What's the point in a preamp? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Mic preamp: Inverting or non-inverting op-amp configuration?Another question concerning transistorsGetting bad clipping issues with this 3 stage amplifierNoise on mic preamp plus aux mixerIs there a difference in the meaning of power and current amplifier terms?What is the function of this transistor?NPN audio amplification, what is the difference between outputing from the collector or emitterHeadphone amplifier for guitar with stereo MP3 input - mixingHow to find feedback resistor value?Does this audio amplifier do differential filtering?

Is it ok to offer lower paid work as a trial period before negotiating for a full-time job?

Is every episode of "Where are my Pants?" identical?

Is this wall load bearing? Blueprints and photos attached

does high air pressure throw off wheel balance?

What are these Gizmos at Izaña Atmospheric Research Center in Spain?

What LEGO pieces have "real-world" functionality?

The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 1397BC53640DB551

Is above average number of years spent on PhD considered a red flag in future academia or industry positions?

Can a novice safely splice in wire to lengthen 5V charging cable?

Did God make two great lights or did He make the great light two?

Why is superheterodyning better than direct conversion?

ELI5: Why do they say that Israel would have been the fourth country to land a spacecraft on the Moon and why do they call it low cost?

What do you call a plan that's an alternative plan in case your initial plan fails?

Wolves and sheep

University's motivation for having tenure-track positions

What's the point in a preamp?

Make it rain characters

Cooking pasta in a water boiler

I could not break this equation. Please help me

Didn't get enough time to take a Coding Test - what to do now?

Sort a list of pairs representing an acyclic, partial automorphism

Finding the path in a graph from A to B then back to A with a minimum of shared edges

Did the new image of black hole confirm the general theory of relativity?

Are my PIs rude or am I just being too sensitive?



What's the point in a preamp?



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Mic preamp: Inverting or non-inverting op-amp configuration?Another question concerning transistorsGetting bad clipping issues with this 3 stage amplifierNoise on mic preamp plus aux mixerIs there a difference in the meaning of power and current amplifier terms?What is the function of this transistor?NPN audio amplification, what is the difference between outputing from the collector or emitterHeadphone amplifier for guitar with stereo MP3 input - mixingHow to find feedback resistor value?Does this audio amplifier do differential filtering?



.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








12












$begingroup$


I'm talking in the context of guitar amps, but I assume that this question is relevant for any type of audio amplifier.



Very often in amplifier schematics I see two stages of amplification -- first, the signal is amplified a smaller amount by a preamp circuit and then amplified again by a power amp circuit.



This seems redundant to me. What's the point in amplifying a signal in two small steps rather than just one greater-gain amplification?



My first thought was: does this multi-stage amplification help to reduce unwanted noise from the signal? But the more I think about that, the less it makes sense, since surely the second stage would be amplifying any noise as well.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    There is also the problem of gain bandwidth product. For a given amplifier, more gain means less bandwidth. If you use too much gain in one stage, then you limit the bandwidth of that stage. This can lead to distortion - it takes gain and bandwidth for negative feedback to compensate for distortion.
    $endgroup$
    – JRE
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You don't want the high currents (to the loudspeaker) anywhere near the input signal from the guitar pickup, or the vinyl-record signals.
    $endgroup$
    – analogsystemsrf
    yesterday






  • 8




    $begingroup$
    The first amplifier in any signal path usually is the one that adds all the noise to the signal. So the pre-amp must be designed so as to avoid adding more noise to the signal than necessary. Generally low noise devices and design techniques are incompatible with high power devices and design techniques.
    $endgroup$
    – mkeith
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    @mkeith I think your comment is the best general answer I've seen yet on this. Combined with Dave Tweed's answer, it all makes sense in terms of guitar amplification.
    $endgroup$
    – Todd Wilcox
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I would call it the input stage, not a preamp, unless there is mixing and tone control circuitry, which answers your question by itself.
    $endgroup$
    – user207421
    18 hours ago

















12












$begingroup$


I'm talking in the context of guitar amps, but I assume that this question is relevant for any type of audio amplifier.



Very often in amplifier schematics I see two stages of amplification -- first, the signal is amplified a smaller amount by a preamp circuit and then amplified again by a power amp circuit.



This seems redundant to me. What's the point in amplifying a signal in two small steps rather than just one greater-gain amplification?



My first thought was: does this multi-stage amplification help to reduce unwanted noise from the signal? But the more I think about that, the less it makes sense, since surely the second stage would be amplifying any noise as well.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    There is also the problem of gain bandwidth product. For a given amplifier, more gain means less bandwidth. If you use too much gain in one stage, then you limit the bandwidth of that stage. This can lead to distortion - it takes gain and bandwidth for negative feedback to compensate for distortion.
    $endgroup$
    – JRE
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You don't want the high currents (to the loudspeaker) anywhere near the input signal from the guitar pickup, or the vinyl-record signals.
    $endgroup$
    – analogsystemsrf
    yesterday






  • 8




    $begingroup$
    The first amplifier in any signal path usually is the one that adds all the noise to the signal. So the pre-amp must be designed so as to avoid adding more noise to the signal than necessary. Generally low noise devices and design techniques are incompatible with high power devices and design techniques.
    $endgroup$
    – mkeith
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    @mkeith I think your comment is the best general answer I've seen yet on this. Combined with Dave Tweed's answer, it all makes sense in terms of guitar amplification.
    $endgroup$
    – Todd Wilcox
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I would call it the input stage, not a preamp, unless there is mixing and tone control circuitry, which answers your question by itself.
    $endgroup$
    – user207421
    18 hours ago













12












12








12





$begingroup$


I'm talking in the context of guitar amps, but I assume that this question is relevant for any type of audio amplifier.



Very often in amplifier schematics I see two stages of amplification -- first, the signal is amplified a smaller amount by a preamp circuit and then amplified again by a power amp circuit.



This seems redundant to me. What's the point in amplifying a signal in two small steps rather than just one greater-gain amplification?



My first thought was: does this multi-stage amplification help to reduce unwanted noise from the signal? But the more I think about that, the less it makes sense, since surely the second stage would be amplifying any noise as well.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$




I'm talking in the context of guitar amps, but I assume that this question is relevant for any type of audio amplifier.



Very often in amplifier schematics I see two stages of amplification -- first, the signal is amplified a smaller amount by a preamp circuit and then amplified again by a power amp circuit.



This seems redundant to me. What's the point in amplifying a signal in two small steps rather than just one greater-gain amplification?



My first thought was: does this multi-stage amplification help to reduce unwanted noise from the signal? But the more I think about that, the less it makes sense, since surely the second stage would be amplifying any noise as well.







amplifier preamp






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited yesterday









Nick Alexeev

32.6k1066167




32.6k1066167










asked yesterday









Jacob GarbyJacob Garby

31312




31312







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    There is also the problem of gain bandwidth product. For a given amplifier, more gain means less bandwidth. If you use too much gain in one stage, then you limit the bandwidth of that stage. This can lead to distortion - it takes gain and bandwidth for negative feedback to compensate for distortion.
    $endgroup$
    – JRE
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You don't want the high currents (to the loudspeaker) anywhere near the input signal from the guitar pickup, or the vinyl-record signals.
    $endgroup$
    – analogsystemsrf
    yesterday






  • 8




    $begingroup$
    The first amplifier in any signal path usually is the one that adds all the noise to the signal. So the pre-amp must be designed so as to avoid adding more noise to the signal than necessary. Generally low noise devices and design techniques are incompatible with high power devices and design techniques.
    $endgroup$
    – mkeith
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    @mkeith I think your comment is the best general answer I've seen yet on this. Combined with Dave Tweed's answer, it all makes sense in terms of guitar amplification.
    $endgroup$
    – Todd Wilcox
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I would call it the input stage, not a preamp, unless there is mixing and tone control circuitry, which answers your question by itself.
    $endgroup$
    – user207421
    18 hours ago












