http://www.prescomaudio.com/webadmin/documents/class_i.pdf
Is this correct, and under laws?
Class I is still under pattent of CROWN, or not?
0
To all CROWN stuff..
Started by DjLeco, Jan 04 2011 05:08 PM
2 replies to this topic
#2
Kevin Heber
-
- Crown Staff
-
- 883 posts
Power User
Posted 05 January 2011 - 09:20 AM
Interesting. However, the process they describe appears to be totally different than Crown's Class I. Essentially they describe a linear output stage (based on Class AB) using BJT's combined with a high-speed switching drive circuit similar to Class D. Crown's Class I has a switching, interleaving drive circuit (thus the name Class I)and a switching FET output stage.
Looking at the two from 50,000 feet, Crown's Class I is going to yield better efficiency (during use, especially at high power levels -- at idle, Crown's Class I amps must go into standby after a short time to conserve power). Crown Class I will also have better damping and handle reactive loads better. My guess is also better low-signal-level performance and less EMI than the Chinese Class I. In terms of overall complexity, they are probably similar, although Crown's Class I seems like a more elegant approach since it is not merely combining two existing technologies in series, but rather it is an entirely novel drive/switching output topology.
Bottom line: the two technologies are completely different except for the name.
Looking at the two from 50,000 feet, Crown's Class I is going to yield better efficiency (during use, especially at high power levels -- at idle, Crown's Class I amps must go into standby after a short time to conserve power). Crown Class I will also have better damping and handle reactive loads better. My guess is also better low-signal-level performance and less EMI than the Chinese Class I. In terms of overall complexity, they are probably similar, although Crown's Class I seems like a more elegant approach since it is not merely combining two existing technologies in series, but rather it is an entirely novel drive/switching output topology.
Bottom line: the two technologies are completely different except for the name.
#3
DjLeco
-
- Members
-
- 60 posts
Power User
Posted 07 January 2011 - 12:24 PM
I know class I topology.
I was afraid they have stollen your pure class I, demanding is their design...
Class I is unique and is ballanced curent amplifier, pure switching amplifier.
No any AB class+switching rails or other implementation, inspired from XTI series, or like Labgruppen, AB+D class.
That's why I was scarred, because Class I is the only one class with balanced curent on output stage.
Btw, class I is under patent, or patent has expired?
I was afraid they have stollen your pure class I, demanding is their design...
Class I is unique and is ballanced curent amplifier, pure switching amplifier.
No any AB class+switching rails or other implementation, inspired from XTI series, or like Labgruppen, AB+D class.
That's why I was scarred, because Class I is the only one class with balanced curent on output stage.
Btw, class I is under patent, or patent has expired?
