avoid using gargantuan size resistors, where smaller ones are intended
in most cases that means thicker pin wires, which means unnecessary stressing metalisation of pad holes (vias)
I mean - if resistor legs/pins are going easy in, ignore me , but - if you need to persuade them to go in, it's just mess
in most cases that means thicker pin wires, which means unnecessary stressing metalisation of pad holes (vias)
I mean - if resistor legs/pins are going easy in, ignore me , but - if you need to persuade them to go in, it's just mess
Those were the only 100r I had in my stash. I believe you kit did only include 8 pieces of 100r resistors. They got in without any stress on the pads, still some wiggle room left. They are Dale metal film 1%, should be fine for R21 right? (As long as SIT is on shortest leash).
well, schematic ........ who drew that one?
it really isn't critical - having one (preferably flying), or both or just one on pcb ........ as long SIT is behaving and wires are short, pretty much no difference
one, flying - preference
if you did in any other way, just chill
it really isn't critical - having one (preferably flying), or both or just one on pcb ........ as long SIT is behaving and wires are short, pretty much no difference
one, flying - preference
if you did in any other way, just chill
Don’t forget to remove the sticker from the bottem of the THF 51.So far so good. I have a question though on the thermal insulation material. Pras provided a thin sheet with the THF51S as shown in attached photos. Is it sufficient to use those? View attachment 1004250
Ok, I will refrain from trying to explain why I like the SissySIT so much but it is definitely the best/most special I have built so far. Oh and the best I have heard for that matter
I was wondering, with future P iterations coming, is it possible to "P" (active FE) my R.2 iron FE?
I was wondering, with future P iterations coming, is it possible to "P" (active FE) my R.2 iron FE?
I'm getting around to building my R1 SissySIT, however my current (Abbas Audio) DACs have hot outputs, around 4.5 Vrms (according to Mr. Abbas, i have not measured them), and i'd rather not throw most of the signal away by attenuation. Unsure of the output impedance of the DACs, i will try to find out (tube buffers on output). I guess i could wire the autoformer differently to lower the gain, very grateful for any suggestions.
with these xformers, it's really either 4x gain or 2x gain
2x gain would end with 9Vrms (OK, smidge lower, output not really being 1x, as all followers) , and that's 10W at output
4.5rms , with regular gain of 4x ( smidge less) should end with, say , 17Vrms, which is 36W ...... which Sissy can't reach of course
conclusion - you'll still need to attenuate, no free lunch
good thing in entire calculus is - majority of music (except modern crap) is rarely reaching exact 0db of digital level
2x gain would end with 9Vrms (OK, smidge lower, output not really being 1x, as all followers) , and that's 10W at output
4.5rms , with regular gain of 4x ( smidge less) should end with, say , 17Vrms, which is 36W ...... which Sissy can't reach of course
conclusion - you'll still need to attenuate, no free lunch
good thing in entire calculus is - majority of music (except modern crap) is rarely reaching exact 0db of digital level
- Home
- Amplifiers
- Pass Labs
- SissySIT