By
Rosalfonso Bortoni (rb@thatcorp.com), AES Member,
and Wayne Kirkwood (wayne@proaudiodesignforum.com), AES Member
INTRODUCTION
In a paper presented at the 110th AES
Convention, Hebert and Thomas
described the “phantom menace,”
wherein phantom power faults can
damage audio input circuitry [1]. Their
approach focused on the analysis of a
“common-mode fault” occurring at the
microphone preamplifier inputs, which
was described as a “fault at both
inputs, simultaneously.”
However, this is not the only fault
condition that can occur. New fault
mechanisms are considered in this
paper, and we show that commonly
used protection schemes for popular
integrated microphone preamplifiers
do not always protect the preamplifiers
as expected.
We named these new fault mecha-
nisms as “single-ended fault” and
“differential fault,” which are
described in this work as “fault at one
input, with the other input open,” and
“fault at one input, with the other input
already grounded,” respectively.
We focus our analysis on simulated
behavior of the THAT 1510 and 1512 [2]
IC preamplifiers. The findings presented
are based on our extensive experience
and bench tests. Most of the principles
presented here apply equally well to
other IC preamplifiers, such as the Texas
Instruments INA217 [3] and INA163 [4],
and the Analog Devices SSM2019 [5].
Indeed, many of our findings may be
applied to other (discrete) preamplifier
designs, particularly those using bipolar
junction transistors as input devices.
FAULT MECHANISMS
Fig. 1 shows, from the perspective of
phantom power faults, an unprotected
This article was developed from a paper of
the same title (7909) presented at the 127th
Convention in New York.
J. Audio Eng. Soc., Vol. 58, No. 3, 2010 March
THAT Corporation, Milford, MA, 01757, USA
+48V
R1 R2
6k81 6k81
C1
M ic I N-
C2
M ic I N+
R4
SW1 SW2 1k21 1k21
Fig. 1. Microphone preamplifier with phantom power capability. Switches SW1 and
SW2, when properly closed, cause the three fault modes discussed in this paper.
microphone preamplifier with phantom
power capability. Phantom power
faults are simulated by closing
switches SW1 and/or SW2.
In normal operation, both SW1 and
SW2 are open and the differential
microphone signal is connected
between the junction of R1 and C1,
and the junction of R2 and C2. Closing
both switches simultaneously simu-
lates the common-mode fault described
by Hebert and Thomas. Closing one
(or the other) individually while the
other switch remains open simulates
the “single-ended” fault. Closing the
first switch, then the second switch
(while the first one remains closed)
simulates a “differential” fault.
Our analysis was intended to
determine the voltages and current
paths that appear during each of the
fault modes under discussion, as
well as the magnitudes of the tran-
sient signals. The basic circuit used
V+
I N-
C3
100n
R G1
V+
RG OUT Pre OUT
REF
V-
R G2
I N+
C4
R5 V- 100n
n
for simulations is shown in Fig. 2.
This circuit includes a simplified
front-end circuit with external gain and
bias resistors (RG, R4, and R5, respec-
tively), input-coupling capacitors (C1
and C2), and phantom power connec-
tions (+48 V and 6.81 kΩ resistors R1
and R2).
The front end is represented by the
input transistors Q1 and Q2, their
respective base-emitter reverse-bias
protection diodes Q3 and Q4, and
internal (ESD protection) diodes D11,
D12, D13, D14, D21, D22, D23, and
D24 [2].
Simulations of current and voltages
flowing in this circuit were made for
all three variations of fault conditions,
with five different values of input
capacitors (C1 and C2). The input
capacitors simulated include three
commonly used values: 22 µF, 47 µF,
and 100 µF, and two other less-
common values, 220 µF and ➥
197
 The 48 -Volt Phantom Menace Returns
first finds a discharge path to the V–
V+
Simplified fr
ffront
ont
n end circuit
rail through several paths internal to the
+48V IC (see Fig. 4). The most direct is
through electrostatic discharge (ESD)
R1 R2
1k5 1k5 protection diodes D12 and D22. Note
D11 D21 D23 D13
6k81 6k81 that it reaches a peak of approximately
C1
1.2 amperes; the duration of the current
M ic I N-
IN- spike depends on the size of the input-
Q1 coupling capacitors.
R G1 Q3
Because this current is so large, and
because the diodes D12 and D22 are
RG
small devices intended to protect
R G2 against the smaller energies involved
Q4 in ESD, the voltage across these
C2 Q2
M ic I N+
IN+ components increases to the point that
other devices begin to conduct. The
SW1 SW2
R4 R5 charge on C1 also finds its way
1k21 1k21
D12 D22 D24 D14 through Q3 in series with D14, while
the charge on C2 finds its way through
Q4 in series with D24. Fig. 4 shows
V-
these currents, which simulation
Fig. 2. Microphone preamplifier basic input circuit used for simulations predicts will reach about 720 mA.
D14 and D24 are also ESD protec-
tion devices, while Q3 and Q4 are
C ommon-Mode Fault Fig. 3. Voltage across intended to protect the input transistors
5 bias resistors R4 and R5 (Q1 and Q2) from having their base-
during the common-mode
0 emitter junctions reverse biased to the
fault, circuit of Fig. 2.
-5 point that they conduct as zener
-10 diodes. (Doing so would harm the low-
V R 4 & V R 5 - (V )

-15 noise behavior of these devices, thus

-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
-50
0 5
T ime - (ms )
470 µF. As might be expected, the
duration of the fault currents is much
longer with larger input-coupling
capacitors. The larger capacitors
require more energy to be dissipated
in the circuit and its protection
network [1].
COMMON-MODE FAULT
A common-mode fault occurs when
both inputs are shorted to ground
simultaneously, with phantom power
turned on, and without a microphone
connected. This fault is simulated by
closing switches SW1 and SW2 simul-
taneously (see Fig. 2).
Prior to the fault, both input capaci-
tors, C1 and C2, are charged to +48 V
with respect to ground. During the
198
22 mF
47 mF
100 mF
220 mF
470 mF
10 15 20
fault both inputs are shorted, simulta-
neously, to ground. When the positive
ends of C1 and C2 are grounded, (the
voltage across these capacitors is
stored and cannot change instanta-
neously) –48 V is developed across
bias resistors R4 and R5, and appears
at the IC inputs and IN– and IN+. This
voltage gradually returns to 0 V as the
capacitors discharge.
Fig. 3 shows an idealized (SPICE)
simulation of this voltage versus time
(the fault occurs at t = 2 ms). This
simulation assumes that the supply rails
(V+ and V–) for the IC are ±15 V. The
time it takes for C1 and C2 to discharge
is proportional to their value. The simu-
lation shows that after closing SW1 and
SW2, the charge on the input capacitors
compromising the noise performance
of the preamplifier.) Q3 and Q4 ensure
that the base-emitter junctions of Q1
and Q2 never see more than a volt or
so in reverse.
Once the voltage at IC pins IN– and
IN+ becomes more positive than the
negative supply rail (–15 V in the
simulation), current no longer flows in
the input pins, but shifts to flowing
only through R4 and R5. This accounts
for the second, longer time constant
evident in the 22 µF cap curve of Fig.
3. There is one exponential discharge
to the –15 V rail, based on the time
constant formed by the protection
diodes and the input-coupling capaci-
tors, and then a second to ground based
on the time constant formed by the
input bias resistors and the input-
coupling capacitors.
Referring to Fig. 5, the currents
through the input capacitors C1 and
C2 end up flowing into the V– pin of
the IC. As shown in Fig. 4, each input
capacitor delivers currents up to nearly
2 A; the total current flowing through
the negative power supply pin in the
IC is almost 4 A.
J. Audio Eng. Soc., Vol. 58, No. 3, 2010 March
 The 48 -Volt Phantom Menace Returns
P eak c urrent flowing 4000
in v nents
and the
c ommon-mode fault 3500