  • 1




    $begingroup$
    There is also the problem of gain bandwidth product. For a given amplifier, more gain means less bandwidth. If you use too much gain in one stage, then you limit the bandwidth of that stage. This can lead to distortion - it takes gain and bandwidth for negative feedback to compensate for distortion.
    $endgroup$
    – JRE
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You don't want the high currents (to the loudspeaker) anywhere near the input signal from the guitar pickup, or the vinyl-record signals.
    $endgroup$
    – analogsystemsrf
    yesterday






  • 8




    $begingroup$
    The first amplifier in any signal path usually is the one that adds all the noise to the signal. So the pre-amp must be designed so as to avoid adding more noise to the signal than necessary. Generally low noise devices and design techniques are incompatible with high power devices and design techniques.
    $endgroup$
    – mkeith
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    @mkeith I think your comment is the best general answer I've seen yet on this. Combined with Dave Tweed's answer, it all makes sense in terms of guitar amplification.
    $endgroup$
    – Todd Wilcox
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I would call it the input stage, not a preamp, unless there is mixing and tone control circuitry, which answers your question by itself.
    $endgroup$
    – user207421
    18 hours ago







1




1




$begingroup$
There is also the problem of gain bandwidth product. For a given amplifier, more gain means less bandwidth. If you use too much gain in one stage, then you limit the bandwidth of that stage. This can lead to distortion - it takes gain and bandwidth for negative feedback to compensate for distortion.
$endgroup$
– JRE
yesterday




$begingroup$
There is also the problem of gain bandwidth product. For a given amplifier, more gain means less bandwidth. If you use too much gain in one stage, then you limit the bandwidth of that stage. This can lead to distortion - it takes gain and bandwidth for negative feedback to compensate for distortion.
$endgroup$
– JRE
yesterday




1




1




$begingroup$
You don't want the high currents (to the loudspeaker) anywhere near the input signal from the guitar pickup, or the vinyl-record signals.
$endgroup$
– analogsystemsrf
yesterday




$begingroup$
You don't want the high currents (to the loudspeaker) anywhere near the input signal from the guitar pickup, or the vinyl-record signals.
$endgroup$
– analogsystemsrf
yesterday




8




8




$begingroup$
The first amplifier in any signal path usually is the one that adds all the noise to the signal. So the pre-amp must be designed so as to avoid adding more noise to the signal than necessary. Generally low noise devices and design techniques are incompatible with high power devices and design techniques.
$endgroup$
– mkeith
yesterday




$begingroup$
The first amplifier in any signal path usually is the one that adds all the noise to the signal. So the pre-amp must be designed so as to avoid adding more noise to the signal than necessary. Generally low noise devices and design techniques are incompatible with high power devices and design techniques.
$endgroup$
– mkeith
yesterday












$begingroup$
@mkeith I think your comment is the best general answer I've seen yet on this. Combined with Dave Tweed's answer, it all makes sense in terms of guitar amplification.
$endgroup$
– Todd Wilcox
yesterday




$begingroup$
@mkeith I think your comment is the best general answer I've seen yet on this. Combined with Dave Tweed's answer, it all makes sense in terms of guitar amplification.
$endgroup$
– Todd Wilcox
yesterday




1




1




$begingroup$
I would call it the input stage, not a preamp, unless there is mixing and tone control circuitry, which answers your question by itself.
$endgroup$
– user207421
18 hours ago




$begingroup$
I would call it the input stage, not a preamp, unless there is mixing and tone control circuitry, which answers your question by itself.
$endgroup$
– user207421
18 hours ago










5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes


















27












$begingroup$

In audio gear, it is useful to do most of the signal manipulation at a standard level, known as "line level". This includes mixing, equalization, compression, etc.



Some signal sources (microphones, guitar pickups, etc.) do not inherently produce line level outputs, so a preamplifier is used to boost the signal to that level. Some signal sources (record players) require not only a boost, but also a special equalization to flatten the frequency response.



Then, after all of the signal processing is done, a second, "power" amplifier is used to drive the speaker(s).



This kind of modularity allows signal sources, processing stages, and different kinds of speakers to be mixed and matched freely.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    In case anyone needs this broken down to the simplest level for electric guitar amps: the preamp gets the signal ready for the tone controls, then after the tone controls the power amp makes it ready for the speaker.
    $endgroup$
    – Todd Wilcox
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Oh, you're right. I did not notice he was talking about amps in the same unit which was implied by the "in the same schematic part" bit.
    $endgroup$
    – Toor
    yesterday



















15












$begingroup$

Quick and dirty answer:



Buffering is one reason. Interconnects between things can have a lot of capacitance and require a lot (comparatively) of current to drive.



Noise immunity is another. Think about this scenario: Send a signal through a wire where it picks up, say, 10mV noise, then amplify it by 100x: total noise, 1000mV. But if you instead amplify it by 10x, then send it through the wire where it gets 10mV noise, then amplify by another 10x, your total signal amplification is still 100x, but your total noise is only 100mV.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Are you saying the noise picked up inside the amp chassis would be equal to or greater than the noise picked up by the guitar pickups out in the world? That doesn't seem right to me. In the case of electric guitars, the part of the signal chain most prone to noise is the source (the pickups), not an interconnect (the cables or flywires or the traces on a PCB).
    $endgroup$
    – Todd Wilcox
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @ToddWilcox I did say this was a quick and dirty answer, and may not apply quite so well to the specific scenario the asker is asking about. It is not the best answer and needs a lot of work but I don't have the time or energy to work on it right now, and frankly I'm amazed it got as many upvotes as it did. That said, the definition of "noise" that I'm using here is implicitly assuming that the signal you want is exactly what the transducer outputs, that the signal as it exists on the terminals of the transducer is noise-free by definition.
    $endgroup$
    – Hearth
    yesterday


















8












$begingroup$

A major reason for separate boxes for preamps and poweramps is the GROUND currents and also magnetic coupling. [there is numeric example, at 20KHz and 6 amps to the speakers, at end of this answer, with the Preamp only 10cm from the Power amplifier]



Suppose you built the preamp and the poweramp on the same PCB. Why not?



Some of the loudspeaker current will be flowing around on the GROUND, and end up combining with the input signal.



To minimize this "combining", make that PCB long and thin, so the PowerAmp Grounds are far away from the PreAmp Grounds.



How to improve on this? use long thin regions between the Preamp and the Poweramp.



In the extreme, a coax cable provides a long-thin-region, to ensure very small combining of input and output currents.



Given low millivolt signals from a vinyl record Moving Magnet cartridge, or even 0.5 millivolt from Moving Coil cartridges, that amplified to near-100-volt audio outputs, the entire system needs ~100,000:1 isolation. And even that isolation only provides Signal-Noise-Ratio of UNITY which just barely prevents oscillation; for 80dB ratio of signal-to-feedback, the isolation needs to improve by another 10,000:1 to 1 part per Billion.





schematic





simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab



=============================================



How bad can (magnetic field) crosstalk/feedback be? assume output current is 6 amps peak at 20,000Hz. The dI/dT is 6* d(sin(2*pi*20,000*Time))/dT = 6 * 2*pi*20,000*cos(2*pi*20000*T)



or dI/dT = 700,000 amps per second.



Assume the preamp input (remember that 1 millivolt signal from the cartridge, and you want at least 10,000:1 SNR or tonal feedback, thus 0.1 microvolt feedback is the desired floor) is 0.1 meter from the Speaker output.



V_magnetic_induce = (2.0e-7 * Area/Distance) * dI/dT



and we'll assume the input loop area (signal to ground) is 1cm by 4cm.



Now run the math; remember we need 0.1 microvolt feedback.



