As electronics rely more and more on ICs, subtle details about discrete components get lost because we spend less time designing with them. For example, a relay seems like a simple component, but selecting the contact material optimally has a lot of nuance that people often forget. Another case of this is the Miller effect, explained in a recent video by the aptly named [Old Hack EE].

Put simply, the Miller effect — found in 1919 by [John Milton Miller] — is the change in input impedance of an inverting amplifier due to the gain’s effect on the parasitic capacitance between the amplifier’s input and output terminals. The parasitic capacitance acts like there is an additional capacitor in parallel with the parasitic capacitance that is equivalent to the parasitic capacitance multiplied by the gain. Since capacitors in parallel add, the equation for the Miller capacitance is C-AC where C is the parasitic capacitance, and A is the voltage gain which is always negative, so you might prefer to think of this as C+|A|C.

The example uses tubes, but you get the same effect in any inverting amplification device, even if it is solid state or an op amp circuit. He does make some assumptions about capacitance due to things like tube sockets and wiring.

The effect can be very pronounced. For example, a chart in the video shows that if you had an amplifier with gain of -60 based around a tube, a 10 kΩ input impedance could support 2.5 MHz, in theory. But in practice, the Miller effect will reduce the usable frequency to only 81.5 kHz!

The last part of the video explains why you needed compensation for old op amps, and why modern op amps have compensation capacitors internally. It also shows cases where designs depend on the Miller effect and how the cascade amplifier architecture can negate the effect entirely.

This isn’t our first look at Miller capacitance. If you look at what’s inside a tube, it is a wonder there isn’t more parasitic capacitance.

Are your jellybeans getting stale? [lcamtuf] thinks so, and his guide to choosing op-amps makes a good case for rethinking what parts you should keep in stock.

For readers of a certain vintage, the term “operational amplifier” is almost synonymous with the LM741 or LM324, and with good reason. This is despite the limitations these chips have, including the need for bipolar power supplies at relatively high voltages and the need to limit the input voltage range lest clipping and distortion occur. These chips have appeared in countless designs over the nearly 60 years that they’ve been available, and the Internet is littered with examples of circuits using them.

For [lcamtuf], the abundance of designs for these dated chips is exactly the problem, as it leads to a “copy-paste” design culture despite the far more capable and modern op-amps that are readily available. His list of preferred jellybeans includes the OPA2323, favored thanks to its lower single-supply voltage range, rail-to-rail input and output, and decent output current. The article also discussed the pros and cons of FET input, frequency response and slew rate, and the relative unimportance of internal noise, pointing out that most modern op-amps will probably be the least thermally noisy part in your circuit.

None of this is to take away from how important the 741 and other early op-amps were, of course. They are venerable chips that still have their place, and we expect they’ll be showing up in designs for many decades to come. This is just food for thought, and [lcamtuf] makes a good case for rethinking your analog designs while cluing us in on what really matters when choosing an op-amp.