3000

2500
mA
2000

1500

1000

500

0
V - P in C1 C2 D12 D22 Q3 Q4 D14 D24
P eak C urrent, mA 3770 1925 1925 1166 1166 720 720 720 720

Fig. 4. Current distribution during the common-mode fault

C ommon-Mode Fault Fig. 5. Total fault

current flowing S ingle-E nded Fault
0 5
through the IC
0
-0.5 (at V– pin)
-5
-1 -10
-15
IV- pin - (A)

-1.5
V R 4 - (V )

-20
-2
-25
-2.5 -30
22 mF -35 22 mF
-3 47 mF 47 mF
100 mF -40 100 mF
-3.5 220 mF -45 220 mF
470 mF
-4
470 mF Fig. 6. Voltage -50
0 5 10 15 20
0 5 10 15 20 across bias T ime - (ms )
T ime - (ms )
resistor R4

For the common-mode fault, no When SW1 is closed, –48 V appears tion), fault currents stop flowing
current flows through the base-emitter instantaneously across bias resistor R4, through the IC and the remaining
junctions of input transistors Q1 and as shown in Fig. 6. As in the common- charge on C1 bleeds off through R4.
Q2 because they are reversed biased mode fault, input capacitor C1 As in the common-mode fault, this
during the fault. In addition, no discharges to the V– rail primarily gives rise to the two time constants
current flows through the gain resistor through protection diode D12, but also evident in Fig. 6.
RG. As well, the fault currents in the through Q3 in series with D14. Fig. 7 shows the levels of these
input bias resistors R4 and R5 are Additionally, in this mode, since the currents. In the single-ended fault, the
relatively small (approximately 40 IN– pin initially remains near –48 V, simulation predicts that the input
mA peak for 1.21 kΩ resistors). current flows through Q3 in series with capacitor will deliver a peak current of
RG and D24, and through Q3 in series almost 2.4 A, almost all of which
SINGLE-ENDED FAULT with RG, the base-emitter junction of flows through the IC’s negative supply
A single-ended fault occurs when only Q2, and D22. For simplicity, we only pin (see Figs. 7 and 8). Individual
one input is connected to ground with describe the case in which C1 is components within the IC are exposed
phantom power turned on, and without connected to ground. The results are to significant currents.
a microphone connected. This type of symmetrical if, instead, C2 is To generate the simulation data
fault is simulated by closing one connected to ground. Once the IN– pin presented here, the gain resistor, RG,
switch in Fig. 1, SW1 or SW2, while reaches the negative supply rail was set to 10 Ω. This corresponds to a
the other remains open. (assumed to be –15 V in the simula- high-gain condition. RG plays a ➥
J. Audio Eng. Soc., Vol. 58, No. 3, 2010 March 199
 The 48 -Volt Phantom Menace Returns

P eak c urrent flowing 2500

in various c omponents
and paths during the
s ingle-ended fault

2000

1500

mA

1000

500

0
C1 V - P in D12 Q3 RG D14 D24 Q2 D22
P eak C urrent, mA 2308 2220 1166 1103 589 514 300 289 241

Fig. 7. Current distribution during the single-ended fault

S ingle-E nded Fault Fig. 8. Current its associated input capacitor to fully
through input discharge before the second short
0
capacitor C1
occurs. However, the authors have
found that the largest currents flow if
-0.5
the first input capacitor is completely
discharged before the second input is
IC 1 - (A)

-1
-1.5
-2
-2.5
0 5
T ime - (ms )
very important role here because its
value determines the amount of current
that flows through input transistor Q2
and protection diode D24. The higher
the value of RG, the lower this current
will be. For relatively high RG values
(low preamplifier gains), the current
path to the V– rail is mostly through
protection diodes Q3 and D14, and the
peak current is reduced. For single-
ended faults, the highest currents are
generated with the preamp set to the
highest gain condition.
DIFFERENTIAL FAULT
A differential fault occurs when the
two inputs are shorted to ground
200
22 mF
47 mF
100 mF
220 mF
470 mF
10 15 20
sequentially, with phantom power
turned on, and without a microphone
connected. At first glance, this fault
might be considered a pair of single-
ended faults in sequence, but in the
single-ended fault, one input is shorted
while the other remains open. In this
paper, the authors define the differen-
tial fault to occur when the second
input is shorted after the first input has
been shorted, and where the first input
remains shorted during the second
input’s short.
Of course, the time between the two
successive shorts will not necessarily
follow any particular pattern. The first
short need not persist long enough for
shorted to ground. Accordingly, this is
the case analyzed in detail.
The simulation starts at time t = 0
with SW2 closed. Input capacitor C2 is
connected to ground and contains no
charge. At time t = 2 ms, SW1 is
closed, which shorts input capacitor C1
to ground. The results are equally valid
for the other possibility, C1 connected
to ground followed by C2.
When the differential fault occurs,
a –48 V transient appears across bias
resistor R4 (Fig. 9). Input capacitor C1
supplies high currents (Fig. 10) as it
discharges. As in the other fault mech-
anisms, the simulation shows that this
current flows to the V– rail by splitting
through several paths: protection diode
D12; protection diodes Q3 and D14;
Q3 in series with RG and D24; Q3 in
series with RG, input transistor Q2,
and protection diode D22; and through
Q3, RG, Q2, and input capacitor C2.
As with the other mechanisms, after
the voltage across R4 becomes more
positive than the V– supply (assumed
J. Audio Eng. Soc., Vol. 58, No. 3, 2010 March
 The 48 -Volt Phantom Menace Returns
here to be –15 V), the current through Fig. 9 Voltage across
Diff
ffe rential Fault
Differential bias resistor R4
the IC drops to almost nothing, and the 5
remaining charge bleeds off through
0
R4. Fig. 11 shows the associated fault
-5
currents through these paths.
-10
In the simulation, approximately
40% (a little over 1.1 A) of C1’s -15

V R 4 - (V )
discharge current flows to the negative -20
supply rail through ESD protection -25
diode D12. The other 60% (almost 1.8 -30
A) flows through reverse Vbe protec- -35 22 mF
tion diode Q3. Only a small portion of 47 mF
-40 100 mF
Q3’s current flows through ESD
-45 220 mF
protection diode D14; the majority of 470 mF
current flows through gain resistor RG -50
0 5 10 15 20
(set to 10 Ω in this simulation). The T ime - (ms )
RG current flows through the base-
Fig. 10. Current
emitter junction of Q2 and capacitor Diff
ffe rential Fault
Differential through input capacitor
C2, and then to ground through SW2 0 C1
(which is permanently closed). No
current flows through protection -0.5

diodes D24 and D22.

