Yes, and it is also decently priced. If this was super cost-critical I'd probably create a little booster supply and let an opamp bullride up there.
-- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
Wow. Which ones?
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
-- Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal ElectroOptical Innovations 55 Orchard Rd Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 845-480-2058 hobbs at electrooptical dot net http://electrooptical.net
TMS320 and TLV320AIC33 are the worst offenders. Between them they've cost at least a year in development.
[... bugs in chips...]
I think it was more like a blunder than anything. They overlooked what happens when the input pair runs out of steam. I am fair certain that if you look at the current datasheet, it is clearly shown.
I sometimes deal with AC at 0.001 Hz or lower. I guess I should stay away from that one.
[1]Another part not to use. I drive op-amps up to their slew rate limits fairly often
That is LDOs. References often has words like "with a xxxuF load" in the datasheet that you need to look for carefully. Some references hate large capacitors and others love them.
I've bought their Burr Brown and TI parts. Worked fine, but remember, not every end user will operate a part at it's limits.
Problems with the TMS320? Hey, how many decades have they been selling DSP chips? For one product, we used over a million. No T-shirts from TI, but they send a plaque acknowledging the volume.
I never did an amp with 3 gain stages, but I can see the 1028 getting funky at the high end. Still an impressive bit of silicon after all these years. It's been bettered, but not by great margins.
On Jun 2, 12:12=A0am, " snipped-for-privacy@sushi.com" wrote: [... LT1028 (bugs) ...]
To do a lot better, you need fins on the input pair or a different technology. I still end up with a discrete first stage in quite a few designs because op-amps are still too noisy by about a decade.
For audio frequency work, the LT1028 is still about the best op-amp. It would be nice if they had a better circuit wired to the (pin 5) compensation connection. Many times I've wished I could reduce the compensation to get more gain.
For me it was a TPS-something. Used with proper caps. When the input voltage came up to fast (unavoidable in our case) ... phut ... *BANG*. The TI guys could not really explain it. Would they share the SPICE model? Nope. Would they be willing to throw my circuit onto their SPICE? Nope. That was a lesson ... no more TPS-something regulators for me, at least not the linear kind.
[...]-- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
Maxim introduced a MAX1028, then pulled it. There must be a story.
John
OTOH AD has the very nice ADA4898-1, which is like an LT1028 on a diet--less than half the input capacitance, 1/3 the thermal resistance (due to a thermal pad on the bottom), otherwise very similar. (Of course the LT1028 is so retro--it actually has guaranteed input specs. How uncool is that?)
Has anybody here used it in anything yet? I'm designing it into a fairly fancy front end, and would love to hear about any experiences.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
-- Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal ElectroOptical Innovations 55 Orchard Rd Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 845-480-2058 hobbs at electrooptical dot net http://electrooptical.net
The 4898 is slower than the LT1028. But ADI has some sub-nv-noise parts up to 600 MHz.
The LT6200 family is cool. 0.95 nv noise, up to 1.6 GHz, r-r input!
Such toys.
John
in
4 y ets
ss
. n "The designer of Maxim's 1028 knew the engineer at LT that did the
1028. [Hey, this is the way of the valley.] I don't know if there was any bad blood after the 2nd source came out, and I never heard of a lawsuit regarding the product.I believe the Maxim 1028 was sold for a while because a friend in Hong Kong found them available for sale. Of course, the hifi guys there wanted the real thing (LTs part). I suspect if it is no longer available, it was a fab issue. One of the outside fabs was eliminated and lots of old chips could not be produced. In fact, one was a nice high side current sense chip, which brings us back to the original question.
My recollection is the first pass had a temperature issue, but those parts don't go on the market. What was sold should have met the LT spec.
I think bettering the 1028 means making some other spec worse. For instance, larger input devices means more capacitance, higher operating current means more leakage, etc.
Blows my mind, they brought out an ADC under the same name:
I mean, even with their mind-boggling unobtanium rate, can they not properly retire a jersey like sports teams do?
-- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
Bizarre. But Maxin does bizarre.
HP keeps renaming things (like inkjet cartriges) the same numbers as older calculators and things.
John
*LOTS* of problems with the 320. Many of the ones we've discovered have been elevated from bugs into the upper strata of errata. One favorite that still bytes in new ways us is DMA. Sometimes it doesn't and TI doesn't much care. The McBSP is buggy as hell too. Unfortunately, we have to rely on both.
OTOH, one reason I was hired was to iron all this out (i.e. roll our own I/O in an FPGA) on future products.
y
tain
o 4
tay
tle
mits
oss
o.
in
sC"
I will pass that part number along and maybe some ass will get kicked.
y
tain
o 4
tay
tle
mits
oss
o.
in
sC"
Doing some poking around on the net, I suspect the Maxim part was originally labeled LT1028. I remember doing one LT 2nd source (different chip just to be clear) and pointed out to the person in charge of the part number that this seemed like a good way to get sued. I just noticed the datasheet on that particular part dropped the LT in favor of MXL. So my guess is the Maxim 2nd source of the LT1028 used the same number until the lawyers got involved, then the part became MXL1028.
Still, pretty dumb. I held most of the business managers that made these kinds of decisions in low esteem. A few were exceptional in their job, but most were really clueless.
name:
But don't hold your breath. IMHO they haven't been able to fix their procurement problems in decades. It seems to me that they let their engineers design clever chips, then throw them against a wall and if they don't stick they just abandon those chips.
-- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
name:
Probably unobtanium by now as usual.
I just wonder how the exceptional ones could stick it out. I'd have high-tailed it since I don't like to work in such an environment, preferring an employer with a different kind of reputation.
-- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
name:
It seems more like they let their marketing department dream up datasheets then design the part when they get an order for a million or two.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.