RE: Slew rate.

Posted by knewton (A) on June 2, 2012 at 11:41:32

In Reply to: RE: Slew rate. posted by rick_m on June 2, 2012 at 08:22:51:

Okay, I think I see what you are drving at. Yes, given identical slew rates the time required to transition through the reciever switching threshold will be the same. Aside from this, and admittedly not part of my original point, is that the data bandwidth of the lower voltage signal can be greater.

If we take two otherwise identical drivers, the one required to swing less voltage can consequently have a higher slew rate. Amplifier slew rate is a function of a number of parameters, one of which is voltage gain. For a given input signal amplitude, the driver swinging 7V will require 14x the gain of the driver swinging only 500mV. Therefore, the driver having the lower gain can also have a significantly faster slew rate.

What I was intending to indicate is that an AES3 compliant driver could have a higher slew rate if the driver's voltage gain, and thereby, the output signal voltage swing, were reduced. The noise immunity afforded by a whopping 7V signal, while perhaps of benefit in certain noise prone professional environments, is just not needed in the home environment. Said another way, it seems to me that the AES3 driver voltage spec. sacrifices the potential for greater driver slew rate (reducing jitter) for greater receiver noise immunity.
_
Ken Newton

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - Is there really any advantage in balanced digital lines over unbalanced? - John C. - Aussie 21:13:23 05/31/12 (20)

RE: Is there really any advantage in balanced digital lines over unbalanced? - audioengr 16:56:47 06/04/12 (0)

RE: Is there really any advantage in balanced digital lines over unbalanced? - SBGK 13:45:55 06/02/12 (0)

RE: Is there really any advantage in balanced digital lines over unbalanced? - knewton 06:24:57 06/01/12 (17)

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)

Follow Ups

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.

Post a Message!