-1
The differential fault produces a
current loop between the inputs,
IC 1 - (A)

-1.5
formed by the reverse Vbe protection
diode at one input, the gain resistor, the -2
other input transistor, and the other
-2.5 22 mF
(previously discharged and grounded) 47 mF
input capacitor. The loop current is 100 mF
-3
primarily limited by the gain resistor, 220 mF
RG. As a result, the peak differential- 470 mF
-3.5
0 5 10 15 20
fault current is a function of the gain T ime - (ms )
setting of the microphone preampli- ➥

P eak c urrent flowing 3000

in various c omponents
and paths during the
diff
differential
f erential fault
2500

2000

mA

1500

1000

500

0
C1 Q3 RG Q2 C2 V - P in D12 D14
P eak C urrent, mA 2988 1784 1629 1629 1617 1319 1166 155

Fig. 11. Current distribution during the differential fault

J. Audio Eng. Soc., Vol. 58, No. 3, 2010 March 201
 AES ANTHOLOGY Ha
ma
sa
ki
et
al.

AVAILABLE
11 Sc
ree
n
12
14
13
17 15 Ad
Lis va
ten nc
ed
are ing 16 M ult
a 1 Scr ich
ee an
Up 18 19 2 n ne
l
pe 3 Au
r la 6 dio
1 yer 4 Sy
Sc 5 ste
2 ree ms
n 8 Lis
3 te n 11 S cr

Int
6 4 a re in g 7
ee
n
a 12
5 14
8 1 0
Lis Mi d 9

ro
ten dl e 13
lay 15
are ing 7 er 17 L is
ten
a

du are ing 16
1
Mid 10 9 2
Scr
ee Fu a
dle n ll
lay 3 Up 18 19
pe

ct
20 er 6 r la
S 4
S1 cree 5
yer
21 n

ion
8

SPATIAL SOUND TECHNIQUES

Lis 11
S2 te n S cr
a re in g ee
22 7 n
LF a 12
E 14

T Lis 10
Mi d 9
ten dl e 13
are ing lay
er 1 7 L is
15
Fig L hi a ten
ure A
2 E se ows eanr are ing 16
20 : LSos pe tio tla c h 1 Scr a
Co 0 ued r n oyloer 2 ee 5.1
ndi o appr m4ualtnicriesspeackept s: hi gy—
n 18
3 Up 19
tionf oa d ha on erusa sto w 6 pe
r la
inc louLocuhe ednnelsp al rara ric ith 4 yer
the lud dsp ds.pPe ited aautdiai dngem n al pa 5
Fula i e a
a o
l q ere p
l n ge ng uaske rkt er by sosys ua ntvi f ers
8 Lis 11
na d q ner app edr- 2 cs D untemlity oew 2s 2 di te n S cr
s l p ua ati ro ba on ur d t e , s.2 vid a re in g 7
ee
n
5th.1yste roc lity e 1o-n 19 ach sed cent aInnd echn valu yste ed a
14
12
e ms ess va of es m rat stBru iq ati ms int 1 0
the pr a ing lu ap to A ull es ecgtio ue on a o Mi d 9
i r
in pa ma e2n - al atio pro th(e iclhoudon ulnt s. P —i nd hre tl a t dl e 13
F p x a t t la 1 1
in 3cahs per ry t ot 4i , 8g, or n. R ria ccrlud nnspehae , d art s P ech e b yer 7 L is 5
wh clud epar s co hem nclu 9 ithm eco te p leaatioingellos kfeurnsd eals 1, p art nol road ten
ing 1
de ich ed ate 2 -nce es ded s, c ITrdUin erc yern) o pwaetir am wi ub1l 2 o Sgycr o a rea 6
m sM criid thi to vol 4,r6ne-d of t he Roed -gRa eptu f a al ent th b ishe 2f an , een b
a
F3
ch 18
m erci bed s fie dem ume .1T9 his Srea, e ciongm, nBdSm77al c spa audi l pr ina d in 3 e
les div Up 19
mTaubltlic al a hav ld h1 ons . So hese volumxecae s m stoen ix 5.1ue tia o 6inc ura pe
o e p p r d a i s l s i l te 4 s a ide r la
w vie h3an pli e n as- 10tra me losu frm one t “aFu age tionng , re sou yst ple so ning 5ccur be
d yer
is ell d su nelRepcati ot a pass te th his udbjsepce taanl msi thlel”, ,baun tech pro n8df ems L s e un a ate tw
t d
in on ocu rrou spa roodnus ll fo ed, e e M ori tsaaker arddlye a td t niq uc eld , is te n s xte fie ea, ly1, en S cr d i d r 1 e
ab the cha me nd tial c. tTiohn und eve voliddclael re ls arisee ppl rans ues, tion , a re sin gtere nsio7 ld re by an a app e en
B ly b firs rting nted sou aud esecondth n i utio rleavyie ikel 3ucnha y di mis sig , a tr
o uc ph
o n
o p1re me co 1o2a
r
pe ecau e sa t de the by nd io a hel iteiior nws f the nar ewr sonlyyto void rect sion - M 10 f p t ac ony f t 4sen ans usti che
tec riod se id t cad tra rese sys s we p to ayfor sys y p and be abl ly to i dd illu hys ou9 . T he p tati of cal s th 1 3
s s
o t
we hni of f t hat e of il th arc em ll a do intoxpteerm oce pa cov y Fini e r
a
l t
eenlaey on cal tica h1e7 l syc L on, 15an even at ai
i i
th re que 197 his mu th Aat h pa s, w s pr cum m im s ae ss per ere gure e udi ’sre tha acc wa tte oa tennd ana t o m to r e l a h is a
an e A the s, fo 0 t mo ltich e 21 EleSad per hic ovi en ains ndts thro s ar
n d 3: Rnt o il ars t g ura ve r, w arceouingapp lyti1 6r so re
on d p ES topi r ex o 20 st o ann st c s1t1o6ts. T h a ding t the trea meth ugh e
ph epw lu to M en cy fro h a s ro ca un co
ch ysic raoydsu: sion coniderat , de nts 1 ile s tic p ach l ph dfie nstr
ste ly rpo in t c of am 00. f th el s entu whh C
u he re an or m c od an al ct . e p a8 o r1 e y l u
a h
to reo sm ses e 1 a n ple, So- e ke pati ry, ere nmvpe ot insi igin om
o e n s p rag ne sc theion Tche vinc s suUpepned nd s met inc9 s th sica d w ct, m
c l i s on s e f r o im ip at l ith o
na the pho al , st 97 ow are cal y p al a wh the hanstio art ght s o p - o m s e o de f l
pa u
t i m mpr atic pati ntist und iatpiop nshim icie riymer ndf es m es o are appr in a re o
l
mi l B birt nic l am arts 0s. T ou not led q ape udi en i fiel is, hn, iB cu int f
e o a e om en al ’s fie roa fo or nt ari iel a f ba oa l r
cro ell h o tec ou wh he t-o co ua rs o h t c d Pi a ow arrlil n
f s
l
p
pp s
r m ise gin aud wa ld ch r ehxepr per ly ds w nag two sed ch is-
M ph La f m ni nt h e - v d a a o g e y , o
Ge p erc ac o r ad eer io, o rec s c eorfim cep po ith ing -ch on to y e u
ult on bs u qu o re q curr prin ered raph re t s co uld locea 5veor,
ich e a e ltic es f o ua en t a in on ake me rea ted f 12 srmhailn ep he e op ’s
s w f c on an theent tu n so to an an
an nd xpe ha als ve dra t an nth m ic n s o osy tua , a s i m ted con hil on str be v s al a s m re ne
ne lo ri nn o rla ph th ol uc sy fro of a on- wi for o,ph20lly. nd e i l a in cep e th ceiv uctio dist alidi cues tere e de con l
l a ud m el co p. on ol og h
e st e m ge e th th. y a04It i ith r i the tio e ing n ing ty a op gr -
ud sp nt sp nta T ic og y det m th . n t M do Ms ap er t i e 19 n t ste o a u of t ho ee
io ea s ati in he s l y, pu ail s a e th ce s he os pt eyr a s 3 ha re f pp ish th the ni
sy ker on al a s m A eft for blis . T nd
ste c st u at ES of a he he a c e lou oun aim t rec ed i h8ap–1p1pro t h a 0s. T t gre oph “how roac ed i e sp lis c
ms han ere dio eri f l y t re d df of or n s s m ac n h w on h e n d ati -
a , l d h a sp ie d y h d e o ic o s t i a
an nel oph , in al th nth exh inten by ai etica tive eak ld w acc ing stem ore can i f f e re a ut o ap do are ffer l
d s.
tec on clu at olo ibit ts go m a lly and er a he urat eng de a qu be r e n re, f a pro ” m th -
hn y din is gy ing
us g rel po od t acc and art nd n the ely inee sign esti ana c e s how com ach ulti e
olo in the ev on c sit in ur pe isti mic y rep rs, , r on lyz b eve m is -
g a io p a r c m r e o e e
gy m ori ant fo l ap n, ract te a cep ma roph ake ese for cor f th ed p t w r, so rcia a
ma
y
ul gi
tip - fie rwa plic whic ice, cous tual nne one rec ntin exam ding e pa hys e e n me l
ap le ld rd ati h o ti ly. r c or g p te ra ica t h -
pe l As of a , an ons. mak r ma cal r On to fa han ding som le, d chn digm lly e
ar a p d S e y e t s n s e o i o
to er rge a ru plic the om s th no pres he o hion els a of no no que, and r
m s, as liste le, atio mo ewh em t w ent the a m vai mu tion t se and
he ake is t ning an a n. st a ere hard ork ation r ha ix lable sic; al re t ou
nc su he a cc pp in t in s nd th t the fe t
e t ch c rea ur
he sy ase r ate ro the o u mo do , ap at w o th y u r-
pr
su ste w equ re iat mi se fo re t not pro ork em se
cc m ith ire co e dd r m han alw ach s a in
es s n ap le
s o im wa s a stru pr of ain on ays es th es-
v
f s pra ef er cti v oa al str e l so a
ter ct iel y l on
eo ica d s arg of
ph l f yn e
ch l th ea ist un t
de is m p eni d
pe lie ra ng
This anthology—with papers
on or th nu a so nd s a ct
ic m
red os s.
es m un
i
uc t ap Thi r of field
b e d
s o w i-
n ay
the
divided into three broad sections:
tio p s h lo o
ns lica as ud ve
tha tio te pe r a
t r ns nde ak
s historical reviews, systems and tech-
ely to d -
pa da to
rti te,
all
nology, perceptual and quality evalua-
y
tion—is Part 2 of an AES series on
spatial sound techniques. Part 1, pub-
lished in 2004, deals with binaural
approaches. Part 2 concentrates on
the fundamental principles of loud-
speaker-based multichannel spatial
audio systems, including approaches
to the creation of a spatial soundfield,
the generation of appropriate percep-
tual cues, reproduction, and quality
evaluation.

