3 man team.

Gramm

Oh please! A mixer, Ouuuhhh...

I made mixers, pre amps and power amps years ago. I was most likely
one of the first in my area to have a 400 W RMS per channel stereo
amplifier for mobile use. It may have not been the most power efficient
amplifier but it generate quality sound equal to any high end, line
service unit.. I then made a commercial power supply option unit to
operate it on 120 V mains, by passing the inverter when needed. I would
used it for a few disc jockey gigs now and then..

THis was 30 years ago now using old technology. AT least that is what
you call it.

You have nothing special to offer that enlightens me.

http://webpages.charter.net/jamie_5"

 

[Archimedes' Lever]

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:48:20 -0700 (PDT), mpm <mpmillard@aol.com> wrote:

On Oct 19, 7:45?pm, Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org
wrote:
On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 13:29:17 -0700 (PDT), mpm <mpmill...@aol.com> wrote:
On Oct 19, 12:47?pm, krw <k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

If a radio wave cannot cross state lines it isn't regulated
(shielded inside an enclosure, for instance). ?Once you let it free ?
it's going to cross state lines, all on its own. ?;-)

Technically, that statement is not true.
MRI machines and microwave ovens are two RF examples that come to
mind.
Both are enclosed. ?Both are regulated.

That said, I understood your point.

?Both radiate, dipshit. THAT is NOT enclosed.

Well Mr. Smarty Pants...
Why don't you tell us all what "enclosed" means to you?

Your skull, apparently nearly completely being 2 inch thick bone, has
enclosed your brain. Hell, you don't even need a tin cap, it's so thick.

Even the best screen rooms I've ever seen do not have perfect
attenuation.

You have obviously not seen the HUGE Hughes Anechoic chamber that they
hang entire jet fighters in to perform simulations. I think it is the
biggest in the world. Pretty darned leak free too!

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/bss/factsheets/376/gms/gms.html

http://www.audiojunkies.com/blog/503/the-worlds-largest-anechoic-chamber


You really have no familiarity with part 15 at all, eh?

Not that attenuation of signals has ANYTHING to do with regulation of
radiating devices.

Attenuation of said signals has to do with electro-mechanical
manipulation of the radiating elements within the Faraday Cage. Most get
trapped, some get out.

Regulation is the rule set put forth by a governing body that dictates
the limits of any such radiation, thereby providing a product designer
with guidelines by which design goals can be outlined to conform to
during a product design cycle.

Contrary to your ridiculous assertions.

What assertion are you referring to, idiot?

That even enclosed, attenuated radiation is controlled? It most
certainly is.

Deliberate radio signals, such as that which is intentionally emitted
from a transmitting element, like an antenna or array, are controlled as
to Wattage and carrier type and width, etc. Very specific controls
across all bands.

By the same token,ALL electronic devices, whether it is a "radio" or
not, are ALSO controlled by the FCC (if it emits RF at all)inasmuch as
all microprocessor based devices radiate as do some other devices in the
RF range. The maximum amount they are permitted to radiate is controlled
in most countries. With us, a simple statement like "must not interfere"
makes it OK to do, all the way up to the point someone complains that you
are indeed interfering with their gear.

Oddly, however, it also states that it (the device) must also accept
such types of interference from other devices.

No wonder pilots make us turn everything off while they are hoppin' -n-
jumpin' all over the place.

 

[Eeyore]

john jardine wrote:

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote


Well, neither. I was suggesting a fast opamp *per fet*, with feedback
from the source, to make each fet look like an ideal transconductance
device, perfectly linear, no offset or threshold, all exactly matched,
with very low input capacitance.

But how does improving and parallelizing gate drives cost speed? It
makes my amps faster and a lot more stable. Your amp (the one you
never built) has a couple of wimpy current sources driving 10 fets in
parallel; I'm suggesting a beefy voltage source per fet gate, with
local feedback.

Servo arrangement summat like this?.
http://img518.imageshack.us/my.php?image=eloadte9.png
[An 'electronic load' project (scrapped). Occasionally blew opamps
consequent to particular dynamics on the Red wire. Traced to Drain/gate
feedback transients coupled with slightly dissimilar current source slew
rates.]

