What is wrong with negative feedback?


I am not talking about the kind you get as a flaky seller, but as used in amplifier design. It just seems to me that a lot of amp designs advertise "zero negative feedback" as a selling point.

As I understand, NFB is a loop taken from the amplifier output and fed back into the input to keep the amp stable. This sounds like it should be a good thing. So what are the negative trade-offs involved, if any?
solman989
If you can increase the speed of the amp (decrease the propagation delay) theoretically you could speed it up to the point that the odd-ordered enhancement is pushed well outside of the audio band.

Our amps are also pretty fast- 600V/usec is a typical risetime, and we only have one stage of gain. But IME this is still not fast enough, so we resort to other means of getting rid of distortion: class A operation coupled with fully differential balanced operation, which cancels even ordered harmonics not just at the output, but throughout the amplifier. This leaves us with the 3rd harmonic, which is controlled by using only one stage of gain. Odd ordered harmonics are exacerbated by noise problems in the ground and the power supply, so we use star grounding (a lot easier since most of the grounds are balanced) and separate power supplies for the driver and output sections, which also reduces IM distortion.

Distortion has the property of masking detail in addition to adding loudness cues, so if you can get rid of distortion you get greater transparency and greater smoothness at the same time, provided your techniques for getting rid of distortion don't enhance the 5th, 7th and 9th harmonics. IOW real reductions in distortion have real, immediate sonic benefits that anyone can hear: extreme detail accompanied by smoothness are the hallmarks to look for.
Atmasphere - concept is beautiful. Tube class A balanced operation without output transformer. The only problem I can see is that this design requires a lot of tubes and each one has about 2.5A heater current - a lot of wasted power. On the other hand any class A has as low as 12.5% efficiency.

Have you ever investigated ultra high vacuum tubes. Military division of Tesla made them before communism fell and Stereophile posted great review of amp built with them. Such tubes can deliver large currents.
The typical transit time of linear amplifiers is about 2000-3000 nanoseconds, which is too slow for effective implementation of global feedback and error correction.
I think this description nicely highlights so many of the conceptual and terminological errors that audiophiles and audiophile equipment designers have about negative feedback.

Looking generically at a solid-state feedback amplifier, their frequency response before feedback is defined by a single "Miller-compensation" capacitor at the voltage-amplifier stage. It is generally flat from DC to some frequency (i.e. 1kHz), and then rolls off at at 6db/octave all the way to the point to where the gain falls below unity, which may be something like 2MHz. While the gain and the frequencies may vary, virtually every common audio opamp has a frequency response that can be described like this. Again, we're talking about it WITHOUT feedback.

Since negative feedback only exists if the open-loop (feedback-free) gain is above unity, and since the open-loop response falls off at 6dB/octave . . . the input/output phase response must be 90 degrees or less. So if we're going to talk about "transit time", how would you define that? Since we know that comparing the phase at the input the output will give us 90 degrees, the "transit time" at 100KHz will be 2500 nanoseconds. At 200KHz, it will be 1250 nanoseconds. At 20KHz, it will be 25000 nanoseconds. So it seems that talking about "transit time", or "propegation delay", or "delayed feedback", or whatever . . . is a wholly inadequate way of understanding what's going on. Rather, classical Control Theory uses phase relationships to analyze feedback.

And classical Control Theory is wholly adequate to understand the circuit behavior when feedback is applied. Musical information isn't "time smeared" from "delayed feedback", it's simply that part of the amplifier circuit operates in quadrature for a huge chunk of the frequency range (in the case of our generic SS amplifier). Just like the filter slope of the very simplest first-order speaker crossover. And this phase relationship doesn't change whether or not feedback is applied (because it's defined by the Miller capacitor) . . . the feedback simply corrects the phase response at the output.
This lagging results in ringing artifacts and enhances ODD-order harmonics which are particularly annoying to the human hearing so even the smallest amounts of these distortions are highly noticeable.
Ringing when feedback is applied is indicative of an open-loop response that is something other than a simple 6dB/octave slope, and this may be due to factors both in the circuit itself and the load it's driving. And this is indeed something that commonly can occur in the real world. But this phenomenon is wholly analyzable with classical Control Theory, and a careful analysis of the amplifier's stability. Further, this type of analysis virtually always reveals the specific mechanisms responsible for the subjective complaints associated with negative feedback.
There are good sounding components using feedback and no feedback, which is simply more proof you need to listen to the component, because the component really is an extension of the skills and philosophy of the designer, and there are good skilled designers employing both methods.
Precisely.
" Odd ordered harmonics are exacerbated by noise problems in the ground and the power supply..."

Fully agree here with Atmasphere. The more regulated (and noiseless) power supply the better sound quality will be. One can assert that the quality of the power amplifier is not in its signal path so much as in its power supplies. And in many (but not all) cases I would agree with it.

Simon