[sdiy] LM394 vs. MAT02 vs. ?

[James Patchell]

With dual matched transistors, you get what you pay for.  The MAT02 is a 
very good transistor, well matched, low bulk resistance.  The LM394 is also 
pretty good, probably not quite up to the MAT02 specs...

Now, how any transistor pair works in any given application depends a lot 
on how picky you are.  I have used the transistors in a CA3046 (which is 
about as cheap as you can get) quite successfully.  I have also used the 
MAT04, which is more expensive, and does the job better, but I am not sure 
if it does the job $5 better.

The biggest difference between the cheap matched pairs and the more 
expensive, in my experience, is how well the track at the higher 
frequencies.  I can get about 7 or so octaves out of the CA3046, and about 
8 to 9 octaves out of the MAT04 (to +/- 1 cent).  I have found that 7 
octaves of accurate tuning is more than enough.

And if you want to be real cheap, try hand matching a pair of 
2n3904's...they work fair well (you must glue them together to make them 
work)....

At 04:53 PM 11/3/2004 -0800, larry at unicode.com wrote:
>I have been looking for LM394's for use in the CGS VCO module and found a
>couple of sources at just over $5US each.  I noted from several articles
>that the MAT02 might be usable as an alternative, however I've only found a
>few at $15US each!  Is there any significant difference between these two
>parts?  At there any substitutes that would work just as well but be more
>available and cost less?  Should I jump on either of the parts at the
>indicated prices?
>
>Larry T.

         -Jim
***************************************************************
http://www.oldcrows.net/~patchell

***************************************************************