Surely would have been fixable with a reverse biased diode from op-amp o/p to V+
and another one from the - i/p to ground, but you'd have needed a small series
R.

Graham

 

[Jon Slaughter]

"Anthony Fremont" <nobody@noplace.net> wrote in message
news:HNqdncHCuK--mWDVnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@supernews.com...

Jon Slaughter wrote:

But since you didn't think about the interrupt ocurring inbetween the
statements you never realized how x = 7 was comming about.

You presume allot. You can build all the straw men you want, JW's code
was fine.

It's a big deal and though you might want to be a hard head about it
maybe one day it will bite you in the ass and you'll spend weeks
trying to figure out why your code is crashing.


You really don't know what you are talking about here. I have fixed
scores of obscure bugs in programs that the author couldn't fix. How much
programming experience do you have?

I've been programming for 15 years. I I know intel x86 assembly that
includes up to the 486. I know C/C++, C#(.NET), Java, PIC24 assembly, Perl,
and php. I started programming when I was 15. I've wrote my own 386
protected mode operating system when I was 17 that had it's own vesa 3D
graphics library. I mainly write physics simulation programs dealing with
fluid mechanics now days but I'd bet my pinkie knows more than you.

So who knows more? To bad we can't put it to a test so I can shut your
arrogant ass up.

If you were smart you would say "Thanks, I'll need to remember that
for next time" or something like that. Else your just being ignorant.


Who was it that thought the OP didn't know how to solve his problem and
was wanting a C solution?

You must not know shit about programming. I didn't give him C but what is
called pseudo code... obviously if you were any bit of a real programmer you
could translate it to your favorite language. Keep trying retard and maybe
one day you will get it.

I'll agree that in 99.9% of the cases it won't matter but lets hope
you are writing code for anything serious then.

I didn't want to be rude, but since you aparently won't have it any other
way..... I've been writing code for more than 30 years on a wide variety
of platforms from 8-bit micros to 36-bit mainframes, literally. I've used
PICs extensively for something like seven years, now I do the ARM thing
for fun. I think I know a thing or two about using a PIC chip including
pretty much all the internal peripherals, using multiple and even nested
interrupts. But if you'd like to compare code some time.... You are way
over your head here bud, too bad you aren't smart enough to realize it.
You are also way too quick to jump to conclusions about other people's
abilities while trying to stand on your own shoulders.

30 years huh? 30 years and thats all you got out of it? Maybe you should
have went to school and learned somethign then because obviously if you
can't understand what Fred pointed out then you have some major logic flaws.

Don't get me wrong, I like your ambition to learn and your outgoing nature
most of the time. You need to do a little more careful reading and a
little less "telling" people how smart you [and how dumb they] are while
arguing petty, moot points with them.

Sure you do. You sound like one arrogant jackass who thinks he's and expert
and when it's pointed out that you don't know much as you think you go into
a conniption fit. Keep writing your code the way you want... it will get
you by. I just hope you don't write any commerical apps because your likely
to injury or kill someone(or at the very least cost the company only because
of your arrogance and ignorance).

Anyways.. I love to killfile people like you so respond at will.

 

[Eeyore]

John Fields wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:
Eeyore wrote:

I am a true audio expert Michael, John Fields is not. Each to their own.

You say you are, and so do thousands of others. Have you seen the
state of the art Harris broadcast audio consoles?

Probably only bought in the USA btw.

Digitize every input, do everything in the CPU,

'the' CPU ? LMAO !

and convert back to analog. Factory service of the boards only.

They're hardly the first. The Neve company I was with for 3 years as a project
leader over 20 years ago was the first and I worked on a couple of their
digital projects, one of only 2 of the conventional analogue team to be
'allowed' to. The digital team was mostly run almost as a separate company
within a company.

So, your 'state of the art' is a bit ancient for me.

---
And yet you didn't know that the sum of output currents from active IOs
can't exceed the stated maximum current into Vcc or out of GND of logic
chips?

Curious, that...

SOD OFF. God, you're a pest. Of course it wouldn't get past me on a design review.

Graham

 

[Jon Slaughter]

"ehsjr" <ehsjr@NOSPAMverizon.net> wrote in message
news:_99Lk.2532$Rx2.274@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...