Purchase online at www.aes.org/publications/anthologies/

For more information email Donna Vivero at dmv@aes.org
or call +1 212 661 8528, ext.42
 The 48 -Volt Phantom Menace Returns
Table 1: Transient voltages and currents of the simulated fault conditions.

V peak mA peak

Fault R4 R5 C1 C2 D12 D22 D14 D24 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 RG V–

Common-Mode 48 48 1925 1925 1166 1166 720 720 0 0 720 720 0 3770

Single-Ended 48 23 2308 0 1166 241 514 300 0 289 1103 0 589 2220

Differential 48 14 2988 1617 1166 0 155 0 0 1629 1784 0 1629 1319

fier when the fault occurs, and will be
greatest at the highest gain.
FAULT SUMMARY
Table 1 provides a summary of the sim-
ulated transient voltages and currents in
each fault mode. The fault currents that
flow through the protection diodes and
input transistors are extremely high. In
the authors’ experience, no integrated
devices are capable of withstanding
such high currents without damage.
Since phantom power faults are essen-
tially inevitable, the most appropriate
solution is to provide an external pro-
tection network to divert these currents
safely around the IC.
Due to their physical design, the
exposed contacts of male TRS plugs
are more likely to accidentally touch
metal objects than the partially
shrouded XLR contacts. Thus, TRS
plugs are especially prone to causing
phantom faults. However, XLR
connectors are not immune to faults.
When an XLR connector is plugged
into a signal output, contact is made to
the outside shield first due to the phys-
ical design of the connector. Contact is
then made to each of the three signal
pins. The angle of insertion and condi-
tion of the connectors (oxidation,
exact length of the pin and the socket,
width of the pin and socket, etc.) will
vary, so the order in which the three
signal pins make contact is unpre-
dictable. Moreover, each individual
contact may be intermittent or
“bounce” as the connection is made.
Thus, any of the described phantom
faults can occur when devices are
plugged together.
Some equipment provides “pseudo-
balanced” or unbalanced outputs via
XLR connectors. When a connection is
made to the undriven signal leg, a low
or near-zero impedance connection is
established between the microphone
preamp input and ground, causing a ➥

FAULTS IN THE REAL WORLD

Phantom power faults can occur when:
A) a user connects a microphone
preamp input to a line-level output,
which has low output impedance and,
sometimes, output protection diodes
to the internal rails [1]
B) the cable plug accidentally touches
metal connected to ground (an
equipment rack, a metal enclosure,
the “sleeve” of a patch bay jack,
etc.)
C) a loose signal wire floating in a
cable or connector due to damage or
improper termination shorts to the
shield ground, or a floating shield
wire touches a signal contact
D) metallic contact to ground is made
to an exposed terminal block (such as
a barrier-strip) carrying microphone
level signals
E) a TRS male plug with phantom
energized on the tip and ring is
plugged into a patch bay, making
temporary contact with the grounded
jack sleeve on its way in.

