Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
Which caps do you folks recommend for dc blocking in mic pres? I built
one using large polypropylene caps, and would like to do one using smaller parts. Panasonic SU non polars? Multiple film caps in parallel? Thanks in advance Roger Foote |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
R. Foote wrote:
Which caps do you folks recommend for dc blocking in mic pres? I built one using large polypropylene caps, and would like to do one using smaller parts. Depends entirely on how small they need to be. I assume we are talking about phantom power blocking on the front end? Any other blocking caps inside are going to depend completely on the technology of the active electronics you are using. Panasonic SU non polars? Multiple film caps in parallel? I can recommend the Panasonic FC series caps if you have to go electrolytic. Maybe with a film bypass cap if there is enough room. 20 uF of the Panasonic Mylar caps, though, will sound better than an electrolytic and won't take up quite as much room as polypropylene. There is no reason to go nonpolar, since there is considerable DC offset. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
www.solen.ca
Solen, manufactures one of the best polypropylene capacitors in my opinion. They are used by many loudspeaker manufactures, and they have a great web page. Marko. "R. Foote" wrote in message om... Which caps do you folks recommend for dc blocking in mic pres? I built one using large polypropylene caps, and would like to do one using smaller parts. Panasonic SU non polars? Multiple film caps in parallel? Thanks in advance Roger Foote |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
Marko wrote:
www.solen.ca Solen, manufactures one of the best polypropylene capacitors in my opinion. They are used by many loudspeaker manufactures, and they have a great web page. Unfortunately a 100 uF dc blocking cap in polypropylene is about the size of a Mack truck. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
Scott Dorsey wrote in message ... Marko wrote: www.solen.ca Solen, manufactures one of the best polypropylene capacitors in my opinion. They are used by many loudspeaker manufactures, and they have a great web page. Unfortunately a 100 uF dc blocking cap in polypropylene is about the size of a Mack truck. --scott Yeah, but if you're designing the thing yourself you can do it so as not to need 100uF. Make the resistance on the right-hand side of the cap 10k and you can get away with 10uF. That's doable in polypropylene. Peace, Paul |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
In article ,
Paul Stamler wrote: Scott Dorsey wrote in message ... Marko wrote: www.solen.ca Solen, manufactures one of the best polypropylene capacitors in my opinion. They are used by many loudspeaker manufactures, and they have a great web page. Unfortunately a 100 uF dc blocking cap in polypropylene is about the size of a Mack truck. Yeah, but if you're designing the thing yourself you can do it so as not to need 100uF. Make the resistance on the right-hand side of the cap 10k and you can get away with 10uF. That's doable in polypropylene. That's where the rub is. You want a low input impedance on your preamp, so that it properly loads dynamic microphones. BUT, you want a high input impedance, so your phantom blocking caps aren't enormous. With a 600 ohm input Z, 10 uF gives you a -3dB point at 20 Hz or so, which is kind of high, I think. But not insane. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
"Paul Stamler" wrote in message
Scott Dorsey wrote in message ... Marko wrote: www.solen.ca Solen, manufactures one of the best polypropylene capacitors in my opinion. They are used by many loudspeaker manufactures, and they have a great web page. Unfortunately a 100 uF dc blocking cap in polypropylene is about the size of a Mack truck. --scott Yeah, but if you're designing the thing yourself you can do it so as not to need 100uF. Make the resistance on the right-hand side of the cap 10k and you can get away with 10uF. That's doable in polypropylene. It's not free. The reactance of the cap at low frequencies adds to the impedance seen by the amplifier, and low frequency noise increases accordingly. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote: "Paul Stamler" wrote in message Yeah, but if you're designing the thing yourself you can do it so as not to need 100uF. Make the resistance on the right-hand side of the cap 10k and you can get away with 10uF. That's doable in polypropylene. It's not free. The reactance of the cap at low frequencies adds to the impedance seen by the amplifier, and low frequency noise increases accordingly. Yes, but it's low frequency noise, and only that component caused by the front end's input current noise, so it's really pretty benign. Sure, it's nice to not have it there at all, but using 10uF isn't such a horrible compromise. 10uF has a reactance of 150 ohms at 106Hz, and that's not all that high up there. Use 20uF and you move the turnover to 50Hz, which is probably lower than the 1/f noise from most semiconductors used in front ends anyway. Regards, Monte McGuire |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
"Marko" wrote in message ...