Vinduce*** = 2e-7Henry/meter * (victim loop area=1cm * 4cm)/10cm * 700,000



Vinduce = 2e-7 * 0.0004meter/0.1meter * 700,000



Vinduce = 2e-7 * 0.004 * 7e+5



Vinduce = 2e-7 * 4e-3 * 7e+7 = 56 e-3 = 56 milliVolts. [WRONG! math error]



Vinduce = 2e-7 * 4e-3 * 7e+5 = 56e-5 = 560e-6 = 0.56 milliVolts [had been 7e-5; corrected to 7e+5]



The magnetic feedback, caused by having the Poweramplifer near the Preamplifier, is 0.56mV / 0.1 microvolt or 5,600X stronger than what "clean" music can tolerate. (some papers says the ear's cochlea can hear to -106dBc, which suggests another factor of 20x cleanliness is needed)



====================================



How can the designer improve the fidelity of these systems? SLABS OF METAL in steel cases; twisted-pair wiring for output signals (use woven-multiwire speaker cables) and for power-line cabling to the boxes; PCB layout to route signal to be immediately adjacent to Return; coax cables that avoid loose signal/ground wiring, instead use plugs-into-PCB for minimal separation of the signal and ground current flows; large charge reservoirs in the PowerAmps, placed near speaker-out terminals, to achieve minimal-area transmitter loops (the long straight wire model used in the example is just part of a real-world out+return current movement); power supplies that use inductors along with the rectifier diodes, to slow the diode surges and avoid
the evil "singing" sound of impulsive (fast edge) 120Hz power flows.



*** Vinduce uses the non-natural-log approximation of coupling between a long straight wire carrying the aggressor/transmitter current with dI/dT, and the rectangular loop of the victim/receiver circuit. The equation, from a combination of Faraday Law of Induction and Biot-Savart Law, is



Vinduce = [MU0 * MUr * LoopArea/(2 * pi * Distance_wire_to_Loop)] * dI/dT



and we ignore 2nd order effects that require natural-log.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$




















    5












    $begingroup$

    To minimize the noise factor, which is the SNR of the output divided by the SNR of the input. An ideal amplifier should keep the SNR constant, since the input noise is amplified by the same amount as the input signal. A real amplifier, however, adds extra noise. The noise factor is given by
    $$ F = 1 + fracN_mathrmadditionalN_mathrminputG.$$



    If you cascade a series of amplifiers the total noise factor is given by Friis’ equation
    $$F_mathrmtotal = F_1 + fracF_2 - 1G_1 + fracF_3 - 1G_1 G_2 + fracF_4 - 1G_1 G_2 G_3 + dots.$$
    Where $F_n$ is the noise factor of the nth stage and $G_n$ is the gain of the nth stage. This is because the additional noise of the first stage is amplified by the second and subsequent stages but the additional noise of the second stage is amplified by only the third and subsequent stages etc.



    As you can see, the the noise factor of a given stage is divided by the gain product of all previous stages. So the first stage is the most important when it comes to noise. That’s why you have a low noise pre-amp stage as your very first component in the signal chain. This configuration has the added benefit of not having to worry about the noise figure of the power amplifier.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$








    • 1




      $begingroup$
      And this is true from DC to daylight, as they say. The first amplifier sets the noise figure is what they say in RF (as a rule of thumb).
      $endgroup$
      – mkeith
      yesterday


















    0












    $begingroup$

    To some degree, the use of separate preamps is a historical hangover.



    Back in the day, a consumer audio system might consist of a turntable and tape deck, with perhaps a tuner thrown in. Of particular interest was the vinyl input, which was not remotely a flat frequency response - see RIAA compensation. So, different components required different amplification chains. It became common to separate the input amplification/frequency compensation/tone controls in a unit separate from the power amplifier, to allow mixing and matching of the desired performance levels without replacing the entire electronics chain.



    Nowadays, with turntables pretty much a niche market, and tape recorders replaced with solid-state sources, virtually every device you might want to play will have a line out level and flat frequency response, with the notable exception of microphones. For the most part, there isn't much need for separate preamps except for really dedicated audiophiles (and there seems to be a considerable status/brand component to that market).






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      It seems to me that 'pre-amp' was almost always a misnomer, unless a phono cartridge or tape head or microphone was connected. To this day, most preamp separates are really used as attenuators in practice, whether active or passive: indeed the mere existence of so-called 'passive preamps' alone proves the point. (And yes it is an oxymoron.) Some preamps like the Leak valve units were attenuators even in theory, when you consider tuner inputs of 2V and target amplifier sensitivies around 125mV. One exception I can think of quickly was the Quad 22: 100mV in, 1.4V out.
      $endgroup$
      – user207421
      39 mins ago











    Your Answer






    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    return StackExchange.using("schematics", function ()
    StackExchange.schematics.init();
    );
    , "cicuitlab");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "135"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f432251%2fwhats-the-point-in-a-preamp%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    5 Answers
    5






    active

    oldest

    votes








    5 Answers
    5






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    27












    $begingroup$

    In audio gear, it is useful to do most of the signal manipulation at a standard level, known as "line level". This includes mixing, equalization, compression, etc.



    Some signal sources (microphones, guitar pickups, etc.) do not inherently produce line level outputs, so a preamplifier is used to boost the signal to that level. Some signal sources (record players) require not only a boost, but also a special equalization to flatten the frequency response.



    Then, after all of the signal processing is done, a second, "power" amplifier is used to drive the speaker(s).



    This kind of modularity allows signal sources, processing stages, and different kinds of speakers to be mixed and matched freely.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$








    • 1




      $begingroup$
      In case anyone needs this broken down to the simplest level for electric guitar amps: the preamp gets the signal ready for the tone controls, then after the tone controls the power amp makes it ready for the speaker.
      $endgroup$
      – Todd Wilcox
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      Oh, you're right. I did not notice he was talking about amps in the same unit which was implied by the "in the same schematic part" bit.
      $endgroup$
      – Toor
      yesterday
















    27












    $begingroup$

    In audio gear, it is useful to do most of the signal manipulation at a standard level, known as "line level". This includes mixing, equalization, compression, etc.



    Some signal sources (microphones, guitar pickups, etc.) do not inherently produce line level outputs, so a preamplifier is used to boost the signal to that level. Some signal sources (record players) require not only a boost, but also a special equalization to flatten the frequency response.



    Then, after all of the signal processing is done, a second, "power" amplifier is used to drive the speaker(s).



    This kind of modularity allows signal sources, processing stages, and different kinds of speakers to be mixed and matched freely.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$








    • 1




      $begingroup$
      In case anyone needs this broken down to the simplest level for electric guitar amps: the preamp gets the signal ready for the tone controls, then after the tone controls the power amp makes it ready for the speaker.
      $endgroup$
      – Todd Wilcox
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      Oh, you're right. I did not notice he was talking about amps in the same unit which was implied by the "in the same schematic part" bit.
      $endgroup$
      – Toor
      yesterday














    27












    27








    27





    $begingroup$

    In audio gear, it is useful to do most of the signal manipulation at a standard level, known as "line level". This includes mixing, equalization, compression, etc.



    Some signal sources (microphones, guitar pickups, etc.) do not inherently produce line level outputs, so a preamplifier is used to boost the signal to that level. Some signal sources (record players) require not only a boost, but also a special equalization to flatten the frequency response.



    Then, after all of the signal processing is done, a second, "power" amplifier is used to drive the speaker(s).



    This kind of modularity allows signal sources, processing stages, and different kinds of speakers to be mixed and matched freely.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    In audio gear, it is useful to do most of the signal manipulation at a standard level, known as "line level". This includes mixing, equalization, compression, etc.



    Some signal sources (microphones, guitar pickups, etc.) do not inherently produce line level outputs, so a preamplifier is used to boost the signal to that level. Some signal sources (record players) require not only a boost, but also a special equalization to flatten the frequency response.