J. Audio Eng. Soc., Vol. 58, No. 3, 2010 March 203

 The 48 -Volt Phantom Menace Returns

+48V
+48V

R1 R2
6k81 6k81 R1 R2
6k81 6k81
C1 4x 1N4148
4 C1
M ic I N- I N-
M ic I N- I N-
V+
D1 D2
C2
D3 D4 V- ZENER
M ic I N+ I N+
C2 D1 D2
M ic I N+ I N+
R4 R5
D3 D4 R bias R bias
R4 R5
R bias R bias

Fig. 12. 1N4148 bridge clamping the input signal to the rails Fig. 13. Zeners back-to-back clamping the input signal to
(not recommended) ground (not recommended)

single-ended fault. If the output is

actively balanced, the differential fault +48V

occurs as the two signal legs are

connected to the low-impedance output
nonsimultaneously. If the two legs
make simultaneous contact, as
suggested by Hebert/Thomas [1], this
generates a common-mode fault.
However, because common-mode
faults require simultaneous connection,
they seem the least likely to occur in
the real world.
PROTECTION SCHEMES
As described above, microphone
preamplifiers can be exposed to very
high currents when phantom power
faults occur. During experimentation,
it was found that many of the most
commonly used protection schemes do
not effectively protect ICs from these
faults. In particular, differential faults
can be very destructive when a pream-
plifier operates at high gain (low val-
ues for RG). The authors also discov-
ered that some protection schemes
introduce noise or distortion to the
audio signal in the preamplifier front
end. Some protection topologies are
sacrificial in nature, most notably those
using zener diodes. Zener diodes can
protect an IC from damage by behav-
ing as a fuse when the first fault
occurs. However, this first fault can
destroy the zener diodes, making them
204
R1 R2
6k81 6k81
C1
M ic I N-
C2
M ic I N+
Fig. 14. Bidirectional TVS to ground and between the inputs (not recommended)
unable to provide protection against
subsequent faults.
The following sections provide test
results and discussion about the effi-
cacy of many well-known protection
schemes.
1N4148 Bridge to Rails
Fig. 12 shows a common protection
scheme using four 1N4148 diodes in a
bridge configuration. This circuit
attempts to clamp the input signal to
the rail voltages, V+ and V– [3,4].
Unfortunately, these small-signal
diodes have too much forward voltage
drop at the currents involved to steer
TV S
I N-
D1
I N+
D2 D3
R4 R5
R bias R bias
enough current away from the IC.
Moreover, the bridge concept (even if
realized with power diodes) is ineffec-
tive against the input loop current gen-
erated during a differential fault.
Back-to-back Zener Diodes to
Ground
Fig. 13 shows a protection scheme
using four zener diodes in a paired,
back-to-back configuration, which
attempts to clamp the input signal rela-
tive to ground [5]. In the authors’ expe-
rience, this configuration will not reli-
ably protect the IC unless the zener
diodes are very large; ½ W and even
J. Audio Eng. Soc., Vol. 58, No. 3, 2010 March
 The 48 -Volt Phantom Menace Returns
1 W zeners do not survive the high cur-
+48V
rents (several amperes) generated by
some fault conditions. The situation is
exacerbated because the zener diodes
R1 R2
have significant voltage across them 6k81 6k81
when they conduct. During the fault,
they must dissipate significant power. C1
RS
Moreover, this scheme may give a M ic I N- I N-
47R min
false impression that it is working
because zeners will often fail as a short C2
RS ZENER
circuit. A single shorted zener will M ic I N+ I N+
47R min D1 D2
make the other zener it is connected to
appear to the IC input as a diode. When R4 R5
this happens, the preamp may success- D3 D4 R bias R bias
fully pass low input-level signals, but
will distort significantly at high levels.
One other consideration for the
zener approach is that it may not offer Fig. 15. Zeners back-to-back to ground with series resistors (effective protection
protection when the unit is powered but compromises noise)
off. As shown in the simulations, one
+48V
significant path for current to flow is to
the negative rail. If the input is mis-
connected to another preamp (powered
up with phantom turned on), the zener R1 R2
6k81 6k81
diodes will only prevent the inputs
from seeing signals up to their break- C1
RS 4x 1N5819
down voltage. This might be enough to M ic I N- I N-
47R min D1 D2
damage an unpowered IC.
V+

Bidirectional TVS
V-
Fig. 14 shows a protection scheme using C2
RS D3 D4
12–18 V bidirectional Transient Voltage M ic I N+
47R min
I N+

Suppression (TVS) diodes. Because the

TVS diodes are more rugged than typical R4 R5
R bias R bias
½ W and 1 W zeners, this scheme pro-
tects the IC in all three fault modes.
However, in the authors’ experience,
TVS diodes have high intrinsic capaci-
Fig. 16. Schottky diode bridge clamping inputs to the rail (not recommended)
tance and substantial nonlinearities.
These can interact with the source
+48V
impedance to cause significant distortion
to the signal. As a result, the authors do
not recommend using TVS diodes
R1 R2
directly across the preamp inputs for 6k81 6k81
phantom fault protection.
C1 4x 1N4004GP
1N4004
0 GP
RS
Zeners + Series Resistors M ic I N- I N-
47R min
Fig. 15 shows a protection scheme V+
using four zener diodes, in back-to-back D1 D2
configuration, with series resistors D3 D4 V-
placed in front of the zeners to limit the C2
RS
M ic I N+ I N+
fault currents. Jung and Garcia found 47R min
that the minimum value for the series
resistors should be approximately 47 Ω R4
R bias
R5
R bias
[6]. The resistance limits the current ➥
1
GP indicates “glass passivated,” which
reduces leakage and avoids the problems
mentioned above in connection with Fig. 17. 1N4004GP diode bridge clamping the inputs to the rail, plus input series
Schottky diodes. resistors (effective but compromises noise performance)
J. Audio Eng. Soc., Vol. 58, No. 3, 2010 March 205
 The 48 -Volt Phantom Menace Returns
this way tend to introduce noise and
+48V R1 R2 DC offset due to diode leakage. While
6k81 6k81
Hebert and Thomas once recom-
C1
RS 4x 1N4004G
4 P
1N4004GP 2x 1N4148
mended this approach, the authors now
RM1ic I N-R 2
6k81 6k81 10R min
D1 D2
I N-
recommend against it.
R G1

