Power factor correction implementation?

Such devices would most likely use what is referred to as "passive" power factor correction - typically using some kind of passive network with one or more inductors and capacitors.

The most effective means for power factor correction is active power factor correction, which requires an impedance matching network (e.g., using var caps or other mechanism for matching the impedance of the load.) This solution, however, is more expensive and complex, and there is a question as to how much of an audible difference this would make in audio applications, particularly for line level components. (By contrast, in designing amplifiers for powering plasma chambers for thin film deposition, active power factor correction is a matter of necessity - a couple kW of reflected power is not the healthiest thing for your amp).

Hi Ptss,

First, I certainly did not mean to imply that active power factor correction could not have an audible effect, just that there is not a whole lot of consensus on this point in the audio context - and I certainly tried to note that it can make a measurable difference. However, I am curious as to which components you considered that include active power factor correction that led to your view that the difference is "immense".

As to your more particular question, I am not sure what you are asking, particularly when you refer to the "player". To the extent I understand it, in active power factor correction you have a circuit that measures the impedance of the load (no need for an oscilloscope per se), and then via a conventional feedback loop adjusts the value of the matching network to match that impedance through, e.g., adjusting the capacitance of variable capacitors that are part of the impedance matching network. In very high powered applications, this can involve a rotating shaft that actually rotates the plates that comprise the variable capacitors, but in lower powered applications, there are a number of ways to accomplish the equivalent function.

Rodmann99999,

I too am unsure as to what "industrial use" necessarily connotes, but as you appear to note, variable capacitance is the most common mechanism of achieving power factor correction.  The article you cite notes what common lower powered systems cite as the key benefit of power factor correction- i.e., improved efficiency due to reduction of any mismatch in impedance between the source and the load, thus resulting in more efficient delivery of power to the load.

jazzonthehudson,

I don't really agree with the statement "until the 80's when clean power was universally available" - clean power is not universally available now, much less in the 80s, and was certainly variable both then and now based on location and prevailing conditions.  If you are achieving <1% THD on you home power, you are doing pretty well - I have seen anything between 2 and 11% THD.

I also don't follow what you mean by "put a frequency generator for high power" - using a "frequency generator" is not a mechanism for achieving power factor correction - rather, you need a mechanism for matching the impedance of the source to the load, typically using variable capacitors / inductors.  Addressing what I understand to be your further comments, the "perfection" of the sinusoid waveform is not directly related to power factor correction - you can have a great looking AC waveform, but still poor power factor due to significant mismatches between source and load (subject to how the load responds to the reflected power).