    Then, after all of the signal processing is done, a second, "power" amplifier is used to drive the speaker(s).



    This kind of modularity allows signal sources, processing stages, and different kinds of speakers to be mixed and matched freely.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered yesterday









    Dave TweedDave Tweed

    124k10154269




    124k10154269







    • 1




      $begingroup$
      In case anyone needs this broken down to the simplest level for electric guitar amps: the preamp gets the signal ready for the tone controls, then after the tone controls the power amp makes it ready for the speaker.
      $endgroup$
      – Todd Wilcox
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      Oh, you're right. I did not notice he was talking about amps in the same unit which was implied by the "in the same schematic part" bit.
      $endgroup$
      – Toor
      yesterday













    • 1




      $begingroup$
      In case anyone needs this broken down to the simplest level for electric guitar amps: the preamp gets the signal ready for the tone controls, then after the tone controls the power amp makes it ready for the speaker.
      $endgroup$
      – Todd Wilcox
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      Oh, you're right. I did not notice he was talking about amps in the same unit which was implied by the "in the same schematic part" bit.
      $endgroup$
      – Toor
      yesterday








    1




    1




    $begingroup$
    In case anyone needs this broken down to the simplest level for electric guitar amps: the preamp gets the signal ready for the tone controls, then after the tone controls the power amp makes it ready for the speaker.
    $endgroup$
    – Todd Wilcox
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    In case anyone needs this broken down to the simplest level for electric guitar amps: the preamp gets the signal ready for the tone controls, then after the tone controls the power amp makes it ready for the speaker.
    $endgroup$
    – Todd Wilcox
    yesterday












    $begingroup$
    Oh, you're right. I did not notice he was talking about amps in the same unit which was implied by the "in the same schematic part" bit.
    $endgroup$
    – Toor
    yesterday





    $begingroup$
    Oh, you're right. I did not notice he was talking about amps in the same unit which was implied by the "in the same schematic part" bit.
    $endgroup$
    – Toor
    yesterday














    15












    $begingroup$

    Quick and dirty answer:



    Buffering is one reason. Interconnects between things can have a lot of capacitance and require a lot (comparatively) of current to drive.



    Noise immunity is another. Think about this scenario: Send a signal through a wire where it picks up, say, 10mV noise, then amplify it by 100x: total noise, 1000mV. But if you instead amplify it by 10x, then send it through the wire where it gets 10mV noise, then amplify by another 10x, your total signal amplification is still 100x, but your total noise is only 100mV.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$








    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Are you saying the noise picked up inside the amp chassis would be equal to or greater than the noise picked up by the guitar pickups out in the world? That doesn't seem right to me. In the case of electric guitars, the part of the signal chain most prone to noise is the source (the pickups), not an interconnect (the cables or flywires or the traces on a PCB).
      $endgroup$
      – Todd Wilcox
      yesterday






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @ToddWilcox I did say this was a quick and dirty answer, and may not apply quite so well to the specific scenario the asker is asking about. It is not the best answer and needs a lot of work but I don't have the time or energy to work on it right now, and frankly I'm amazed it got as many upvotes as it did. That said, the definition of "noise" that I'm using here is implicitly assuming that the signal you want is exactly what the transducer outputs, that the signal as it exists on the terminals of the transducer is noise-free by definition.
      $endgroup$
      – Hearth
      yesterday















    15












    $begingroup$

    Quick and dirty answer:



    Buffering is one reason. Interconnects between things can have a lot of capacitance and require a lot (comparatively) of current to drive.



    Noise immunity is another. Think about this scenario: Send a signal through a wire where it picks up, say, 10mV noise, then amplify it by 100x: total noise, 1000mV. But if you instead amplify it by 10x, then send it through the wire where it gets 10mV noise, then amplify by another 10x, your total signal amplification is still 100x, but your total noise is only 100mV.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$








    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Are you saying the noise picked up inside the amp chassis would be equal to or greater than the noise picked up by the guitar pickups out in the world? That doesn't seem right to me. In the case of electric guitars, the part of the signal chain most prone to noise is the source (the pickups), not an interconnect (the cables or flywires or the traces on a PCB).
      $endgroup$
      – Todd Wilcox
      yesterday






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @ToddWilcox I did say this was a quick and dirty answer, and may not apply quite so well to the specific scenario the asker is asking about. It is not the best answer and needs a lot of work but I don't have the time or energy to work on it right now, and frankly I'm amazed it got as many upvotes as it did. That said, the definition of "noise" that I'm using here is implicitly assuming that the signal you want is exactly what the transducer outputs, that the signal as it exists on the terminals of the transducer is noise-free by definition.
      $endgroup$
      – Hearth
      yesterday













    15












    15








    15





    $begingroup$

    Quick and dirty answer:



    Buffering is one reason. Interconnects between things can have a lot of capacitance and require a lot (comparatively) of current to drive.



    Noise immunity is another. Think about this scenario: Send a signal through a wire where it picks up, say, 10mV noise, then amplify it by 100x: total noise, 1000mV. But if you instead amplify it by 10x, then send it through the wire where it gets 10mV noise, then amplify by another 10x, your total signal amplification is still 100x, but your total noise is only 100mV.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    Quick and dirty answer:



    Buffering is one reason. Interconnects between things can have a lot of capacitance and require a lot (comparatively) of current to drive.



    Noise immunity is another. Think about this scenario: Send a signal through a wire where it picks up, say, 10mV noise, then amplify it by 100x: total noise, 1000mV. But if you instead amplify it by 10x, then send it through the wire where it gets 10mV noise, then amplify by another 10x, your total signal amplification is still 100x, but your total noise is only 100mV.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered yesterday









    HearthHearth

    5,17511340




    5,17511340







    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Are you saying the noise picked up inside the amp chassis would be equal to or greater than the noise picked up by the guitar pickups out in the world? That doesn't seem right to me. In the case of electric guitars, the part of the signal chain most prone to noise is the source (the pickups), not an interconnect (the cables or flywires or the traces on a PCB).
      $endgroup$
      – Todd Wilcox
      yesterday






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @ToddWilcox I did say this was a quick and dirty answer, and may not apply quite so well to the specific scenario the asker is asking about. It is not the best answer and needs a lot of work but I don't have the time or energy to work on it right now, and frankly I'm amazed it got as many upvotes as it did. That said, the definition of "noise" that I'm using here is implicitly assuming that the signal you want is exactly what the transducer outputs, that the signal as it exists on the terminals of the transducer is noise-free by definition.
      $endgroup$
      – Hearth
      yesterday












    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Are you saying the noise picked up inside the amp chassis would be equal to or greater than the noise picked up by the guitar pickups out in the world? That doesn't seem right to me. In the case of electric guitars, the part of the signal chain most prone to noise is the source (the pickups), not an interconnect (the cables or flywires or the traces on a PCB).
      $endgroup$
      – Todd Wilcox
      yesterday






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @ToddWilcox I did say this was a quick and dirty answer, and may not apply quite so well to the specific scenario the asker is asking about. It is not the best answer and needs a lot of work but I don't have the time or energy to work on it right now, and frankly I'm amazed it got as many upvotes as it did. That said, the definition of "noise" that I'm using here is implicitly assuming that the signal you want is exactly what the transducer outputs, that the signal as it exists on the terminals of the transducer is noise-free by definition.
      $endgroup$
      – Hearth
      yesterday







