[sdiy] OTA performance (was SSM chip reissue)

[MTG]

Sorry I don't know this one. Which manufacturer for AN6818?


On 4/24/2017 11:41 AM, Cooper Sloan wrote:
> Can I piggy back a little request on this thread for the now missing 
> AN app notes? AN6818 I think?
>
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:53 AM Justin Herrmann 
> <ebn303afxcut at email.com <mailto:ebn303afxcut at email.com>> wrote:
>
>     Datasheets for CA3280, LM13700, and NE5517 all claim "excellent
>     matching" between the pairs, but none back up that claim with
>     numbers or guaranteed matching specs. On the other hand, the
>     SSM2164 claims "All channels are closely matched to within 0.07 dB
>     at unity gain."
>
>     Has anyone compared how closely OTA devices within a package
>     match? Is it just gm that's important here?
>
>     Justin
>
>     On 04/23/2017, 11:10 PM Michael E Caloroso <mec.forumreader
>     <http://mec.forumreader>@gmail.com <http://gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         The CA3280 dual OTAs are also matched, which the 2164 cannot
>         claim.
>         There is no dual matched OTA IC currently available on the market.
>
>         MC
>
>         On 4/23/17, David G Dixon <dixon at mail.ubc.ca
>         <mailto:dixon at mail.ubc.ca>> wrote:
>         > The exponential response of the 2164 is good enough for just
>         about anything
>         > you need it to do. It is the heart of the Dixie, Rubicon,
>         and Atlantis
>         > VCOs, and we have sold about a million dollars worth of
>         those, so it can't
>         > suck all that hard.
>         >
>         >> -----Original Message-----
>         >> From: Synth-diy [mailto:synth-diy-bounces at synth-diy.org
>         <mailto:synth-diy-bounces at synth-diy.org>] On
>         >> Behalf Of Ian Fritz
>         >> Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 2:14 PM
>         >> To: Tom Wiltshire; Jay Schwichtenberg
>         >> Cc: synth-diy at synth-diy.org <mailto:synth-diy at synth-diy.org>
>         >> Subject: Re: [sdiy] SSM chip reissue
>         >>
>         >>
>         >>
>         >> The CA3280 is a much higher performance chip. For example, it
>         >> has a specially designed low noise input. The expo response
>         >> of the 2164 is pretty poor, compared with what one can do
>         >> with a good monolithic pair. Etc.
>         >>
>         >> Ian
>         >>
>         >>
>         >>
>         >> On 4/23/2017 12:52 PM, Tom Wiltshire wrote:
>         >> >
>         >> >
>         >> > Talking of which, why not use the 2164 instead of the
>         >> CA3280? You can
>         >> > use it for filters, VCAs, and VCOs, and it's got the
>         exponential
>         >> > reposnse built in, unlike the CA3280.
>         >> --
>         >> ijfritz.byethost4.com <http://ijfritz.byethost4.com>
>         >> _______________________________________________
>         >> Synth-diy mailing list
>         >> Synth-diy at synth-diy.org <mailto:Synth-diy at synth-diy.org>
>         >> http://synth-diy.org/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>         >
>         > _______________________________________________
>         > Synth-diy mailing list
>         > Synth-diy at synth-diy.org <mailto:Synth-diy at synth-diy.org>
>         > http://synth-diy.org/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>         >
>         _______________________________________________
>         Synth-diy mailing list
>         Synth-diy at synth-diy.org <mailto:Synth-diy at synth-diy.org>
>         http://synth-diy.org/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Synth-diy mailing list
>     Synth-diy at synth-diy.org <mailto:Synth-diy at synth-diy.org>
>     http://synth-diy.org/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at synth-diy.org
> http://synth-diy.org/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20170424/45cfbb5d/attachment.htm>