7400 series was first. It was actually faster than the 4000 series, because the 4000 series was designed for low power.
74LS followed lower power than 74 series and a little bit faster.
Then there was 74S - faster but not low power.
Eventually, after several more bpiolar types, there was 74HC = high-speed CMOS - as fast as the 74LS and a low power as the 4000 series, but limited to 6V; and 74HCT (with the same logic thresholds as the original 74 series).
After that there was 74AC (faster, higher output current than 74HC) and lower voltage versions (74LV) and lower voltage versions that will withstand higher voltage input (74LVC)
And probably several more that I have forgotten.

 

7400 series was first. It was actually faster than the 4000 series, because the 4000 series was designed for low power.

Is that (low power) the reason why you suggested the 4017 in a prev. post in this thread?

 

Is that (low power) the reason why you suggested the 4017 in a prev. post in this thread?

4017 is a weird one - because there was no equivalent in the original 74-series TTL. Then when HC came along, they included a 74HC4017.
So, I was using the term generically to mean a decade counter, i.e. 74HC4017 if you need a higher-speed part. just like one uses the term "555" generically to mean all versions of said timer.

 

7400 series was first. It was actually faster than the 4000 series, because the 4000 series was designed for low power.

Is that (low power) the reason why you suggest the 4017 in a prev. post in this thread?

Good luck with that. Do you realize that light travels about 300 microns in 1 ps -- and that's in a vacuum? In a circuit, it is more like 200 µm.

That's where FFT comes in:
https://www.stereophile.com/content/arcam-fmj-cd33-cd-player-measurements
Picoseconds jitter metrics have been tested since the late 80s in digital audio. And probably much earlier for industrial, mil/aerospace.

 

4017 is a weird one - because there was no equivalent in the original 74-series TTL. Then when HC came along, they included a 74HC4017.
So, I was using the term generically to mean a decade counter, i.e. 74HC4017 if you need a higher-speed part. just like one uses the term "555" generically to mean all versions of said timer.

Back in the first page of this thread, recall the driver osc circuit using the 4069:
https://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/...al-ckts-11-289-mhz-needed.194299/post-1827924
Pretty "weird" that a modern circuit website would suggest that chip ... maybe they were simply copying and pasting from ancient datasheets and texbooks.
https://www.circuitbasics.com/crystal-oscillators/

 

Back in the first page of this thread, recall the driver osc circuit using the 4069:
https://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/...al-ckts-11-289-mhz-needed.194299/post-1827924
Pretty "weird" that a modern circuit website would suggest that chip ... maybe they were simply copying and pasting from ancient datasheets and texbooks.
https://www.circuitbasics.com/crystal-oscillators/

Not really. There are a lot of websites filled with circuits that won't work. If every circuit on the internet worked, this forum would be redundant!

I'm not sure that a 4069UB would manage 11MHz, certainly not at 5V.
But if you want to make a 32768Hz crystal oscillator and run it off a PP3, then the 4069UB would be ideal.

There's an awful lot of websites with circuits where the op-amp is a 741. It's 50 years old! The world has moved on from the 741.

 

Google's 2nd result for the query "7400 vs 4000":
https://www.electro-tech-online.com/threads/difference-between-4000-series-and-7400-series.26344/

But why suggest the 4000 over 7400 was my query, too.
Maybe Ian0 can support his suggestion?

So your evidence that 7400 series ICs are newer is because someone else that was asking a question about them happened to incorrectly think they were? Despite being told explicitly when they were introduced?

The 7400 series was introduced in 1966 by Texas Instruments. But it was nothing more than a low-cost plastic-packaged version of the ceramic-packaged 5400 series that was introduced in 1964.

https://www.computerhistory.org/siliconengine/standard-logic-ic-families-introduced/

The CD4000 series logic was introduced in 1968 by RCA specifically as an alternative to TI's 7400-series logic family.

https://www.computerhistory.org/siliconengine/complementary-mos-circuit-configuration-is-invented/

Here's a link to a copy of the 1967-68 TI IC catalog. Check it out for yourself.

 

interesting articl on effects of clock jitter on audio DCAs.
https://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/...-digital-ckts-11-289-mhz-needed.194299/page-2

 

interesting articl on effects of clock jitter on audio DCAs.
https://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/...-digital-ckts-11-289-mhz-needed.194299/page-2

@Ian0: Did you accidentally post the wrong link (the link is just to page 2 of this thread).

 

@Ian0: Did you accidentally post the wrong link (the link is just to page 2 of this thread).

Indeed I did
https://www.analog.com/en/technical...tly to,clocks without degrading audio quality.
that looks better.
Blame the iPad.

 

Wbahn;
Thanks for sharing the Computer History website. Very interesting and informative.
Indeed, back in those days all of the major semiconductor companies were developing integrated logic families.
I worked in an industrial environment equipment manufacturer which used Motorola’s HTL high threshold logic. With 15 volts supplies, it had the highest noise immunity.
Motorola also introduced ECL emitter coupled logic, which was blinding fast but power hungry.
But I disgress.