VREF A and B

falco_femoralis

Well-known member
I've noticed some circuits have Vref A and VREF B that bias each section of a dual op amp. Why? Both Vrefs are set with identical voltage dividers, so why are there two VREFs instead of just one?

Thank you
 
I'm not sure if this is the schematic @falco_femoralis is referring to, but I suspect this is a representative example: PedalPCB Snozzberry (One Control Strawberry Red). This schematic doesn't explicitly label all the VREFs, but you can see there is a local, dedicated voltage divider and capacitor everywhere the bias voltage is needed (I counted four, one per opamp).

As for why... there are different reasons. In some cases, it's almost certainly not necessary, and likely just a copy-paste propagation of an earlier error, or at least copy-paste of a circuit fragment taken out of context. I can't think of an example off the top of my head, but I'm pretty sure I've seen Chuck consolidate superfluous bias voltages into one when he gives a circuit his treatment.

As for a legit reason: depending on how VREF is used, in some cases, it might be sourcing or sinking non-trivial amounts of current, in which case isolating the current-heavy part might help keep it cleaner/more stable for other parts of the circuit. In the Snozzberry, at least for IC1.2, I suspect it was done so that the VREF impedance on the non-inverting input exactly matches the impedance of the inverting input. But I suspect the design would also work essentially the same with a single, low-impedance VREF (say 10k+10k divider, 47uF cap), and localized impedance-matching resistors.
 
Curious what others think, but my armchair guess is that separate VREFs aren't really necessary in that circuit either, especially with the 220uF VREF cap(s). I suppose the one place it might make sense is where it's used for the volume control, since that's the only DC path in that part of the circuit. All the other VREF uses look like they are just for bias, and should have minimal current draw.
 
Absolutely not necessary in that circuit, probably just there because that's what the original had.

There are lots of design decisions that are completely arbitrary and can be left out if you're not making an exact clone of something.

Hell, for that from scratch I'd just use a rail splitter and drop half a dozen components
 
Back
Top