On May 31, 2009 at 21:08, Gizmologist09 said...
Question for you: why do you suppose the manufacturers use pulsed triggers?
Could it have something to do with design efficiency?
Personally, I think it's to give it a unique gimmick, certainly not for efficiency.
Referencing to the definition for efficiency:
efficiency (1): effective operation as measured by a comparison of production with cost (as in energy, time, and money) (2): the ratio of the useful energy delivered by a dynamic system to the energy supplied to itI can't see how designing a MORE complicated circuit with more materials and costs falls under the category "efficient". In fact, it seems to be "counter-efficient". Now if you're talking about energy effiency, how much would you save by having a pulsed trigger vs. a constant trigger in an all solid state design? I would bet too little to be cost effective. I'm sure the manufacturer is not placing energy efficiency of operation in the customer's home high on their priority list.
Using a flip flop is faster, cleaner, and allows use of wireless remotes.
How would a flip-flop signal be any faster than a constant signal? The properties of how electrons move are the same in any circuit. In fact, you could induce more delay as you add components in a design.
Cleaner how?
And what does this have to do with remotes? We're talking about a trigger signal from a PREAMP to an AMP.
JP
