Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site bragvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!bragvax!david
From: david@bragvax.UUCP (David DiGiacomo)
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Re: 74S124 as xtal osc - (nf)
Message-ID: <154@bragvax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 19-Jul-84 23:12:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: bragvax.154
Posted: Thu Jul 19 23:12:00 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 21-Jul-84 03:39:28 EDT
References: <3829@fortune.UUCP>
Organization: Brag Systems Inc., San Mateo, CA
Lines: 19

>>... the following is from Jim Williams article,
>>_Basic Circuit-design Techniques Yield Stable Clock Oscillators_,
>>in the August 18, 1983 edition of EDN:
>>
>>	While gate oscillators are quite popular ...
>>

Wasn't this article referring to non-crystal oscillators (which I agree
can be problematic) ?

Also, someone mentioned using a 4049 as an oscillator; this is not a
good idea because of the non-linearity of the part, and possible
excessive power dissipation.  The best CMOS parts for oscillators are
CD4007s or CD4069U/74CU04s up to 1 MHz, 74HCU04s above that.  The
74HCU04 makes a better oscillator than the 74LS04, but can dissipate
more power (I think).

I'm really amazed at the volume of traffic on this inherently boring
subject.