www.solen.ca Solen, manufactures one of the best polypropylene capacitors in my opinion. They are used by many loudspeaker manufactures, and they have a great web page. Marko. Thanks Marko Yes, Solens are a beautiful cap. I have some that I used for a loudspeaker crossover and I might try them too. Right now though, I want to design a single channel pre in a half rack box, hence the question about electrolytics. Roger Foote |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
In article ,
R. Foote wrote: The preamp I just finished used 2 - 20uF polypropylene's and sounds pretty good. Also takes up an enormous amount of room... It was a challenge getting 2 pres into a 1u enclosure. Nice! The other great thing is you'll never need to replace those caps, unlike with an electrolytic. Which brand of cap(s) did you use? I would like to try the electrolytics as a comparison (front end dc blocking) and , yes I would like to use FC's. But, lots of the data sheets and such say that if phantom power is to be disabled, use a non polar cap. Man, I would much rather use FC's if I can, but will be turning phantom power on and off. Get some logic and a relay or two in there and remove the coupling caps when P48 is turned off. It's not hard to do, good relays aren't a fortune, and the whole shebang is pretty small compared to film caps. You can use one shots like LS123s and some simple logic to avoid using a clock (and getting noise from a clock) while still doing some sequencing. What do you think of the "wisdom" of using non polars for these applications. Nonpolar electrolytics are still essentially polarized electrolytics, just two of them back to back. The chemistry is no different. In some ways, they're worse since one is always reverse biased; at least with a polar cap, you know which way to polarize it. Best of luck, Monte McGuire |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
Monte P McGuire wrote:
In article , R. Foote wrote: I would like to try the electrolytics as a comparison (front end dc blocking) and , yes I would like to use FC's. But, lots of the data sheets and such say that if phantom power is to be disabled, use a non polar cap. Man, I would much rather use FC's if I can, but will be turning phantom power on and off. Get some logic and a relay or two in there and remove the coupling caps when P48 is turned off. Or add another XLR in that bypasses the caps and phantom... |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
Scott Dorsey wrote in message
... Yeah, but if you're designing the thing yourself you can do it so as not to need 100uF. Make the resistance on the right-hand side of the cap 10k and you can get away with 10uF. That's doable in polypropylene. That's where the rub is. You want a low input impedance on your preamp, so that it properly loads dynamic microphones. BUT, you want a high input impedance, so your phantom blocking caps aren't enormous. With a 600 ohm input Z, 10 uF gives you a -3dB point at 20 Hz or so, which is kind of high, I think. But not insane. So put your 600 ohm or whatever oad resistor on the left side of the capacitors, between the two input pins. They have the same DC voltage on them, if your phantom resistors are matched properly, so no current will flow. Total AC load will be the resistor across the pins in parallel with the 10k on the right side of the caps. Peace, Paul |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
Arny Krueger wrote in message
... It's not free. The reactance of the cap at low frequencies adds to the impedance seen by the amplifier, and low frequency noise increases accordingly. Yeah, but just looking at Johnson noise (okay, not realistic, but bear with me for a moment) my back-of-the-envelope calculations say that the total noise contributed by the cap will be about 12dB below the Johnson noise of a 150-ohm microphone, and that's not significant, particularly in a region where Fletcher and Munson say you don't hear so well to begin with. Peace, Paul |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
"Paul Stamler" wrote in message
Arny Krueger wrote in message ... It's not free. The reactance of the cap at low frequencies adds to the impedance seen by the amplifier, and low frequency noise increases accordingly. Yeah, but just looking at Johnson noise (okay, not realistic, but bear with me for a moment) my back-of-the-envelope calculations say that the total noise contributed by the cap will be about 12dB below the Johnson noise of a 150-ohm microphone, and that's not significant, particularly in a region where Fletcher and Munson say you don't hear so well to begin with. my Excel spreadsheet comes up with the following reactances for a 10 uF cap: Freq Hz Cap, uF X(C) 1 10 15915.5 20 10 795.8 50 10 318.3 100 10 159.2 It seems to me like at 100 Hz and below the cap is contributing more noise than the mic. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