    1




    1




    $begingroup$
    Are you saying the noise picked up inside the amp chassis would be equal to or greater than the noise picked up by the guitar pickups out in the world? That doesn't seem right to me. In the case of electric guitars, the part of the signal chain most prone to noise is the source (the pickups), not an interconnect (the cables or flywires or the traces on a PCB).
    $endgroup$
    – Todd Wilcox
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    Are you saying the noise picked up inside the amp chassis would be equal to or greater than the noise picked up by the guitar pickups out in the world? That doesn't seem right to me. In the case of electric guitars, the part of the signal chain most prone to noise is the source (the pickups), not an interconnect (the cables or flywires or the traces on a PCB).
    $endgroup$
    – Todd Wilcox
    yesterday




    1




    1




    $begingroup$
    @ToddWilcox I did say this was a quick and dirty answer, and may not apply quite so well to the specific scenario the asker is asking about. It is not the best answer and needs a lot of work but I don't have the time or energy to work on it right now, and frankly I'm amazed it got as many upvotes as it did. That said, the definition of "noise" that I'm using here is implicitly assuming that the signal you want is exactly what the transducer outputs, that the signal as it exists on the terminals of the transducer is noise-free by definition.
    $endgroup$
    – Hearth
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    @ToddWilcox I did say this was a quick and dirty answer, and may not apply quite so well to the specific scenario the asker is asking about. It is not the best answer and needs a lot of work but I don't have the time or energy to work on it right now, and frankly I'm amazed it got as many upvotes as it did. That said, the definition of "noise" that I'm using here is implicitly assuming that the signal you want is exactly what the transducer outputs, that the signal as it exists on the terminals of the transducer is noise-free by definition.
    $endgroup$
    – Hearth
    yesterday











    8












    $begingroup$

    A major reason for separate boxes for preamps and poweramps is the GROUND currents and also magnetic coupling. [there is numeric example, at 20KHz and 6 amps to the speakers, at end of this answer, with the Preamp only 10cm from the Power amplifier]



    Suppose you built the preamp and the poweramp on the same PCB. Why not?



    Some of the loudspeaker current will be flowing around on the GROUND, and end up combining with the input signal.



    To minimize this "combining", make that PCB long and thin, so the PowerAmp Grounds are far away from the PreAmp Grounds.



    How to improve on this? use long thin regions between the Preamp and the Poweramp.



    In the extreme, a coax cable provides a long-thin-region, to ensure very small combining of input and output currents.



    Given low millivolt signals from a vinyl record Moving Magnet cartridge, or even 0.5 millivolt from Moving Coil cartridges, that amplified to near-100-volt audio outputs, the entire system needs ~100,000:1 isolation. And even that isolation only provides Signal-Noise-Ratio of UNITY which just barely prevents oscillation; for 80dB ratio of signal-to-feedback, the isolation needs to improve by another 10,000:1 to 1 part per Billion.





    schematic





    simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab



    =============================================



    How bad can (magnetic field) crosstalk/feedback be? assume output current is 6 amps peak at 20,000Hz. The dI/dT is 6* d(sin(2*pi*20,000*Time))/dT = 6 * 2*pi*20,000*cos(2*pi*20000*T)



    or dI/dT = 700,000 amps per second.



    Assume the preamp input (remember that 1 millivolt signal from the cartridge, and you want at least 10,000:1 SNR or tonal feedback, thus 0.1 microvolt feedback is the desired floor) is 0.1 meter from the Speaker output.



    V_magnetic_induce = (2.0e-7 * Area/Distance) * dI/dT



    and we'll assume the input loop area (signal to ground) is 1cm by 4cm.



    Now run the math; remember we need 0.1 microvolt feedback.



    Vinduce*** = 2e-7Henry/meter * (victim loop area=1cm * 4cm)/10cm * 700,000



    Vinduce = 2e-7 * 0.0004meter/0.1meter * 700,000



    Vinduce = 2e-7 * 0.004 * 7e+5



    Vinduce = 2e-7 * 4e-3 * 7e+7 = 56 e-3 = 56 milliVolts. [WRONG! math error]



    Vinduce = 2e-7 * 4e-3 * 7e+5 = 56e-5 = 560e-6 = 0.56 milliVolts [had been 7e-5; corrected to 7e+5]



    The magnetic feedback, caused by having the Poweramplifer near the Preamplifier, is 0.56mV / 0.1 microvolt or 5,600X stronger than what "clean" music can tolerate. (some papers says the ear's cochlea can hear to -106dBc, which suggests another factor of 20x cleanliness is needed)



    ====================================



    How can the designer improve the fidelity of these systems? SLABS OF METAL in steel cases; twisted-pair wiring for output signals (use woven-multiwire speaker cables) and for power-line cabling to the boxes; PCB layout to route signal to be immediately adjacent to Return; coax cables that avoid loose signal/ground wiring, instead use plugs-into-PCB for minimal separation of the signal and ground current flows; large charge reservoirs in the PowerAmps, placed near speaker-out terminals, to achieve minimal-area transmitter loops (the long straight wire model used in the example is just part of a real-world out+return current movement); power supplies that use inductors along with the rectifier diodes, to slow the diode surges and avoid
    the evil "singing" sound of impulsive (fast edge) 120Hz power flows.



    *** Vinduce uses the non-natural-log approximation of coupling between a long straight wire carrying the aggressor/transmitter current with dI/dT, and the rectangular loop of the victim/receiver circuit. The equation, from a combination of Faraday Law of Induction and Biot-Savart Law, is



    Vinduce = [MU0 * MUr * LoopArea/(2 * pi * Distance_wire_to_Loop)] * dI/dT



    and we ignore 2nd order effects that require natural-log.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$

















      8












      $begingroup$

      A major reason for separate boxes for preamps and poweramps is the GROUND currents and also magnetic coupling. [there is numeric example, at 20KHz and 6 amps to the speakers, at end of this answer, with the Preamp only 10cm from the Power amplifier]



      Suppose you built the preamp and the poweramp on the same PCB. Why not?



      Some of the loudspeaker current will be flowing around on the GROUND, and end up combining with the input signal.



      To minimize this "combining", make that PCB long and thin, so the PowerAmp Grounds are far away from the PreAmp Grounds.



      How to improve on this? use long thin regions between the Preamp and the Poweramp.



      In the extreme, a coax cable provides a long-thin-region, to ensure very small combining of input and output currents.



      Given low millivolt signals from a vinyl record Moving Magnet cartridge, or even 0.5 millivolt from Moving Coil cartridges, that amplified to near-100-volt audio outputs, the entire system needs ~100,000:1 isolation. And even that isolation only provides Signal-Noise-Ratio of UNITY which just barely prevents oscillation; for 80dB ratio of signal-to-feedback, the isolation needs to improve by another 10,000:1 to 1 part per Billion.





      schematic





      simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab



      =============================================



      How bad can (magnetic field) crosstalk/feedback be? assume output current is 6 amps peak at 20,000Hz. The dI/dT is 6* d(sin(2*pi*20,000*Time))/dT = 6 * 2*pi*20,000*cos(2*pi*20000*T)



      or dI/dT = 700,000 amps per second.



      Assume the preamp input (remember that 1 millivolt signal from the cartridge, and you want at least 10,000:1 SNR or tonal feedback, thus 0.1 microvolt feedback is the desired floor) is 0.1 meter from the Speaker output.



      V_magnetic_induce = (2.0e-7 * Area/Distance) * dI/dT



      and we'll assume the input loop area (signal to ground) is 1cm by 4cm.



      Now run the math; remember we need 0.1 microvolt feedback.



