In Reply to: John, your concern has been know for nearly 25 years... posted by Jacques on September 6, 2006 at 09:26:58:
Agreed, the bad ones could indeed do such.
A few rhetorical questions (till I can get a copy of the paper..)1. I make the assumption that they measured a fully loaded amplifier. What load did they use?
2. Was their load capable of pulling current at (inverted) nanosecond speeds, or was the amp coasting at the hf?
3. If a reactive load is substituted, are the measurements the same?
4. If the test signal amplitude is changed, do the results change?
5. If the amp is pushed to output limits that mess damping factor up, does that alter the results?
6. What about measurement of the 6K signal, not the carrier. we're not very sensitive to ITD at 60 Hz..essentially, will the "carrier" time modulate the hf?
It sounds like the paper is basically tending a go-no go type of test, but again, I'll have to read it to see if what they did is consistent with what I speak of..
Thank you, you're a wealth of info..
Cheers, John
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Nice - jneutron 11:06:42 09/06/06 (9)
- Answers for what I know and technical comment on PIM - Jacques 07:49:13 09/07/06 (8)
- Re: Answers for what I know and technical comment on PIM - jneutron 09:00:51 09/07/06 (7)
- PIM and other tests - Jacques 11:22:30 09/07/06 (6)
- Re: PIM and other tests - jneutron 11:35:16 09/07/06 (5)
- Your load resistor - Jacques 01:07:43 09/08/06 (4)
- Sure - jneutron 06:53:50 09/08/06 (3)
- If you have the build sequence - Jacques 07:52:02 09/08/06 (2)
- Picture 8 did not make it, the message did not state why. - jneutron 11:41:20 09/08/06 (0)
- Got pics of the whole shebang - jneutron 09:05:00 09/08/06 (0)