R. Foote wrote:
The preamp I just finished used 2 - 20uF polypropylene's and sounds pretty good. Also takes up an enormous amount of room... It was a challenge getting 2 pres into a 1u enclosure. That's very small. What is your input impedance? If you have a nice low input Z, you might benefit from bigger caps. I would like to try the electrolytics as a comparison (front end dc blocking) and , yes I would like to use FC's. But, lots of the data sheets and such say that if phantom power is to be disabled, use a non polar cap. Man, I would much rather use FC's if I can, but will be turning phantom power on and off. Yes, you absolutely have to have DC offset across a conventional cap. What do you think of the "wisdom" of using non polars for these applications. I think that a nonpolar will still sound better if you can keep a DC offset across it. Why can't you live with permanently on phantom power? --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 07:26:56 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: my Excel spreadsheet comes up with the following reactances for a 10 uF cap: Freq Hz Cap, uF X(C) 1 10 15915.5 20 10 795.8 50 10 318.3 100 10 159.2 It seems to me like at 100 Hz and below the cap is contributing more noise than the mic. Reactances don't contribute noise; you doubtless know this; so what does this mean? Also, for everyone, remember that the two caps are in series for signal and noise. Chris Hornbeck "Second star to the right, Then straight on 'til morning." |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
R. Foote wrote:
The preamp I just finished used 2 - 20uF polypropylene's and sounds pretty good. Also takes up an enormous amount of room... It was a challenge getting 2 pres into a 1u enclosure. Don't forget you can construct parallel arrays of capacitors if cap diameter is a problem. 5 times 4.7uF per channel will take up more "floor space" but less height. -- Mark. http://tranchant.plus.com/ |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
"Chris Hornbeck" wrote in message
On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 07:26:56 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: my Excel spreadsheet comes up with the following reactances for a 10 uF cap: Freq Hz Cap, uF X(C) 1 10 15915.5 20 10 795.8 50 10 318.3 100 10 159.2 It seems to me like at 100 Hz and below the cap is contributing more noise than the mic. Reactances don't contribute noise; you doubtless know this; so what does this mean? What does contribute noise is the effective source resistance for the amplifier. Normally a microphone will bring this way down. However, these caps are decoupling the input stage from this nice low source resistance out in the mic. So, the amp sees a higher source resistance, and this increases the noise that is generated by the things that can generate noise. This includes thermal noise in any resistors, and it includes the consequences of any noise source that is modeled as a current source. When a current source acts on an increased resistance, there is more noise. Also, for everyone, remember that the two caps are in series for signal and noise. In a sense that is pretty meaningful . Or, there are two noise sources, one for the balanced and unbalanced input, and they each have one cap as part of their input circuit. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 10:37:16 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: What does contribute noise is the effective source resistance for the amplifier. Normally a microphone will bring this way down. However, these caps are decoupling the input stage from this nice low source resistance out in the mic. So, the amp sees a higher source resistance, and this increases the noise that is generated by the things that can generate noise. This includes thermal noise in any resistors, and it includes the consequences of any noise source that is modeled as a current source. When a current source acts on an increased resistance, there is more noise. Excellent. And for our purposes, two 10uF coupling caps present a series source impedance of 5uF. And will have the low frequency rolloff of a 5uF cap. Chris Hornbeck "Second star to the right, Then straight on 'til morning." |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
