[sdiy] OTA performance (was SSM chip reissue)

[Cooper Sloan]

Nope, they have AN6668 and AN6077. Haven't Seen AN6818 anywhere.

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Josh Nursing <josh.nursing at gmail.com>
wrote:

> First Doc here? http://www.intersil.com/en/products/amplifiers-and-
> buffers/all-amplifiers/amplifiers/CA3280.html#documents
>
> Question: Is it possible to do a pole-mixing filter with LM13700s?
>
> Josh
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Cooper Sloan <mistercooper at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> It's one of the 3 or 4 3280/3080 app notes put out by intersil/Harris,
>> but only two are live on their site now.
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:51 PM MTG <grant at musictechnologiesgroup.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 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>
>>> 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 at 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> 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] 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
>>>>> >> 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
>>>>> >> ____________________
>>>>
>>>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170424/2745c464/attachment.htm>