On 12/16/2011 05:07 PM, Tony Duell wrote:
    I thoguht in the end he managed to get the FET circuit
to be better than
 the light bulb, but it took a lot of work (and probably wasn't worth it). 
     No.  His initial attempt with a FET didn't perform all that well (if
 memory serves), but in the end his very complex circuit with (I think)
 three high-end opamps and an LED-driven photocell did end up
 outperforming the incandescent lamp design. 
 
 Isn't that basically what I said? 
 
    Nope.  His final circuit didn't use the FET. 
Ah yes, of course. I guess the fact that the channel reisstance of a FET
is not quite constant casued enough distortion to make it worse than the
good old filament lamp.
  I didn't; realise he used an LED + LDR in the
cirucit. It's a long time
 sinc eI read the book, so I must have forgotten that. I'd sort-of assumed
 it used only purely electronic (as opposed to optoelectornic) parts 
    Yup.  Those Vactrol analog optoisolators sure are neat. 
 
I rememebr reading about a Mullard (Philips) device that consisted of a
filament and a numbero LDRs in a B(A-baed bottle (about the size of an
ECC83/12AX7). I think the number was RPY13. It appears to have been a
predecessor of the optoisolator. I've never seen one.
What do they use for LDRs nowadays? cThe ones I used were cadmium
sulphide (CdS), but I beleive cadmium is frowned upon now :-(
     Don't bother; I've already found it.
It's "Troubleshooting Analog
 Circuits", ISBN 0750694998. 
THat sounds right.
  [1] I don't necessarily agree with everything
they write, but it's all
 worth reading. To be abvle to disagree with it you have to understand it,
 and you'll learn a lot by so doing... 
    That's good thinking. 
 
There arew very few people (if any) that I totally agree with. Ofte nit's
a matter of personal preference ('I prefer to think of it that way /
design it using that device / etc). One of my criteria for a book that's
worth redading, therefore, is not 'Do I agree with everything in it'
(actually, if I did, I'd probalby not consider that book to be worth
reading because I already know it), but rather 'Does this book make me
think about what I am doing and analyse the design (or whatever) more
carefully' If it does, it's werth reading.
-tony