Jon Slaughter wrote:
Is there a cheap source for fiber optic that is't used for communication
but lighting? I need it in small lengths(< 1 in but of course I can cut
it) and don't mind imperfections. In fact I imagine even scrap would
work. 1mm to 2mm in diameter too.


Although need it without the sheath or some easy way to remove it. Would
be nice if it had a coating on it so I could handle it but a very thin
one that was bonded to the fiber)

Thanks,
Jon

http://www.goldmine-elec-products.com/prodinfo.asp?number=G755

HTH

If only I knew the diameter ;/

 

[Jon Slaughter]

<x@x.com> wrote in message
news:n2hpf4hg76v9mispctp3dfsk28srvrh8cf@4ax.com...

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 05:46:49 -0500, "Jon Slaughter"
Jon_Slaughter@Hotmail.com> wrote:

snip
It depends on the fiber (optical rolloff), but the type of cable I'm
thinking you want doesn't actually have a sheath. That also saves you
the labor of having to remove it.
---
Yes, but the sheath/jacket has two important functions: 1. It protects the
fiber from the wood(not sure if this is an issue but I read that oils from
fingers and change the refraction index along with cuts and such). 2. It
helps make a snug fit into the hole. I do not know if fiber will work as
well.


===
I didn't make it clear in my last post, but you should definitely be
using a plastic or acrylic fiber (not a glass fiber). I didn't get
around to completing that thought. Glass fiber will be too much money
anyway.
----

Yes, I think this is what I'm using now. I'm going to head to the hobby
store and hopfully snatch some to work with.

==
I'm also wondering (out loud, I really haven't thought it
through.....) if you might be able to get by with a silicone lens.
You might even be able to prototype these yourself? Google "Liquid
Silicone Lens" and drill down through some of the hits. Although
focusing might suffer on your protoype, I'm wondering if using a clear
silicone would greatly simply prototype assembly -- or whether it
would just be a big ugly mess to clean up?
----

Google doesn't return anything. What I would be looking for is some type
of
small cylinder with the same diameter of the fiber optic that is either
somewhat opaque(hopefully help mix the colors and increase the angle) or
maybe clear but has the same properties. Ultimately it can't decrease the
brighness too much though.

========
The company I was thinking about was Banner Engineering.
(No "S". Duh?!) Oh well. Call their engineers, because they make a
lot of stuff that's nowhere to be found on their web sites. Although,
they're likely too pricey to be a practical solution. But maybe they
can steer you to the right folks. I do know they carry all kinds of
fiber. At least they used to a few years back. Good luck.
---


Ok, I'll check them out.


We used a ~1/8" plastic rod that brought out a LED's light through an
EMI compliant box. I heated the visible end of the rod to create a
dome shaped lens. This looked better than if the visible end of the
rod was flat. Dunno if this idea would work with plastic fiber or
not.

-Dave Pollum

I tried that with the fiber optic I had and it didn't work well... actually
it didn't work at all ;/ But I might not have done a good job

 

[John Fields]

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:45:13 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

John Fields wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
John Fields wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
John Fields wrote:
Eeyore wrote:

Where would you place the threshold (and what harmonic structure) of audible
THD ?

---
It depends:
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GFRC,GFRC:2006-50,GFRC:en&q=harmonic+distortion+threshold+of+audibility

I was interested in YOUR opinion though.
---
No, you weren't.

Yes I absolutely was.
---
No, you absolutely weren't, liar.

As a matter of principle I don't lie.

---
But, as a matter of fact, you do.
---

This has presented me with a conundrum that I'd hate ever to have to face if I
ever get asked a certain question by an old friend.

Because the truth might hurt someone else and a relationship.

---
That's from your selfish point of view.

Denying them access to the truth means that you're setting yourself up
as a judge of who should and should not have access to the truth because
of what your predictions dictate will happen when the truth is revealed.
---

The proof lies in that you'd only ask me that if you thought my opinion
was important.

I wanted to hear your opinion. After several attempts to drag it out of you,
I can only assume you don't have one.

---
I already said as much, earlier, but after reading some stuff on
Wikipedia there seems to be data that claims that under certain
conditions 0.003% THD is clearly discernible.

