Peter Baxandall's 1959 Class-D oscillator paper.

Interesting, thanks, but isn't that a confusing use of the term *class D* which is nowadays regarded as something quite different? I think naming this a *current-fed push-pull convertor* would describe it clearly to a modern audience.

"piglet"

-10 - but AFAIK Clive never described it as being "class D".

Anyhow, still long after Peter Baxandall's clever sine wave oscillator was published.

Baxandall "class D" sine wave oscillator.

.... Phil

which is nowadays regarded as something quite different? I think naming t his a *current-fed push-pull convertor* would describe it clearly to a mode rn audience.

It's what Peter Baxandall called his circuit in 1959. Nobody in the US ever seems to have read his paper, so the term has been used to describe other circuits since then, not all that consistently.

It's certainly a current-fed inverter, but "push-pull" is a bit specific.Th e parallel version, which is the more popular one, in part thanks to Jim Wi lliams (who described it as a current-fed Royer inverter, which is nuts), i s pull-pull (or push-push with PNP transistors or PMOS FETs). The serial ve rsion could be described as push-pull.