In Reply to: RE: Is there really any advantage in balanced digital lines over unbalanced? posted by knewton on June 1, 2012 at 06:24:57:
"That potential benefit [doubled slew rare] is erased if the signal voltage itself is more than double what it needs to be."
I don't understand why that would be. Is the gain of the receiver lower (or the undefined regions larger) in the systems that use the higher amplitudes?
Just the other day I read a post saying that the AES receivers had the same thresholds as the EBU (or whatever they are) ones used but AES driver levels were higher.
Also I rather thought that the big advantage of the 'LV' part of LVDS was lower emissions at a given data rate due to both balance and less signal energy in play, but I've never actually used it.
Thanks, Rick
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Slew rate. - rick_m 07:21:42 06/01/12 (16)
- RE: Slew rate. - knewton 13:07:30 06/01/12 (15)
- RE: Slew rate. - Bromo33333 06:48:39 06/06/12 (0)
- RE: Slew rate. - rick_m 18:39:26 06/01/12 (9)
- RE: Slew rate. - knewton 19:35:49 06/01/12 (8)
- RE: Slew rate. - rick_m 08:22:51 06/02/12 (7)
- RE: Slew rate. - knewton 11:41:32 06/02/12 (3)
- RE: Slew rate. - rick_m 18:08:35 06/02/12 (0)
- Higher slew rates can make interface jitter worse - slider 12:54:21 06/02/12 (1)
- RE: Higher slew rates can make interface jitter worse - knewton 05:16:43 06/03/12 (0)
- RE: Slew rate. - Tony Lauck 10:17:04 06/02/12 (2)
- RE: Slew rate. - rick_m 14:07:12 06/02/12 (1)
- RE: Slew rate. - Tony Lauck 17:16:18 06/02/12 (0)
- RE: Slew rate. - John Swenson 15:34:49 06/01/12 (3)
- RE: Slew rate. - Tony Lauck 10:07:55 06/02/12 (0)
- RE: Slew rate. - knewton 16:17:34 06/01/12 (1)
- RE: Slew rate. - tonyptony 16:26:03 06/02/12 (0)