I don't have the link at hand but, if you're interested, I'm sure you
can find it.
---

Please don't bother replying.

---
It's no bother at all.

BTW, here's that amp with Larson's complaints removed:

Version 4
SHEET 1 1476 680
WIRE 512 -144 -208 -144
WIRE -128 -64 -496 -64
WIRE 224 -64 -128 -64
WIRE 368 -64 224 -64
WIRE 224 -16 224 -64
WIRE -208 16 -208 -144
WIRE 368 32 368 -64
WIRE -496 48 -496 -64
WIRE 0 112 -16 112
WIRE 96 112 64 112
WIRE 224 112 224 64
WIRE 224 112 176 112
WIRE 320 112 224 112
WIRE -128 160 -128 -64
WIRE -496 176 -496 128
WIRE -496 176 -592 176
WIRE -336 176 -368 176
WIRE -208 176 -208 96
WIRE -208 176 -256 176
WIRE -160 176 -208 176
WIRE -16 192 -16 112
WIRE -16 192 -96 192
WIRE 368 192 368 128
WIRE 512 192 512 -144
WIRE 512 192 368 192
WIRE -160 208 -208 208
WIRE -496 224 -496 176
WIRE -368 224 -368 176
WIRE 368 256 368 192
WIRE -208 272 -208 208
WIRE -16 272 -16 192
WIRE 0 272 -16 272
WIRE 96 272 64 272
WIRE 224 272 176 272
WIRE 320 272 224 272
WIRE 224 320 224 272
WIRE 512 320 512 192
WIRE -496 448 -496 304
WIRE -128 448 -128 224
WIRE -128 448 -496 448
WIRE 224 448 224 400
WIRE 224 448 -128 448
WIRE 368 448 368 352
WIRE 368 448 224 448
WIRE -592 528 -592 176
WIRE -368 528 -368 304
WIRE -368 528 -592 528
WIRE -208 528 -208 352
WIRE -208 528 -368 528
WIRE 512 528 512 400
WIRE 512 528 -208 528
WIRE -592 592 -592 528
FLAG -592 592 0
SYMBOL voltage -496 32 R0
WINDOW 123 0 0 Left 0
WINDOW 39 0 0 Left 0
SYMATTR InstName V1
SYMATTR Value 15
SYMBOL voltage -496 208 R0
WINDOW 123 0 0 Left 0
WINDOW 39 0 0 Left 0
SYMATTR InstName V2
SYMATTR Value 15
SYMBOL voltage -368 208 R0
WINDOW 3 24 104 Invisible 0
WINDOW 123 20 110 Left 0
WINDOW 39 0 0 Left 0
SYMATTR Value SINE(0 1 20000)
SYMATTR Value2 AC 1
SYMATTR InstName V3
SYMBOL res 496 304 R0
SYMATTR InstName R1
SYMATTR Value 4
SYMBOL res -240 160 R90
WINDOW 0 -31 55 VBottom 0
WINDOW 3 -26 57 VTop 0
SYMATTR InstName R2
SYMATTR Value 100
SYMBOL res -192 112 R180
WINDOW 0 36 76 Left 0
WINDOW 3 36 40 Left 0
SYMATTR InstName R3
SYMATTR Value 510
SYMBOL res -224 256 R0
SYMATTR InstName R7
SYMATTR Value 82
SYMBOL nmos 320 32 R0
SYMATTR InstName M1
SYMATTR Value FDB2532
SYMBOL pmos 320 352 M180
SYMATTR InstName M2
SYMATTR Value HAT1072H
SYMBOL diode 64 96 R90
WINDOW 0 0 32 VBottom 0
WINDOW 3 32 32 VTop 0
SYMATTR InstName D1
SYMATTR Value 1N4148
SYMBOL res 208 -32 R0
SYMATTR InstName R6
SYMATTR Value 1000
SYMBOL res 208 304 R0
SYMATTR InstName R8
SYMATTR Value 1000
SYMBOL Opamps\\LT1007 -128 128 R0
SYMATTR InstName U1
SYMBOL diode 0 288 R270
WINDOW 0 32 32 VTop 0
WINDOW 3 0 32 VBottom 0
SYMATTR InstName D3
SYMATTR Value 1N4148
SYMBOL res 192 96 R90
WINDOW 0 -31 55 VBottom 0
WINDOW 3 -26 57 VTop 0
SYMATTR InstName R4
SYMATTR Value 170
SYMBOL res 192 256 R90
WINDOW 0 -31 55 VBottom 0
WINDOW 3 -26 57 VTop 0
SYMATTR InstName R5
SYMATTR Value 170
TEXT -560 552 Left 0 !.tran .001 uic
TEXT -392 552 Left 0 !;ac oct 256 20 20000