C1
RS 4x 1N4004G
1N4004GP
V4+ P 2x 1N4148 D5 1N4004 Bridge + Series Resistors
M ic I N- I N-
10R min RG
D1 D2
V-
D6
R G1 Fig. 17 shows a protection scheme
D3 D4
V+
D5 R G2
using 1N4004GP1 diodes in a bridge
C2
M ic I N+
RS RG I N+
configuration, with series resistors
10R min V-
D3 D4 D6 placed in front of the bridge to limit
R4 R5
C2
RS 1k21 1k21
R G2 the fault current. This circuit attempts
M ic I N+
10R min
I N+ to clamp the input signal to the power
R4 R5
rails. The 1N4004 diodes are inexpen-
1k21 1k21 sive and readily available.
The authors’ experience is that this
circuit will protect the part against all
three fault modes, provided the series
resistors are large enough. The 47 Ω
Fig. 18. Proposed protection scheme that incorporates two 1N4148 to steer the
currents away from the base-emitter protection diodes resistors shown are effective, but they
compromise noise performance at high
to a low-enough value that the zeners Schottky Diodes + Series gains. Previously, THAT Corporation
survive the fault. However, the addi- Resistors had suggested this scheme, with only
tional 94 Ω in series with the source Fig. 16 shows a protection scheme that 10 Ω series resistors. The authors have
compromises the noise performance of uses Schottky diodes in a bridge config- found that without more current limiting
high-performance IC preamps [1]. uration, clamping the input signal to the (extra resistance) this scheme will not
A compromise might be sought by rails, with two resistors placed in front protect the IC from differential faults.
reducing the series impedance and of the bridge to limit the fault current.
increasing the wattage of the zener Bridge + Series Resistors + B-E
The authors have found that the mini-
diodes. However, in the authors’ expe- diodes
mum value of these resistors, required to
rience, if the zeners are large enough to protect against differential faults, is Table 1 reveals that very large cur-
handle the fault currents, they increase 47 Ω. Like the circuit of Fig. 15, this rents flow through the input transis-
distortion. Of course, if they are too compromises noise performance [1]. tors, RG, and internal reverse V be
small, they become sacrificial. Moreover, Schottky diodes used in diodes, Q3 and Q4 (Fig. 2), during ➥

P eak c urrent flowing

4000
in various c omponents
and paths during the
3500
c ommon-mode fault

3000

2500

mA
2000

1500

1000

500

0
C1 C2 D12 D22 D14 D24 Q3 Q4 V - P in
T ype A , No P rotec tion 1925 1925 1166 1166 720 720 720 720 3770
T ype B , S eries R es is tors 1198 1198 730 730 438 438 438 438 2337
T ype C , B P lus B ridge Diodes 3198 3198 11 11 0 0 0 0 21
T ype D, C P lus R ev-V be Diodes 3198 3198 11 11 0 0 0 0 21

Fig. 19. Current distribution during the common-mode fault for the circuits type A, B, C, and D
206 J. Audio Eng. Soc., Vol. 58, No. 3, 2010 March
 The 48 -Volt Phantom Menace Returns
differential faults. Differential faults resistors at RS may be reduced to NEW PROTECTION SCHEME
are most destructive to Q3 and Q4. 10 Ω each, so noise performance is SIMULATION
Fig. 18 shows a protection scheme not unduly compromised. The authors After analyzing the three fault mecha-
that includes a pair of 1N4148 diodes have found that this protection nisms, and considering the various pro-
to steer currents around Q3 and Q4 scheme is effective against all three tection schemes presented above, the
during faults. With the addition of fault modes, and recommend it in authors focused on the circuit shown in
these diodes, the current-limiting preference to others. Fig. 18. This circuit was tested with ➥

P eak c urrent flowing 3500

in various c omponents
and paths during the
s ingle-ended fault 3000

2500

2000
mA

1500

1000

500

0
C1 D12 D22 D14 D24 Q2 Q3 RG V - P in
T ype A , No P rotec tion 2308 1166 241 514 300 289 1103 589 2220
T ype B , S eries R es is tors 1332 682 120 290 170 163 622 332 1261
T ype C , B P lus B ridge Diodes 3199 10 0 0 0 34 34 34 10
T ype D, C P lus R ev-V be Diodes 3199 10 0 0 0 36 2 36 10

Fig. 20. Current distribution during the single-ended fault for the circuits type A, B, C, and D

P eak c urrent flowing 3500

in various c omponents
and paths during the
diff
f erential fault
differential 3000

2500

2000

mA
1500

1000

500

0
C1 C2 D12 D14 Q2 Q3 RG V - P in
T ype A , No P rotec tion 2988 1617 1166 155 1629 1784 1629 1319
T ype B , S eries R es is tors 1519 770 614 85 794 878 794 698
T ype C , B P lus B ridge Diodes 3201 353 10 0 369 369 369 10
T ype D, C P lus R ev-V be Diodes 3202 610 9 0 630 19 630 9