Chris Hornbeck wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 07:26:56 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: my Excel spreadsheet comes up with the following reactances for a 10 uF cap: Freq Hz Cap, uF X(C) 1 10 15915.5 20 10 795.8 50 10 318.3 100 10 159.2 It seems to me like at 100 Hz and below the cap is contributing more noise than the mic. Reactances don't contribute noise; you doubtless know this; so what does this mean? It's handy for figuring out how much low end roll-off you will get from the series capacitor, into a given impedance load. You know your load impedance and the capacitor impedance form a resistive divider, so you can figure out what the voltage loss throught the cap is at any given frequency. Also, for everyone, remember that the two caps are in series for signal and noise. Depends on how you want to model the differential input stage..... --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
In article ,
my Excel spreadsheet comes up with the following reactances for a 10 uF cap: Freq Hz Cap, uF X(C) 1 10 15915.5 20 10 795.8 50 10 318.3 100 10 159.2 It seems to me like at 100 Hz and below the cap is contributing more noise than the mic. The reactances are correct, but the meaning of that is not quite what you think... Reactances don't contribute noise; you doubtless know this; so what does this mean? What does contribute noise is the effective source resistance for the amplifier. Normally a microphone will bring this way down. However, these caps are decoupling the input stage from this nice low source resistance out in the mic. So, the amp sees a higher source resistance, and this increases the noise that is generated by the things that can generate noise. This includes thermal noise in any resistors, No, the Johnson noise from a resistor, such as the effective source resistance of a mike, will be unchanged by any loading. and it includes the consequences of any noise source that is modeled as a current source. When a current source acts on an increased resistance, there is more noise. Yes, this is the _only_ thing that will cause increased noise from a higher source impedance caused by excess reactance: the input current noise from the amplifier's input stage devices. There are three main sources of noise in a mike amp: the Johnson noise caused by the resistance of the source (the mike), the input voltage noise caused by the input stage devices and the input current noise caused by the input stage devices. Only one of these three sources is affected by excess reactance at a mike amp input, and the significance of this noise source also depends on the type of device used for the input stage. For example, JFET input devices often have much lower current noise contributions than bipolar input devices that have similar total noise performance. So, whether this increase is significant or not really depends upon the particular devices used. Regards, Monte McGuire |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
Once again, I'm just blown away by the value of this newsgroup as an info
resource. Thanks, all, for contributing your remarkable knowledge so freely! George Reiswig Song of the River Music "R. Foote" wrote in message om... (Monte P McGuire) wrote in message ... In article , R. Foote wrote: The preamp I just finished used 2 - 20uF polypropylene's and sounds pretty good. Also takes up an enormous amount of room... It was a challenge getting 2 pres into a 1u enclosure. Nice! The other great thing is you'll never need to replace those caps, unlike with an electrolytic. Which brand of cap(s) did you use? I used Vishay (Sprague), the only other brand I had access to at the time was Cornell Dubileer... The pre uses an INA217 and it likes to have 2.2K from each input to gnd, so a 20 uf is pretty much required. Get some logic and a relay or two in there and remove the coupling caps when P48 is turned off. It's not hard to do, good relays aren't a fortune, and the whole shebang is pretty small compared to film caps. You can use one shots like LS123s and some simple logic to avoid using a clock (and getting noise from a clock) while still doing some sequencing. Or maybe use a timer. P48 off, time out, then short caps. That would sure make it sweet for using non condensor mics! Good Idea, maybe next time What do you think of the "wisdom" of using non polars for these applications. Nonpolar electrolytics are still essentially polarized electrolytics, just two of them back to back. The chemistry is no different. In some ways, they're worse since one is always reverse biased; at least with a polar cap, you know which way to polarize it. Check, that's what I thought. Oh well, so much for np's. Thanks Monte Best of luck, Monte McGuire |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
In article ,