In the real world, R4R6 and R5R8 are both 1000 ohm pots used to set the
crossover bias with the input end of R2 shorted to ground.

Do you need instructions on how to do that?


JF

 

[Jamie]

Eeyore wrote:

Jamie wrote:


Eeyore wrote:

As ever you're quite clueless.

What do you [think] a PCB / chassis mount professional audio XLR 3 pin

gold-plated

connector should cost for example ?

Or an NE5532 ?

Something beyond you..

Cat whisker diodes.


I see you can't even begin to answer the question.

Graham

Answer what question?

Why would I care about toys.. Because that is all that crap is
that you're referring to.

Let me give you some advise like you did to one other, we are
not longer in the dark ages. The world has moved on, why have you
not?

And to answer your idiotic question, I don't buy those things, my
employer does that for me at my request. I don't care what they cost.

And as the younger generation would put it, asking a retarded question
like that only shows your ignorance.

If that is the kind of ammo you used for interrogation, you've lost
the battle before it even started...



I thought for you Graham.

"SOME PEOPLE ARE LIKE SLINKIES. NOT REALLY GOOD FOR ANYTHING BUT
THEY BRING A SMILE TO YOUR FACE WHEN PUSHED DOWN THE STAIRS.
http://webpages.charter.net/jamie_5"

 

[Eeyore]

Jamie wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Jamie wrote:
Eeyore wrote:

You clearly haven't the tiniest clue about the economics of high-volume manufacturing.
Or the importance of pcb layout. Not to mention the cost savings of offshore
manufacturing too.

One product of mine (in its various channel sizes) sold over 100,000 units.

If you really had that much involvement in projects as you speak of,
I'll wager the majority of them are off of some one else's back.!

You're as much of a cnut as I always thought.

Here's an example of the above btw.
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Studiomaster-Club-2000-18-channel-mixing-desk-excellent_W0QQitemZ220296706076QQihZ012QQcategoryZ23785QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

It was available with various numbers of channels (the above is the largest) and a DSP
reverb option.

Totally my own design thank you, although obviously I had guys working on stuff like > pcb layout and metalwork for me as part of a 3 man team.

Gramm

Oh please! A mixer, Ouuuhhh...

WTF did you expect for audio ? A mouse trap.

Prefer an amplifier ? 1200W. We made tons of these too.
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/StudioMaster-D1200-Power-Amp_W0QQitemZ290268606793QQihZ019QQcategoryZ69962QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
There was a 700W and 1600W version too in the same form factor.

I made mixers, pre amps and power amps years ago.

But not 100,000 of them.

I was most likely one of the first in my area to have a 400 W RMS per channel stereo
amplifier for mobile use.

Oh lucky you !

I was running a 1 - 2 kW PA rig back then using horn loaded cabs of monitor standard (Electrovoice Sentry IVs) and it used my own quite serious mixer I designed and
built with help from friends in 1971. That's *37* years ago. All discrete btw with class A complementary output stages capable of driving low-Z loads.

You WILL NOT beat my audio experience or expertise.