Fig. 21. Current distribution during the differential fault for the circuits type A, B, C, and D
J. Audio Eng. Soc., Vol. 58, No. 3, 2010 March 207
 The 48 -Volt Phantom Menace Returns
40
30
20
10
V 0
-10
-20
-30
-40
0 5 10 15
Fig. 22. During the fault, in the circuit of Fig. 21, the negative rail (blue) follows the voltage across R4 (black)
a variety of microphone preamplifier
ICs [2–6], and found to be both robust
in protecting the ICs and “transparent”
in audio performance.
To understand why this circuit
worked so well, the authors ran simu-
lations of all three fault modes with
different elements of the protection
scheme shown in Fig. 18. The results
are shown in Figs. 19, 20, and 21.
Each Figure shows a simulation for
four different circuits, as follows:
A) circuit of Fig. 2
B) circuit of Fig. 2, with two 10 Ω
input series resistors (RS)
C) circuit in B, plus the diode bridge
(D1–D4) to the power supply rails
D) circuit in C, plus base-emitter
diodes (D5 and D6). This is the cir-
cuit shown in Fig. 18.
Other circuit parameters are: R4 =
R5 = 1.21 kΩ, RG = 10 Ω, and V+ /
V– = ±15 V.
The addition of 10 Ω input series
resistors reduces fault currents, but
20 Ω (total) is not sufficient to protect
the IC from differential faults. The
experiments suggest that all preampli-
fier ICs will fail without some input
series resistance. As well, although
beyond the scope of this paper, the
authors suspect that discrete designs
will be similarly challenged by differ-
ential faults.
Adding the diode bridge to the rails
appears (in the simulations) to provide
signal clamping and current steering,
but it also increases the fault current.
The bridge steers voltages and currents
208
20 25 30 35 40
ms
away from the IC (and into the “stiff”
negative supply rail) by reducing the
impedance seen by the input capacitors
while it clamps. This is why the
discharge current is larger. However,
by steering currents away from the IC,
the diode bridge also significantly
reduces the damaging currents flowing
in the IC.
The external base-emitter diodes D5
and D6 are in parallel with internal
diodes Q3 and Q4. They serve to
reduce the current flowing in the inter-
nal protection diodes. D5 and D6 allow
the input series resistors to be reduced
from 47 Ω to 10 Ω while still protect-
ing the part. This is important to main-
taining a low noise floor.
The equivalent input noise of the
microphone preamplifier IC in ques-
tion with 60 dB gain and its input
shorted, is 1 nV/√Hz. With 10 Ω input
resistors, the input noise is increased to
1.15 nV/√Hz, a compromise of 1.2 dB.
With 47 Ω input resistors, the input
noise goes up to 1.6 nV/√Hz, a
compromise of 4.1 dB. Using
typical 150 Ω microphone
source impedance and 10 Ω
resistors, the dynamic range is
degraded by 0.4 dB. For the
same source impedance and
47 Ω resistors, the dynamic
range is compromised by 1.6dB.
Therefore, by using 10 Ω resis-
tors instead of 47 Ω resistors,
the dynamic range is increased Fig. 23. Simple representation of a bench
by 1.2 dB. power supply or three-terminal regulator.
As shown in Figs. 19–21, the Typically, C1>>C2.
45 50 55 60 65
differential fault is the most dangerous
type due to the high currents flowing
through the input transistors and base-
emitter protection diodes. These high
currents flow through the resistor gain
RG, providing a convenient spot for
noninvasive current measurement and
evaluation of protection effectiveness.
Simulations, although helpful, can
miss phenomenon witnessed in the real
world. For example, the data in Figs. 19
through Fig. 21 assumes the bridge
diodes clamp the IC inputs exactly 0.6 V
volts from the ±15 V power supplies
(which are themselves modeled as
perfect batteries). In practice, the power
supplies are not batteries, and the clamp-
ing is not ideal.
In particular, simulator power
supplies have low Thevenin impedance
for both sinking and sourcing current. In
the real world, most positive-power-
supply regulators are only able to source
current, and do a poor job of sinking it.
The negative-supply regulator will likely
be a good sink but a poor source. ➥
V in V in -15V -15V
C1 GND C2
J. Audio Eng. Soc., Vol. 58, No. 3, 2010 March
 The 48 -Volt Phantom Menace Returns
+48V
R1 R2
6k81 6k81
C1
RS
M ic I N-
10R min
47uF
C2
RS
M ic I N+
10R min
47uF
C5
47uF min
Fig. 24. New protection scheme with diode-isolated rails (D7, D8) and bypass capacitors (C5, C6) to ground
Often, if a power-supply output is driven
past the regulated voltage by a phantom-
related fault, it has no means to correct
the error and will go out of regulation.
Consequently, the power supply will not
instantly absorb the capacitor’s transient
discharge. In this case, the negative rail
“moves,” and the clamping voltage is no
longer V–. Under these conditions the
currents flowing through the IC can be
significantly different from those
predicted by the simulations.
REAL-WORLD TESTING
Given that the SPICE simulations pre-
sented above do not represent the real
world of regulated power-supply
behavior, the authors measured the rec-
ommended circuit shown in Fig. 18 on
the bench. The results presented earlier
show that the differential fault is the
worst-case scenario, so the authors
concentrated on that one. As well, the
current flowing through the IC’s front-
end stage is essentially equal to the
current flowing through the gain resis-
tor RG and the internal base-emitter
protection diodes. Thus, the differen-
tial voltage across RG permits indirect
measurement of internal junction cur-
rents. Limiting transient currents
through these junctions is the key to
protecting against differential faults.
J. Audio Eng. Soc., Vol. 58, No. 3, 2010 March
4x 1N4004GP
1N4004G
4 P 2x 1N4148
4
I N-
R G1
D1 D2
D5
RG
D3 D4 D6
R G2
I N+
* 18V
8 TV S optional
opt
p ional
TV S
* * R4 R5
C6 R bias R bias
D9 D10 47uF
min
To see how this circuit actually
behaves, the authors observed various
waveforms in the circuit. A digital
oscilloscope was used to capture the
waveforms.
Fig. 22 shows the voltage across the
bias resistor R4 (black trace) and the
voltage at the V– rail (blue trace)
during a phantom power fault.
Initially, the input voltage is zero and
V– is –15 V. When the fault occurs,
the input voltage is not clamped at V–,
as predicted by the simulation, but
drops to approximately –35 V, driven
there by the discharge current in C1.
Substantially the same behavior mani-
fests regardless of the fault mode.
Initially it was suspected that the
voltage to which the supply is driven
would depend on the capacitance on
the negative supply. But, after some
investigation, the authors observed that
the circuit was clamping to the bench
power supply’s regulator input voltage,
which has a much larger filter capaci-
tance than its output.
Fig. 23 shows a typical three-termi-
nal regulator with reverse-polarity
protection. The regulator output, typi-
cally an emitter follower, cannot
source the current required to clamp
transients. Regulator reverse-polarity
protection assures that transients more
V+
D7
1N4148
4
C3
100n
V+
OUTT
OU OU T
R EF
V-
C4
100n
D8
1N4148
4
V-
negative than the regulator input volt-
age get steered to the filter capacitance
at the regulator’s input. With the linear
supply used in the tests, the unregu-
lated supply voltage will determine the
clamp voltage.
Other loads connected to the regula-
tor can also absorb the transient.
Uncontrolled, a phantom fault applied
to the circuit of Fig. 18 can corrupt the
entire V– supply. The authors expected
that this could damage the IC preamp,
as well as other circuitry, unless it can
tolerate the transient increase in supply
voltage.
One means of clamping the negative
excursion is to add a bypass capacitor
from the IC’s V– pin to ground (the
same might be used for V+ as well) to
form a capacitive voltage divider. (See
C5 and C6 in Fig. 24.) During a fault, a
portion of the input capacitor’s charge
is transferred to the bypass capacitor
through the bridge-protection diode
(D2 or D4). Bypass capacitors give the
energy in the input capacitors (C1 or
C2) a less destructive path to ground.
But, in order to limit the negative-
supply transient to a safe level
(perhaps –18 V), a large capacitor is
required. The charge distributes based
on the size of the bypass capacitor rela-
tive to the input-coupling capacitor. ➥
209
 AES is now a scitopia.org partner

three hundred fifty years of content

three and a half million documents
twenty leaders in science & technology research
one gateway to it all

Search scitopia.org to find quality content from leaders in science

and technology research. Scitopia.org generates relevant and
focused results – with no Internet noise. From peer-reviewed journal
articles and technical conference papers to patents and more,
scitopia.org is a researchers’ heaven on earth.

search

Integrating Trusted Science + Technology Research

Scitopia.org was founded by: Acoustical Society of America · American Geophysical

Union · American Institute of Physics · American Physical Society · American
Society of Civil Engineers · American Society of Mechanical Engineers · American
Vacuum Society · ECS · IEEE · Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics ·
Institute of Physics Publishing · Optical Society of America · Society of Automotive
Engineers · Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics · SPIE
New partners include: Audio Engineering Society · Institution of Mechanical
Engineers · International Union of Crystallography · Royal Society of Chemistry
 The 48 -Volt Phantom Menace Returns
80

60

40

20

V 0

-20

-40

-60

-80
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
ms
Fig. 25. Isolation diodes without capacitors C5 and C6. Input voltage (black) and isolated negative rail (blue).

40

30

20

10

V 0

-10

-20

-30

-40
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
ms
Fig. 26. Voltage at IN+ (black) and V– (blue), for the circuit of Fig. 24 as is.

40

30

20

10

V 0

-10

-20

-30

-40
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
ms
Fig. 27. Voltage at IN+ (black) and V– (blue), for the circuit of Fig. 24 including 18 V TVS diode at D10; C6 = 47 µF.