      Vinduce*** = 2e-7Henry/meter * (victim loop area=1cm * 4cm)/10cm * 700,000



      Vinduce = 2e-7 * 0.0004meter/0.1meter * 700,000



      Vinduce = 2e-7 * 0.004 * 7e+5



      Vinduce = 2e-7 * 4e-3 * 7e+7 = 56 e-3 = 56 milliVolts. [WRONG! math error]



      Vinduce = 2e-7 * 4e-3 * 7e+5 = 56e-5 = 560e-6 = 0.56 milliVolts [had been 7e-5; corrected to 7e+5]



      The magnetic feedback, caused by having the Poweramplifer near the Preamplifier, is 0.56mV / 0.1 microvolt or 5,600X stronger than what "clean" music can tolerate. (some papers says the ear's cochlea can hear to -106dBc, which suggests another factor of 20x cleanliness is needed)



      ====================================



      How can the designer improve the fidelity of these systems? SLABS OF METAL in steel cases; twisted-pair wiring for output signals (use woven-multiwire speaker cables) and for power-line cabling to the boxes; PCB layout to route signal to be immediately adjacent to Return; coax cables that avoid loose signal/ground wiring, instead use plugs-into-PCB for minimal separation of the signal and ground current flows; large charge reservoirs in the PowerAmps, placed near speaker-out terminals, to achieve minimal-area transmitter loops (the long straight wire model used in the example is just part of a real-world out+return current movement); power supplies that use inductors along with the rectifier diodes, to slow the diode surges and avoid
      the evil "singing" sound of impulsive (fast edge) 120Hz power flows.



      *** Vinduce uses the non-natural-log approximation of coupling between a long straight wire carrying the aggressor/transmitter current with dI/dT, and the rectangular loop of the victim/receiver circuit. The equation, from a combination of Faraday Law of Induction and Biot-Savart Law, is



      Vinduce = [MU0 * MUr * LoopArea/(2 * pi * Distance_wire_to_Loop)] * dI/dT



      and we ignore 2nd order effects that require natural-log.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$















        8












        8








        8





        $begingroup$

        A major reason for separate boxes for preamps and poweramps is the GROUND currents and also magnetic coupling. [there is numeric example, at 20KHz and 6 amps to the speakers, at end of this answer, with the Preamp only 10cm from the Power amplifier]



        Suppose you built the preamp and the poweramp on the same PCB. Why not?



        Some of the loudspeaker current will be flowing around on the GROUND, and end up combining with the input signal.



        To minimize this "combining", make that PCB long and thin, so the PowerAmp Grounds are far away from the PreAmp Grounds.



        How to improve on this? use long thin regions between the Preamp and the Poweramp.



        In the extreme, a coax cable provides a long-thin-region, to ensure very small combining of input and output currents.



        Given low millivolt signals from a vinyl record Moving Magnet cartridge, or even 0.5 millivolt from Moving Coil cartridges, that amplified to near-100-volt audio outputs, the entire system needs ~100,000:1 isolation. And even that isolation only provides Signal-Noise-Ratio of UNITY which just barely prevents oscillation; for 80dB ratio of signal-to-feedback, the isolation needs to improve by another 10,000:1 to 1 part per Billion.





        schematic





        simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab



        =============================================



        How bad can (magnetic field) crosstalk/feedback be? assume output current is 6 amps peak at 20,000Hz. The dI/dT is 6* d(sin(2*pi*20,000*Time))/dT = 6 * 2*pi*20,000*cos(2*pi*20000*T)



        or dI/dT = 700,000 amps per second.



        Assume the preamp input (remember that 1 millivolt signal from the cartridge, and you want at least 10,000:1 SNR or tonal feedback, thus 0.1 microvolt feedback is the desired floor) is 0.1 meter from the Speaker output.



        V_magnetic_induce = (2.0e-7 * Area/Distance) * dI/dT



        and we'll assume the input loop area (signal to ground) is 1cm by 4cm.



        Now run the math; remember we need 0.1 microvolt feedback.



        Vinduce*** = 2e-7Henry/meter * (victim loop area=1cm * 4cm)/10cm * 700,000



        Vinduce = 2e-7 * 0.0004meter/0.1meter * 700,000



        Vinduce = 2e-7 * 0.004 * 7e+5



        Vinduce = 2e-7 * 4e-3 * 7e+7 = 56 e-3 = 56 milliVolts. [WRONG! math error]



        Vinduce = 2e-7 * 4e-3 * 7e+5 = 56e-5 = 560e-6 = 0.56 milliVolts [had been 7e-5; corrected to 7e+5]



        The magnetic feedback, caused by having the Poweramplifer near the Preamplifier, is 0.56mV / 0.1 microvolt or 5,600X stronger than what "clean" music can tolerate. (some papers says the ear's cochlea can hear to -106dBc, which suggests another factor of 20x cleanliness is needed)



        ====================================



        How can the designer improve the fidelity of these systems? SLABS OF METAL in steel cases; twisted-pair wiring for output signals (use woven-multiwire speaker cables) and for power-line cabling to the boxes; PCB layout to route signal to be immediately adjacent to Return; coax cables that avoid loose signal/ground wiring, instead use plugs-into-PCB for minimal separation of the signal and ground current flows; large charge reservoirs in the PowerAmps, placed near speaker-out terminals, to achieve minimal-area transmitter loops (the long straight wire model used in the example is just part of a real-world out+return current movement); power supplies that use inductors along with the rectifier diodes, to slow the diode surges and avoid
        the evil "singing" sound of impulsive (fast edge) 120Hz power flows.



        *** Vinduce uses the non-natural-log approximation of coupling between a long straight wire carrying the aggressor/transmitter current with dI/dT, and the rectangular loop of the victim/receiver circuit. The equation, from a combination of Faraday Law of Induction and Biot-Savart Law, is



        Vinduce = [MU0 * MUr * LoopArea/(2 * pi * Distance_wire_to_Loop)] * dI/dT



        and we ignore 2nd order effects that require natural-log.






        share|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        A major reason for separate boxes for preamps and poweramps is the GROUND currents and also magnetic coupling. [there is numeric example, at 20KHz and 6 amps to the speakers, at end of this answer, with the Preamp only 10cm from the Power amplifier]



        Suppose you built the preamp and the poweramp on the same PCB. Why not?



        Some of the loudspeaker current will be flowing around on the GROUND, and end up combining with the input signal.



        To minimize this "combining", make that PCB long and thin, so the PowerAmp Grounds are far away from the PreAmp Grounds.



        How to improve on this? use long thin regions between the Preamp and the Poweramp.



        In the extreme, a coax cable provides a long-thin-region, to ensure very small combining of input and output currents.



        Given low millivolt signals from a vinyl record Moving Magnet cartridge, or even 0.5 millivolt from Moving Coil cartridges, that amplified to near-100-volt audio outputs, the entire system needs ~100,000:1 isolation. And even that isolation only provides Signal-Noise-Ratio of UNITY which just barely prevents oscillation; for 80dB ratio of signal-to-feedback, the isolation needs to improve by another 10,000:1 to 1 part per Billion.





        schematic





        simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab



        =============================================



        How bad can (magnetic field) crosstalk/feedback be? assume output current is 6 amps peak at 20,000Hz. The dI/dT is 6* d(sin(2*pi*20,000*Time))/dT = 6 * 2*pi*20,000*cos(2*pi*20000*T)



        or dI/dT = 700,000 amps per second.



        Assume the preamp input (remember that 1 millivolt signal from the cartridge, and you want at least 10,000:1 SNR or tonal feedback, thus 0.1 microvolt feedback is the desired floor) is 0.1 meter from the Speaker output.



        V_magnetic_induce = (2.0e-7 * Area/Distance) * dI/dT



        and we'll assume the input loop area (signal to ground) is 1cm by 4cm.



        Now run the math; remember we need 0.1 microvolt feedback.



