Thoughts on "The Art of Electronics" 2nd Edition by Horowitz & Hill?

[jp1390]

Hey all,

Just finishing up my third year in EE and I have been hearing a lot about this book and was wondering what the fuss was about. For microelectronics theory we used both the Jaeger/Blalock and Sedra/Smith textbooks and found them to be very heavy and rather unintuitive for practical design.

Just curious to see what others thought about the Horowitz/Hill book.

Cheers,
JP

[caffeinatedbard]

Don't use to teach yourself electronics.  The book is kind of scattered with golden nuggets of insight and engineering wisdom here and there. It's an excellent reference however--unmatched by any other engineering book I have seen. 

I am sure others will disagree with me but that's what I think and I am sticking to it.

-bard

[olsenn]

I have a copy of this book, and I think it has quite a bit of quality information, but I can't see why it is considerred the bible of electronics??? It is very poorly organized, is too wordy for my tastes, and really doesn't contain as much quality information as it first appears (certainly not worthy of being a definitive reference). I like how it provides information for things like overcoming non-ideal behavour of components etc, but much of the IC specific stuff is dated and useless nowadays. Furthermore, it doesn't provide a comprehensive reference for things like advanced filters (Sallen-Key...), has only the most basic transistor configurations and some more design-specific ones, and not all of the topics actually covered in the book are listed in the TOC.

Overall, I think it is a very good book, but no masterpiece.

[T4P]

I have a copy of this book, and I think it has quite a bit of quality information, but I can't see why it is considered the bible of electronics .
It is very poorly organized, is too wordy for my taste, and really doesn't contain as much quality information as it first appears so (certainly not worthy of being a definitive reference).
I like how it provides information for things like overcoming non-ideal behavour of components etc, but much of the IC specific stuff is dated and useless nowadays. Furthermore, it doesn't provide a comprehensive reference for things like advanced filters (Sallen-Key...), has only the most basic transistor configurations and more design-specific ones, and not all of the topics actually covered in the book are listed in the TOC.

Overall, I think it is a very good book, but certainly not a masterpiece

You answered your own question .

[siliconmix]

Just got it. and its a trill to read..  but my wife thing dosent like that i read it when i eat dinner..

not even when your having chips 

[siliconmix]

i haven't seen "The Art of Electronics" .ill have to look it up.i have "success in electronics" by Tom Duncan it's a good all round reference but dated now.i think books should have a section on it's own.everyone could share whats good and whats not.

[Ajahn Lambda]

While it is a fairly 'scatter-brained' writing, IMHO (and my ADD is anything but mild...), The Art of Electronics does have quite a few nuggets of information, design process, and theory to make it worth reading through, perhaps a few times.  I have to be in the right 'focus mode' to find what I need among its pages, but it's usually there.  Be sure to grab some of those nifty little 3M stick-on page markers, and write notes on them so you can find things later!  Much like caffeinatedbard said, I'd liken it to gold mining:  you may go through tons of material just to find a few pieces of gold strewn about, but it was worth all the time spent panning.


Since it mostly contains very general information, I wouldn't consider it a textbook replacement.  Perhaps a junior-level supplement?  I'd never throw it at a freshman and expect them to use it.  However, I might give it as a gift to someone going into EE to use later.


It's an excellent book, and I can't wait for the 3rd Edition to hit the shelves, possibly later this year or next, IIRC.