To limit the voltage increase on the
supply-bypass capacitor to, say, 3 V,
the bypass capacitor must be many
times larger than the input-coupling
capacitor. This is often impractical.
However, on the bench, the authors
J. Audio Eng. Soc., Vol. 58, No. 3, 2010 March
found, somewhat surprisingly, that the
IC preamplifiers were not damaged by
the brief negative supply transient
to –35 V shown in Fig. 22. None-
theless, a large disturbance on the
negative supply might damage other
circuitry, and so should be at least
isolated, if not eliminated altogether.
Accordingly, the authors sought a
means to isolate them from the –15 V
supply and other circuitry.
In Fig. 24, diodes D7 and D8 ➥
211
 The 48 -Volt Phantom Menace Returns
40
30
20
10
V 0
-10
-20
-30
-40
0 1 2 3
Fig. 28. Differential fault. Voltages across the gain resistor (black) and the isolated V– voltages (blue), for 0.1 µF and 47 µF
bypass capacitors.
isolate the IC’s V+ and V– pins from
the power supply rails supplying the
rest of the system. D7 and D8 are
forward biased during normal opera-
tion, but reversed biased when a phan-
tom power fault occurs or an external
voltage source is applied to the
preamplifier inputs (+48 V discharg-
ing from the output capacitors of an
AC-coupled line output previously
connected to a phantom power source,
for example). The protection bridge
(D1–D4) terminates on the IC side of
the supply diodes D7 and D8, contain-
ing any overvoltage from faults to
within the preamp system itself. A
modest-sized bypass capacitor (C5
and C6, shown as 47 µF) serves to
absorb some of the charge during the
fault, limiting the voltage excursion at
the supply pins.
Fig. 25 shows the IC input voltage
at Rbias (black trace) and the isolated
V– pin voltage (blue trace), with
capacitor C6 = 0.1 µF, during a phan-
tom power fault on the Mic IN+. The
voltage at the IC’s IN+ pin drops to
approximately –48 V. Without a
means to absorb the input capacitor’s
charge, V– tracks the input voltage.
Fig. 26 shows the voltage at IN+ and
V– for C6 = 47 µF. Note, of course,
that if C1 and C2 are scaled, the tran-
sient peak will scale directly unless C6
is also scaled similarly. Partly for this
reason, and considering low-frequency
response versus typical preamplifier
input impedances, the authors recom-
212
4 5 6 7 8 9
ms
mend that the input-coupling capaci-
tors be no larger than 100 µF. As
shown in Fig. 25, unless a sufficiently
large bypass capacitor is used, during
fault events the negative rail can be
driven above the maximum rating for
typical IC preamplifiers. While the
authors’ experience is that IC preamps
seem to survive this abuse, this does
raise concerns over reliability. One
way to address this without requiring
such large capacitance is to place a
TVS diode across the rail as shown at
D10 in Fig. 24. Fig. 27 shows the
same voltages if an 18 V TVS is
included at D10.
Fig. 28 shows the voltages across
the 10 Ω gain resistor (black traces)
and the isolated V– pin (blue traces)
using 0.1 µF and 47 µF bypass capaci-
tors at C6. With a 0.1 µF bypass
capacitor, the peak current flowing
through RG is approximately 1.2 A.
With a 47 µF bypass capacitor, the
RG current drops significantly to
approximately 700 mA. This current
can be reduced even further if larger
capacitors and/or TVS are used. The
use of bridge diodes, TVS devices,
and capacitors has been explored by
others to protect sensitive low-voltage
programmable gain amplifiers against
phantom faults [7].
TVS devices, isolated in this way by
their use on the power-supply lines for
the preamplifier, do not contribute
signal distortion. This makes them
applicable, in contrast to the circuit of
10 11 12 13
Fig. 14, which is not recommended. It
is also possible to share elements from
the circuit of Fig. 24 among several
preamplifiers, isolating each individual
input with its own bridge (and provid-
ing each input with individual D5 and
D6), but sharing the supply isolation
and bypass components. The authors
consider this one of many areas for
further investigation.
It was found that bypass-capacitor
values should be at least equal to the
value of Cin (C1 or C2, Fig. 24), and
ideally greater than two times Cin, to
provide protection from common
mode faults where the effective value
of Cin is doubled.
To date, most of this work’s experi-
ments and simulations have been
focused on faults based on shorting the
inputs. These faults share the common
feature of drawing the IC input pins
negative, with consequences as
discussed in this article. While this is
clearly a common cause of faults,
another class consists of those where a
source of phantom power is mistakenly
connected to the input of a microphone
preamplifier. The authors have not yet
studied this class of fault sufficiently to
reach any firm recommendations.
However, at a minimum, similar protec-
tion against excessive positive input
excursions and on the positive power
supply seems appropriate to guard
against this category. For this reason, Fig.
24 includes components symmetrically
arranged toward positive excursions.
J. Audio Eng. Soc., Vol. 58, No. 3, 2010 March
CONCLUSIONS AND
SUGGESTIONS
This work presents three phantom
power-related fault mechanisms:
common-mode, open-circuit single-
ended, and differential, and pro-
poses a new protection scheme that
works under a variety of conditions
with minimal impact on noise
performance.
Similar previously published works
have focused on common-mode faults,
but the authors’ observation is that
differential faults are the most danger-
ous to an IC.
Many of the protection schemes in
use today are ineffective at protecting
the active elements against phantom
power faults.
The proposed new protection
scheme is more robust than previous
recommendations, steers destructive
currents away from the IC during
fault conditions, and isolates the
phantom menace from the rest of the
J. Audio Eng. Soc., Vol. 58, No. 3, 2010 March
system.
The authors have tested the
proposed protection scheme exhaus-
tively, but understand that there are
numerous conditions and applications
that were not covered in this work.
Designers should consider these limi-
tations and modify circuitry as they
deem necessary.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors thank THAT Corpora-
tion for encouraging and supporting
this work. Also, the authors thank
Les Tyler, Bob Moses, and Fred
Floru for their discussions and sug-
gestions, and David Lail for editing
the figures.
REFERENCES
[1 ] G . H e b e r t a n d F . T h o m a s ,
“The 48-Volt Phantom Menace,”
paper 5335 presented at the
110th Convention of the
Audio Engineering Society,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
(2001 May).
[2] THAT1500 Series datasheet, Doc.
600031 Rev.05, www.thatcorp.
com/datashts/1500data.pdf.
[3] TI INA217 datasheet, SBOS247B,
06/02 Rev. 02/05, http://focus.ti.
com/lit/ds/symlink/ina217.pdf.
[4] TI INA163 datasheet, SBOS177D,
11/00 Rev. 05/05, http://focus.ti.
com/lit/ds/symlink/ina163.pdf.
[5] AD SSM2019 datasheet, Rev.0,
02/03, www.analog.com/static/
imported-files/data_sheets/
SSM2019.pdf.
[6] W. Jung and A. Garcia, “A Low
Noise Microphone Preamp with a
Phantom Power Option,” Analog
Devices Application Note,
AN-242, 11/93.
[7] Gries et al., “Protection Circuit for
an Input Stage, and Respective
Circuit Arrangement,” Patent
Application No.: US 2008/
0007884 A1.
213