        Vinduce*** = 2e-7Henry/meter * (victim loop area=1cm * 4cm)/10cm * 700,000



        Vinduce = 2e-7 * 0.0004meter/0.1meter * 700,000



        Vinduce = 2e-7 * 0.004 * 7e+5



        Vinduce = 2e-7 * 4e-3 * 7e+7 = 56 e-3 = 56 milliVolts. [WRONG! math error]



        Vinduce = 2e-7 * 4e-3 * 7e+5 = 56e-5 = 560e-6 = 0.56 milliVolts [had been 7e-5; corrected to 7e+5]



        The magnetic feedback, caused by having the Poweramplifer near the Preamplifier, is 0.56mV / 0.1 microvolt or 5,600X stronger than what "clean" music can tolerate. (some papers says the ear's cochlea can hear to -106dBc, which suggests another factor of 20x cleanliness is needed)



        ====================================



        How can the designer improve the fidelity of these systems? SLABS OF METAL in steel cases; twisted-pair wiring for output signals (use woven-multiwire speaker cables) and for power-line cabling to the boxes; PCB layout to route signal to be immediately adjacent to Return; coax cables that avoid loose signal/ground wiring, instead use plugs-into-PCB for minimal separation of the signal and ground current flows; large charge reservoirs in the PowerAmps, placed near speaker-out terminals, to achieve minimal-area transmitter loops (the long straight wire model used in the example is just part of a real-world out+return current movement); power supplies that use inductors along with the rectifier diodes, to slow the diode surges and avoid
        the evil "singing" sound of impulsive (fast edge) 120Hz power flows.



        *** Vinduce uses the non-natural-log approximation of coupling between a long straight wire carrying the aggressor/transmitter current with dI/dT, and the rectangular loop of the victim/receiver circuit. The equation, from a combination of Faraday Law of Induction and Biot-Savart Law, is



        Vinduce = [MU0 * MUr * LoopArea/(2 * pi * Distance_wire_to_Loop)] * dI/dT



        and we ignore 2nd order effects that require natural-log.







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited 2 hours ago

























        answered yesterday









        analogsystemsrfanalogsystemsrf

        16.1k2822




        16.1k2822





















            5












            $begingroup$

            To minimize the noise factor, which is the SNR of the output divided by the SNR of the input. An ideal amplifier should keep the SNR constant, since the input noise is amplified by the same amount as the input signal. A real amplifier, however, adds extra noise. The noise factor is given by
            $$ F = 1 + fracN_mathrmadditionalN_mathrminputG.$$



            If you cascade a series of amplifiers the total noise factor is given by Friis’ equation
            $$F_mathrmtotal = F_1 + fracF_2 - 1G_1 + fracF_3 - 1G_1 G_2 + fracF_4 - 1G_1 G_2 G_3 + dots.$$
            Where $F_n$ is the noise factor of the nth stage and $G_n$ is the gain of the nth stage. This is because the additional noise of the first stage is amplified by the second and subsequent stages but the additional noise of the second stage is amplified by only the third and subsequent stages etc.



            As you can see, the the noise factor of a given stage is divided by the gain product of all previous stages. So the first stage is the most important when it comes to noise. That’s why you have a low noise pre-amp stage as your very first component in the signal chain. This configuration has the added benefit of not having to worry about the noise figure of the power amplifier.






            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              And this is true from DC to daylight, as they say. The first amplifier sets the noise figure is what they say in RF (as a rule of thumb).
              $endgroup$
              – mkeith
              yesterday















            5












            $begingroup$

            To minimize the noise factor, which is the SNR of the output divided by the SNR of the input. An ideal amplifier should keep the SNR constant, since the input noise is amplified by the same amount as the input signal. A real amplifier, however, adds extra noise. The noise factor is given by
            $$ F = 1 + fracN_mathrmadditionalN_mathrminputG.$$



            If you cascade a series of amplifiers the total noise factor is given by Friis’ equation
            $$F_mathrmtotal = F_1 + fracF_2 - 1G_1 + fracF_3 - 1G_1 G_2 + fracF_4 - 1G_1 G_2 G_3 + dots.$$
            Where $F_n$ is the noise factor of the nth stage and $G_n$ is the gain of the nth stage. This is because the additional noise of the first stage is amplified by the second and subsequent stages but the additional noise of the second stage is amplified by only the third and subsequent stages etc.



            As you can see, the the noise factor of a given stage is divided by the gain product of all previous stages. So the first stage is the most important when it comes to noise. That’s why you have a low noise pre-amp stage as your very first component in the signal chain. This configuration has the added benefit of not having to worry about the noise figure of the power amplifier.






            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              And this is true from DC to daylight, as they say. The first amplifier sets the noise figure is what they say in RF (as a rule of thumb).
              $endgroup$
              – mkeith
              yesterday













            5












            5








            5





            $begingroup$

            To minimize the noise factor, which is the SNR of the output divided by the SNR of the input. An ideal amplifier should keep the SNR constant, since the input noise is amplified by the same amount as the input signal. A real amplifier, however, adds extra noise. The noise factor is given by
            $$ F = 1 + fracN_mathrmadditionalN_mathrminputG.$$



            If you cascade a series of amplifiers the total noise factor is given by Friis’ equation
            $$F_mathrmtotal = F_1 + fracF_2 - 1G_1 + fracF_3 - 1G_1 G_2 + fracF_4 - 1G_1 G_2 G_3 + dots.$$
            Where $F_n$ is the noise factor of the nth stage and $G_n$ is the gain of the nth stage. This is because the additional noise of the first stage is amplified by the second and subsequent stages but the additional noise of the second stage is amplified by only the third and subsequent stages etc.



            As you can see, the the noise factor of a given stage is divided by the gain product of all previous stages. So the first stage is the most important when it comes to noise. That’s why you have a low noise pre-amp stage as your very first component in the signal chain. This configuration has the added benefit of not having to worry about the noise figure of the power amplifier.






            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            To minimize the noise factor, which is the SNR of the output divided by the SNR of the input. An ideal amplifier should keep the SNR constant, since the input noise is amplified by the same amount as the input signal. A real amplifier, however, adds extra noise. The noise factor is given by
            $$ F = 1 + fracN_mathrmadditionalN_mathrminputG.$$



            If you cascade a series of amplifiers the total noise factor is given by Friis’ equation
            $$F_mathrmtotal = F_1 + fracF_2 - 1G_1 + fracF_3 - 1G_1 G_2 + fracF_4 - 1G_1 G_2 G_3 + dots.$$
            Where $F_n$ is the noise factor of the nth stage and $G_n$ is the gain of the nth stage. This is because the additional noise of the first stage is amplified by the second and subsequent stages but the additional noise of the second stage is amplified by only the third and subsequent stages etc.



            As you can see, the the noise factor of a given stage is divided by the gain product of all previous stages. So the first stage is the most important when it comes to noise. That’s why you have a low noise pre-amp stage as your very first component in the signal chain. This configuration has the added benefit of not having to worry about the noise figure of the power amplifier.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered yesterday









            user110971user110971

            3,4441717




            3,4441717







            • 1




              $begingroup$
              And this is true from DC to daylight, as they say. The first amplifier sets the noise figure is what they say in RF (as a rule of thumb).
              $endgroup$
              – mkeith
              yesterday












            • 1




              $begingroup$
              And this is true from DC to daylight, as they say. The first amplifier sets the noise figure is what they say in RF (as a rule of thumb).
              $endgroup$
              – mkeith
              yesterday







            1




            1




            $begingroup$
            And this is true from DC to daylight, as they say. The first amplifier sets the noise figure is what they say in RF (as a rule of thumb).
            $endgroup$
            – mkeith
            yesterday




            $begingroup$
            And this is true from DC to daylight, as they say. The first amplifier sets the noise figure is what they say in RF (as a rule of thumb).
            $endgroup$
            – mkeith
            yesterday











            0












            $begingroup$

            To some degree, the use of separate preamps is a historical hangover.



            Back in the day, a consumer audio system might consist of a turntable and tape deck, with perhaps a tuner thrown in. Of particular interest was the vinyl input, which was not remotely a flat frequency response - see RIAA compensation. So, different components required different amplification chains. It became common to separate the input amplification/frequency compensation/tone controls in a unit separate from the power amplifier, to allow mixing and matching of the desired performance levels without replacing the entire electronics chain.