R. Foote wrote: (Monte P McGuire) wrote in message ... Get some logic and a relay or two in there and remove the coupling caps when P48 is turned off. It's not hard to do, good relays aren't a fortune, and the whole shebang is pretty small compared to film caps. You can use one shots like LS123s and some simple logic to avoid using a clock (and getting noise from a clock) while still doing some sequencing. Or maybe use a timer. P48 off, time out, then short caps. That would sure make it sweet for using non condensor mics! I'd recommend you use a DPDT (2 form C) type relay and not short the caps, but merely route the input jacks to the P48 side or the preamp side of the input blocking caps. Let the other side of the cap float when it's not in circuit. Expecting a relay to take the huge current pulse of shorting a big cap charged to 48V and also performing well with microscopic signals is a bit too much to ask!! After one or two discharge cycles, the contacts will have small craters blasted into them, and they won't work well anymore. Waiting for P48 to bleed down is possible, but it's not a constant time - it depends on the mike being powered, and it may take quite a bit for the voltage to get down to even a few volts. Also, it annoys the cap to have to short it out. Let it float... While you're at it, you could add a muting relay to short each preamp input to ground to avoid passing the large pulse that happens when you connect/disconnect P48. It won't prevent hot plugging disasters, but it will certainly lighten the load on your normal input voltage clamping system and it'll let you turn P48 on/off without getting a very large click (or bang... ;-) Good Idea, maybe next time I built an otherwise non-special preamp that used logic and relays to handle P48 switching and it works well. I built mine out of clockless garbage logic (4 HC chips, versions of the old TTL stuff), but I'd probably do it again with a PIC controller that stays in sleep mode most of the time to avoid clock noise. The PIC would save on PC board real estate and allow the last values to be stored in EEPROM for the next startup. They're pretty slick little devices! Regards, Monte McGuire |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
"R. Foote" wrote:
"Marko" wrote in message ... www.solen.ca Solen, manufactures one of the best polypropylene capacitors in my opinion. They are used by many loudspeaker manufactures, and they have a great web page. Marko. Thanks Marko Yes, Solens are a beautiful cap. I have some that I used for a loudspeaker crossover and I might try them too. Right now though, I want to design a single channel pre in a half rack box, hence the question about electrolytics. Quite different requirements for a crossover cap, esp when considering the current rating ! Recent thinking suggests that using a low HF impedance cap such as designed for switch mode power supply output filters is a very good choice for your application. The link someone posted regarding various types of caps is kinda out of date. It didn't even mention multi-later ceramics for example but did mention the almost unobtainable ( these days ) mica types. Component qualities move on - what seemed right 20 yrs ago isn't necessarily good advice any more. Use at least 100 uF btw if you want LF noise to remain low. Graham |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
Paul Stamler wrote: Yeah, but if you're designing the thing yourself you can do it so as not to need 100uF. Make the resistance on the right-hand side of the cap 10k and you can get away with 10uF. That's doable in polypropylene. Tssk @ you Paul. Surely you know that the noise figure for a mic pre is determined in part by the impedance the pre *sees*. 10uF = 160 ohms @ 100Hz. Two in series obviously are 320 ohms. Source R = 150 ? - coupling Z should be much lower, e.g. 2x100uF in series = 32 ohms. Poor flicker noise otherwise. Graham |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Paul Stamler" wrote in message Arny Krueger wrote in message ... It's not free. The reactance of the cap at low frequencies adds to the impedance seen by the amplifier, and low frequency noise increases accordingly. Yeah, but just looking at Johnson noise (okay, not realistic, but bear with me for a moment) my back-of-the-envelope calculations say that the total noise contributed by the cap will be about 12dB below the Johnson noise of a 150-ohm microphone, and that's not significant, particularly in a region where Fletcher and Munson say you don't hear so well to begin with. my Excel spreadsheet comes up with the following reactances for a 10 uF cap: Freq Hz Cap, uF X(C) 1 10 15915.5 20 10 795.8 50 10 318.3 100 10 159.2 It seems to me like at 100 Hz and below the cap is contributing more noise than the mic. You are absolutely right. Learnt this one back in 1979. Only experienced mic pre designers know this stuff. ( apologies to anyone who may feel 'miffed' ) Graham p.s. it's *doubly bad* due to the 1/f noise corner of active devices. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