Graham

 

[Dirk Bruere at NeoPax]

MooseFET wrote:

On Oct 20, 3:35 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bru...@gmail.com
wrote:
john jardine wrote:
"JeffM" <jef...@email.com> wrote in message
news:d3ff949c-047f-4bbb-bc36-c14307115bf0@31g2000prz.googlegroups.com...
JeffM wrote:
This ignores M$'s new "Ribbon" default interface
which will have to be adapted to by old users "upgrading".
Joel Koltner wrote:
The ribbon isn't difficult to use -- and long term may even be a win --,
As I have no intent to ever again contribute to the M$ coffers,
I'll have to take your word for it.
although it certainly causes some amount of lost time initially
as each user ploddingly figures out where their feature menu items
have been moved to.
Yup. You have underscored the point I tried to make.
[...]I was surprised that even in the tiny land of southern Oregon
here, the community college has already switched over to MSO 2007
(and Vista too).
Many (smart, IMO) companies have decided to avoid both.
The new Apple ads (Don't use the "V" word) made me laugh.
It was recently noted here that journals are rejecting
items submitted with M$O2007 formatting (not just the file format
--more significantly, the way it does *text* formatting--
again, M$ not even compatible with itself). 8-(
Yes. M$ shot themselves in the foot with their compatibility problem. Last
week the accountant for a company of 40 people was weeping blood about the
potential update costs to (yet again) keep the company computers in peace
and harmony. Friday (with great trepidation!), he moved to OO.
Customers can be abused only to a point and it looks like M$ overweened
itself.
Last known use of Word may well be to write their own epitaph.
99% of my use of OOo is word processing.
As far as I can tell, it does everything MS does.
Or at least, I have not found anything I cannot do that I want to do
(except import PDFs).


My copy exports PDFs. 2.4.0.14 is the version on it.

Mine too, but I would like to be able to import them, edit and re-export.

--
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party
http://www.onetribe.me.uk/wordpress/?cat=5 - Our podcasts on weird stuff

 

[UltimatePatriot]

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:20:07 -0700 (PDT), mpm <mpmillard@aol.com> wrote:

On Oct 20, 10:48?am, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@My-
Web-Site.com
You don't have to be licensed if you're employed by a licensed plumber
who signs off on the work.



That's not true in Ohio, Jim.
At least, not according to Lucas Co. Building Regulations, which
includes the majority of the Toledo, OH metro area...

Sure it is. In Ohio, one can perform such work UNDER a licensed
contractor.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gJsPHiQlgYvAsrHz9mvHJlezQJLwD93RONUO0
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27207215/

Now McCain is trying to blabber that no citizen should have to undergo
the kind of scrutiny Joe the Plumber is undergoing in a presidental
campaign.... (I actually agree with that),

No shit, Dip Tracy.

But Hello?!! He's the
dippy that brought him up in the first place!!

That isn't the point. I could tell you would miss that one though.

And don't think JP is so innocent either. This dude, as a Repub
diehard, tried to trap Obama - failed miserably,

OBAMA is the idiot that said "spread the wealth", you fucking retard.
I'd say that he did a fine job.

and then later stated
that he thought Obama tapped-danced around the issues like Sammy Davis
Jr.

Wow! Talk about racism...!!

NO IT IS NOT! You're a goddamned IDIOT! NAME ONE WHITE tap dancer
worth mentioning... whatsa matta, fuckhead?

Sammy was quite good, and the remark was not racist, it was
complimentary, you stupid fuck!

Anybody how cares to dig even a little will see this whole plumber
episode for what it really is:

Dig a little deeper? Put up your links, you retarded fuck! Cite! BOY!

A horrible misstep by McCain,

Prove it, asswipe.

and a illegal,

You are a retarded twit.

non-tax paying creep

So you have never had it rough? I hope the hell you go bankrupt, you
retarded little bastard.

who
is suffering more from his own prejudices than anything either
candidate would ever do to him.

What prejudices, idiot?

Small wonder the Republicans now want Joe the Plumber to run for
office.

You're an idiot. I'd bet he could do a hell of a lot more than any
lawyer retarded fuck politician democrat could.

Sadly, he's probably got more experience than some of the Bush
appointees.

Your retarded little jabs show you for the true idiot that you are.

 

[JeffM]

Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:

99% of my use of OOo is word processing.
As far as I can tell, it does everything MS does.
Or at least, I have not found anything I cannot do that I want to do
(except import PDFs).

This is promised (natively) for OOo 3.1.
In the meantime, there is a beta extension that does it:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:c_5ZWA8PMY8J:tuxtraining.com/tag/pdf+Grab.it.here+How.to.import.PDFs.intpenOffice.org+extension+takes.a.long.time&strip=1