            Nowadays, with turntables pretty much a niche market, and tape recorders replaced with solid-state sources, virtually every device you might want to play will have a line out level and flat frequency response, with the notable exception of microphones. For the most part, there isn't much need for separate preamps except for really dedicated audiophiles (and there seems to be a considerable status/brand component to that market).






            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$












            • $begingroup$
              It seems to me that 'pre-amp' was almost always a misnomer, unless a phono cartridge or tape head or microphone was connected. To this day, most preamp separates are really used as attenuators in practice, whether active or passive: indeed the mere existence of so-called 'passive preamps' alone proves the point. (And yes it is an oxymoron.) Some preamps like the Leak valve units were attenuators even in theory, when you consider tuner inputs of 2V and target amplifier sensitivies around 125mV. One exception I can think of quickly was the Quad 22: 100mV in, 1.4V out.
              $endgroup$
              – user207421
              39 mins ago















            0












            $begingroup$

            To some degree, the use of separate preamps is a historical hangover.



            Back in the day, a consumer audio system might consist of a turntable and tape deck, with perhaps a tuner thrown in. Of particular interest was the vinyl input, which was not remotely a flat frequency response - see RIAA compensation. So, different components required different amplification chains. It became common to separate the input amplification/frequency compensation/tone controls in a unit separate from the power amplifier, to allow mixing and matching of the desired performance levels without replacing the entire electronics chain.



            Nowadays, with turntables pretty much a niche market, and tape recorders replaced with solid-state sources, virtually every device you might want to play will have a line out level and flat frequency response, with the notable exception of microphones. For the most part, there isn't much need for separate preamps except for really dedicated audiophiles (and there seems to be a considerable status/brand component to that market).






            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$












            • $begingroup$
              It seems to me that 'pre-amp' was almost always a misnomer, unless a phono cartridge or tape head or microphone was connected. To this day, most preamp separates are really used as attenuators in practice, whether active or passive: indeed the mere existence of so-called 'passive preamps' alone proves the point. (And yes it is an oxymoron.) Some preamps like the Leak valve units were attenuators even in theory, when you consider tuner inputs of 2V and target amplifier sensitivies around 125mV. One exception I can think of quickly was the Quad 22: 100mV in, 1.4V out.
              $endgroup$
              – user207421
              39 mins ago













            0












            0








            0





            $begingroup$

            To some degree, the use of separate preamps is a historical hangover.



            Back in the day, a consumer audio system might consist of a turntable and tape deck, with perhaps a tuner thrown in. Of particular interest was the vinyl input, which was not remotely a flat frequency response - see RIAA compensation. So, different components required different amplification chains. It became common to separate the input amplification/frequency compensation/tone controls in a unit separate from the power amplifier, to allow mixing and matching of the desired performance levels without replacing the entire electronics chain.



            Nowadays, with turntables pretty much a niche market, and tape recorders replaced with solid-state sources, virtually every device you might want to play will have a line out level and flat frequency response, with the notable exception of microphones. For the most part, there isn't much need for separate preamps except for really dedicated audiophiles (and there seems to be a considerable status/brand component to that market).






            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            To some degree, the use of separate preamps is a historical hangover.



            Back in the day, a consumer audio system might consist of a turntable and tape deck, with perhaps a tuner thrown in. Of particular interest was the vinyl input, which was not remotely a flat frequency response - see RIAA compensation. So, different components required different amplification chains. It became common to separate the input amplification/frequency compensation/tone controls in a unit separate from the power amplifier, to allow mixing and matching of the desired performance levels without replacing the entire electronics chain.



            Nowadays, with turntables pretty much a niche market, and tape recorders replaced with solid-state sources, virtually every device you might want to play will have a line out level and flat frequency response, with the notable exception of microphones. For the most part, there isn't much need for separate preamps except for really dedicated audiophiles (and there seems to be a considerable status/brand component to that market).







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 13 hours ago









            WhatRoughBeastWhatRoughBeast

            50.2k22876




            50.2k22876











            • $begingroup$
              It seems to me that 'pre-amp' was almost always a misnomer, unless a phono cartridge or tape head or microphone was connected. To this day, most preamp separates are really used as attenuators in practice, whether active or passive: indeed the mere existence of so-called 'passive preamps' alone proves the point. (And yes it is an oxymoron.) Some preamps like the Leak valve units were attenuators even in theory, when you consider tuner inputs of 2V and target amplifier sensitivies around 125mV. One exception I can think of quickly was the Quad 22: 100mV in, 1.4V out.
              $endgroup$
              – user207421
              39 mins ago
















            • $begingroup$
              It seems to me that 'pre-amp' was almost always a misnomer, unless a phono cartridge or tape head or microphone was connected. To this day, most preamp separates are really used as attenuators in practice, whether active or passive: indeed the mere existence of so-called 'passive preamps' alone proves the point. (And yes it is an oxymoron.) Some preamps like the Leak valve units were attenuators even in theory, when you consider tuner inputs of 2V and target amplifier sensitivies around 125mV. One exception I can think of quickly was the Quad 22: 100mV in, 1.4V out.
              $endgroup$
              – user207421
              39 mins ago















            $begingroup$
            It seems to me that 'pre-amp' was almost always a misnomer, unless a phono cartridge or tape head or microphone was connected. To this day, most preamp separates are really used as attenuators in practice, whether active or passive: indeed the mere existence of so-called 'passive preamps' alone proves the point. (And yes it is an oxymoron.) Some preamps like the Leak valve units were attenuators even in theory, when you consider tuner inputs of 2V and target amplifier sensitivies around 125mV. One exception I can think of quickly was the Quad 22: 100mV in, 1.4V out.
            $endgroup$
            – user207421
            39 mins ago




            $begingroup$
            It seems to me that 'pre-amp' was almost always a misnomer, unless a phono cartridge or tape head or microphone was connected. To this day, most preamp separates are really used as attenuators in practice, whether active or passive: indeed the mere existence of so-called 'passive preamps' alone proves the point. (And yes it is an oxymoron.) Some preamps like the Leak valve units were attenuators even in theory, when you consider tuner inputs of 2V and target amplifier sensitivies around 125mV. One exception I can think of quickly was the Quad 22: 100mV in, 1.4V out.
            $endgroup$
            – user207421
            39 mins ago

















            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Electrical Engineering Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f432251%2fwhats-the-point-in-a-preamp%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            -amplifier, preamp

            Popular posts from this blog

            Frič See also Navigation menuinternal link

            Identify plant with long narrow paired leaves and reddish stems Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?What is this plant with long sharp leaves? Is it a weed?What is this 3ft high, stalky plant, with mid sized narrow leaves?What is this young shrub with opposite ovate, crenate leaves and reddish stems?What is this plant with large broad serrated leaves?Identify this upright branching weed with long leaves and reddish stemsPlease help me identify this bulbous plant with long, broad leaves and white flowersWhat is this small annual with narrow gray/green leaves and rust colored daisy-type flowers?What is this chilli plant?Does anyone know what type of chilli plant this is?Help identify this plant

            fontconfig warning: “/etc/fonts/fonts.conf”, line 100: unknown “element blank” The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In“tar: unrecognized option --warning” during 'apt-get install'How to fix Fontconfig errorHow do I figure out which font file is chosen for a system generic font alias?Why are some apt-get-installed fonts being ignored by fc-list, xfontsel, etc?Reload settings in /etc/fonts/conf.dTaking 30 seconds longer to boot after upgrade from jessie to stretchHow to match multiple font names with a single <match> element?Adding a custom font to fontconfigRemoving fonts from fontconfig <match> resultsBroken fonts after upgrading Firefox ESR to latest Firefox