Chris Hornbeck wrote: On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 07:26:56 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: my Excel spreadsheet comes up with the following reactances for a 10 uF cap: Freq Hz Cap, uF X(C) 1 10 15915.5 20 10 795.8 50 10 318.3 100 10 159.2 It seems to me like at 100 Hz and below the cap is contributing more noise than the mic. Reactances don't contribute noise; you doubtless know this; so what does this mean? Noise = noise voltage. Are you saying that current passing through a cap produces no voltage across it ? The fact that the component is imaginary makes the impedance ( reactance ) no less *real* - lol. Graham |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
Monte P McGuire wrote: snip What does contribute noise is the effective source resistance for the amplifier. Normally a microphone will bring this way down. However, these caps are decoupling the input stage from this nice low source resistance out in the mic. So, the amp sees a higher source resistance, and this increases the noise that is generated by the things that can generate noise. This includes thermal noise in any resistors, No, the Johnson noise from a resistor, such as the effective source resistance of a mike, will be unchanged by any loading. Sure, the resistor itself isn't the problem. You're forgetting the caps in the way. and it includes the consequences of any noise source that is modeled as a current source. When a current source acts on an increased resistance, there is more noise. Yes, this is the _only_ thing that will cause increased noise from a higher source impedance caused by excess reactance: the input current noise from the amplifier's input stage devices. Yes, it's the input noise current - even specced on high end op-amps, although you won't be using an op-amp for a mic. There are three main sources of noise in a mike amp: the Johnson noise caused by the resistance of the source (the mike), the input voltage noise caused by the input stage devices and the input current noise caused by the input stage devices. Flowing in the source *impedance*. Actually, you missed the emitter dynamic impedance as a noise source, although some like to lump this into the published noise figures. That's why you see no mic pres operating with 100uA flowing through the input devices. Or maybe you do ( as in noisy ones - lol ). The typical inter-emitter gain set resitor is there too. Only one of these three sources is affected by excess reactance at a mike amp input, and the significance of this noise source also depends on the type of device used for the input stage. Yes. For example, JFET input devices often have much lower current noise contributions than bipolar input devices that have similar total noise performance. So, whether this increase is significant or not really depends upon the particular devices used. Sadly, FETs typically have worse 1/f noise than bipolars used for othis job. Seems like you can't win. Graham |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
"Pooh Bear" wrote in message ... It seems to me like at 100 Hz and below the cap is contributing more noise than the mic. You are absolutely right. Learnt this one back in 1979. Only experienced mic pre designers know this stuff. ( apologies to anyone who may feel 'miffed' ) Yeah right, even most not so experienced microphone and phono pre-amp designers knew it 40 years ago. Didn't, and still doesn't stop many poor commercial designs of course. TonyP. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
Monte P McGuire wrote: snip What does contribute noise is the effective source resistance for the amplifier. Normally a microphone will bring this way down. However, these caps are decoupling the input stage from this nice low source resistance out in the mic. So, the amp sees a higher source resistance, and this increases the noise that is generated by the things that can generate noise. This includes thermal noise in any resistors, No, the Johnson noise from a resistor, such as the effective source resistance of a mike, will be unchanged by any loading. Sure, the resistor itself isn't the problem. You're forgetting the caps in the way. Exactly! I was looking for a good way to say this. Thanks! |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
