[sdiy] backwards pots. Whats the deal?

[Tom Wiltshire]

Ok, I'm convinced too. So why isn't this more widespread, if it's not actually a new idea? Most mixer circuits you see ae the "classic" design. If there's an already existing "improved" design, why isn't it more widely adopted?

Thanks,
Tom

On 1 Apr 2015, at 19:38, Richie Burnett <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:

> Thanks for sharing.  I hadn't actually seen this mixer topology before. It's nice to see a full analysis of it done with detailed calculations and results included.
> 
> -Richie,
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message----- From: Neil Johnson
> Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2015 7:23 PM
> To: mark verbos
> Cc: Synth DIY
> Subject: Re: [sdiy] backwards pots. Whats the deal?
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> mark verbos wrote:
>> I have noticed on some mixer circuits that the pots seem to be wired backwards from a conventional voltage divider. i.e. signal into the wiper and out of the CW end. What is the point of this? Should the pot still be an audio taper?
> 
> I wrote up some notes on this exact issue some time ago:
> 
> http://www.milton.arachsys.com/nj71/index.php?menu=2&submenu=2&subsubmenu=4
> 
> Cheers,
> Neil
> --
> http://www.njohnson.co.uk
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> 
> 
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2014.0.4800 / Virus Database: 4311/9430 - Release Date: 04/01/15 
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy