[sdiy] Expo in one chip?

KD KD pic24hj at gmail.com
Wed Jan 3 03:40:27 CET 2018

Niel wrote:
>The SSM2018 had an internal compensation system, but.....(snip).

Was hoping for things like PA381CEM3381 etc. Dough knew his stuff.
Is Alfa, UliB, SSI, Mary CEM only going to burp up the old stuff for only
buck's sake? No new designs at all? Not even decent modifications of
old i calmly wonder?

>Which version of the datasheet do you have?
I have rev 2, oct 2017 yet preliminary.
<div id="DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br />
<table style="border-top: 1px solid #D3D4DE;">
        <td style="width: 55px; padding-top: 13px;"><a
alt="" width="46" height="29" style="width: 46px; height: 29px;"
		<td style="width: 470px; padding-top: 12px; color: #41424e;
font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
line-height: 18px;">Virus-free. <a
target="_blank" style="color: #4453ea;">www.avast.com</a>
</table><a href="#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1"

2018-01-02 14:35 GMT+01:00, Neil Johnson <neil.johnson71 at gmail.com>:
> KD KD wrote:
>> I had hoped the external input stability filters to be removed
>> by a upgraded design type Doug Curtis.
> The SSM2018 had an internal compensation system, but that is applied
> per-channel (the SSM2018 was single channel).  Replicating that in the
> 2164 would either require three extra pins per channel, or a global
> compensation system which would preclude certain circuit
> configurations.  Sticking with the existing scheme is not a bad
> compromise.
>> All i can see/read is the usual protection diode between -V and AG,
>> datasheet page 3.
> Which version of the datasheet do you have?
>> 5k to 10k are'nt much, one could have hoped for a "open base summing
>> point"
>> upgrade instead.
> Again, it's a matter of compromise - for the common case this would
> need an external resistor per channel.
> Neil
> --
> http://www.njohnson.co.uk

More information about the Synth-diy mailing list