Arny Krueger wrote: "Paul Stamler" wrote in message Arny Krueger wrote in message ... It's not free. The reactance of the cap at low frequencies adds to the impedance seen by the amplifier, and low frequency noise increases accordingly. Yeah, but just looking at Johnson noise (okay, not realistic, but bear with me for a moment) my back-of-the-envelope calculations say that the total noise contributed by the cap will be about 12dB below the Johnson noise of a 150-ohm microphone, and that's not significant, particularly in a region where Fletcher and Munson say you don't hear so well to begin with. my Excel spreadsheet comes up with the following reactances for a 10 uF cap: Freq Hz Cap, uF X(C) 1 10 15915.5 20 10 795.8 50 10 318.3 100 10 159.2 It seems to me like at 100 Hz and below the cap is contributing more noise than the mic. You are absolutely right. Learnt this one back in 1979. Only experienced mic pre designers know this stuff. ( apologies to anyone who may feel 'miffed' ) Experienced mic pre designers only? That tain't me. It lept right out the schematic at me about a year ago when we were deconstructing one of Rane's designs. Or maybe someone else who knew better commented on it. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
Pooh Bear wrote:
For example, JFET input devices often have much lower current noise contributions than bipolar input devices that have similar total noise performance. So, whether this increase is significant or not really depends upon the particular devices used. Sadly, FETs typically have worse 1/f noise than bipolars used for othis job. Seems like you can't win. You can't. BUT, you can use an input transformer, which gives you some free voltage gain even as it's giving you more thermal noise. This also lets you eliminate the blocking capacitors completely. With a typical FET or tube input stage, this gives you lower noise than you would get without it. With a bipolar input stage it's a net loss. And of course you get more distortion and pay a lot more money, but you also get RF rejection in the bargain. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
In article ,
Pooh Bear wrote: Monte P McGuire wrote: snip What does contribute noise is the effective source resistance for the amplifier. Normally a microphone will bring this way down. However, these caps are decoupling the input stage from this nice low source resistance out in the mic. So, the amp sees a higher source resistance, and this increases the noise that is generated by the things that can generate noise. This includes thermal noise in any resistors, No, the Johnson noise from a resistor, such as the effective source resistance of a mike, will be unchanged by any loading. Sure, the resistor itself isn't the problem. You're forgetting the caps in the way. No, I'm methodically addressing each noise source, the point being that the impedance of the coupling cap only affects _one_ of the noise sources, the current noise generated at the amplifier input. Arny stated or implied that the coupling cap would also affect the noise generated by the resistive component of the source and that's wrong. Regards, Monte McGuire |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
In article ,
Pooh Bear wrote: Sadly, FETs typically have worse 1/f noise than bipolars used for this job. Seems like you can't win. Graham Nor can you break even. But when was the last time anyone complained about preamp noise? Seriously. The SSM-2220 seems to work, though DC -- Dave Collins Entropy just isn't what it used to be! www.collinsaudio.com |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Which caps to use?
Monte P McGuire wrote:
In article , Pooh Bear wrote: Monte P McGuire wrote: snip What does contribute noise is the effective source resistance for the amplifier. Normally a microphone will bring this way down. However, these caps are decoupling the input stage from this nice low source resistance out in the mic. So, the amp sees a higher source resistance, and this increases the noise that is generated by the things that can generate noise. This includes thermal noise in any resistors, No, the Johnson noise from a resistor, such as the effective source resistance of a mike, will be unchanged by any loading. Sure, the resistor itself isn't the problem. You're forgetting the caps in the way. No, I'm methodically addressing each noise source, the point being that the impedance of the coupling cap only affects _one_ of the noise sources, the current noise generated at the amplifier input. Arny stated or implied that the coupling cap would also affect the noise generated by the resistive component of the source and that's wrong. Just so I understand you right, are you saying that - but for input noise current - the noise figure of the pre won't be affected by coupling cap value ? Graham |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
mica pf caps | General | |||
fs: Amp, caps, sub | Car Audio | |||
Polystyrene caps? | Pro Audio | |||
Phantom Blocking/Bypass Caps | Pro Audio |