--- In Rob Danielson <> wrote:
> Eric[...] He measured the noise floor with two MK 2/CMC6's [11
dB(A), > 15 mV/Pa] and found it to be -120 dBV.
For what it's worth, I estimate the Rolls contribution to be -134 dBV
at the switching frequency (well beyond audible range), assuming two
150 ohm mics drawing 10 mA each. Lower impedance mics and lower
current draw would mean less noise.
I don't have a Rolls and I haven't measured one. This is based on
a first-principles analysis of the schematic online at
http://www.rolls.com/data/pb224man.pdf as outlined below.
---------------------------------------
Unknown: Q1 switching frequency Sf.
Noise is inversely proportional to Sf.
Sf assumed to be 50 kHz. Would have less noise if it is higher.
Unknown: mic supply current Is.
Noise is directly proportional to Is, assumed to be 20 mA
(worst case for phantom power: 10 mA x 2)
Unknown: mic impedance Z.
Noise is inversely proportional to mic impedance (for Z<<6.8K)
Z assumed to be 150 ohms at frequency of interest.
---------------------------------------
peak ripple Voltage at D2-C11 node:
I =3D C dV/dt, so (I/C)*dt =3D dV
(20 mA / 47 uF) * (20 us) =3D 8.5 mV (at 50 kHz)
R7 & C6 form a one-pole lowpass filter at frequency
1/2*pi*R*C =3D 1/(2 * 3.14 * 100 ohms * 10 uF) =3D 159 Hz
A single-pole filter is good for 20 dB per decade, so
a 50 kHz signal is attenuated by 50 dB at the R7-C6 node
The phantom power supply has Rs =3D 6.8K in series with the mic.
if Z is 150 ohms, the voltage divider attenuates by 150/(150+6800)
which is 1/46.33, or a 33 dB attenuation.
So our 8.5 mV ripple is attenuated by (50db + 33dB) leaving
us 0.58 uVpp. If we ignore the higher ultrasonic and RF harmonics and
call our 50 kHz sawtooth ripple a simple sinewave, that would be
Message: 0.
Subject: 20 uVrms, which is -134 dBV. That seems pretty quiet to me.
This is a simple analysis but probably pessimistic. Most mics don't
draw the full 10 mA, and the noise you actually care about is only the
fraction that gets by your anti-aliasing filter and is aliased down
into the audio band.
I only considered the main switching frequency and not any
subharmonics or other noise. I see the Rolls design has a feedback
mechanism through Q2 to regulate the power by pushing the U1F input
out of the active switching range when the zener current nears 0.7 mA.
This might be effectively a PWM control depending how the 4069 input
stage works in the linear region, but I don't know what impact if any
that has in the audio range. I'd guess negligible. Zeners themselves
generate broadband noise but that would be much less than the ripple
voltage.
-----------
John Beale
www.bealecorner.com
|