home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- From: tomb@hplsla.hp.com (Tom Bruhns)
- Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 16:16:27 GMT
- Subject: Re: Mr. Pierce responds to Re: Class C amplifiers, says Mr. Pierce.
- Message-ID: <5070321@hplsla.hp.com>
- Organization: HP Lake Stevens, WA
- Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!emory!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!apollo.hp.com!cupnews0.cup.hp.com!news1.boi.hp.com!hp-pcd!hplsla!tomb
- Newsgroups: rec.audio
- References: <BzEs9w.5Cq@world.std.com>
- Lines: 24
-
- henry@monod.biol.mcgill.ca (Henry A. Pasternack) writes:
-
- > The term "Class C" always suggests to me a circuit in which the
- >device conduction angle is significantly less than 180 degrees. I
- >automatically think of CW transmitters when I hear the term. Such
- >an amplifier is wholly unsuited to linear operation, whether at
- >audio frequencies, or at RF, as in an AM transmitter output stage.
-
- Yep, class C is generally biased well below cutoff...
-
- They are used commonly for FM transmitters, and as limiters in
- FM receivers as well.
-
- But also... there was an article in "RF Design" magazine, perhaps two
- years ago now, that described a technique for generating an AM
- radio signal using two class C amplifiers fed with, basically,
- FM modulation from audio signals that were derived from the input
- audio signal in a very special way. The advantages for a 50kW or
- larger transmitter should be obvious. You can afford to spend quite
- a bit on getting the right audio signals when you save 10% or more
- on that kind of power bill. Dunno if anyone is producing the thing
- commercially yet. (Or if it was perhaps even incorrect or a hoax; I
- didn't go through the math, since building AM transmitters isn't in
- my plans these days.)
-