diyAudio

diyAudio (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/)
-   Solid State (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/)
-   -   Guitar amplifier wierdness (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/91520-guitar-amplifier-wierdness.html)

Frazzled 3rd December 2006 05:37 PM

Guitar amplifier wierdness
 
I purchased a guitar amp yesterday and opened up the chassis today to clean out the dust and crud and I found two resistors that have had one leg clipped to remove them from the circuit.

If you look at the schematic HERE look at R102 and R105 on the base of Q1 and Q2 respectively.

Any ideas why one side of the resistors would be lifted from the circuit?

Thanks,
Don

anatech 3rd December 2006 07:40 PM

Hi Don,
Believe it or not, the over current protection circuit was removed! Check the emitter resistors for the correct value and reinstall those resistors.

-Chris

audiofan 3rd December 2006 07:42 PM

This is a protection circuit modification to get more power before protection get in and limit current around 150% of initial rating

anatech 3rd December 2006 07:49 PM

Hi audiofan,
Quote:

This is a protection circuit modification to get more power before protection get in and limit current around 150% of initial rating
I figured as much. It's still a stupid thing to do. The original designer had the limit designed in for a reason. I could see the protection being backed off a little, possibly a time limit out in to delay action. Disabling the circuit entirely is the wrong way to go about it.

-Chris

Frazzled 3rd December 2006 09:02 PM

GEEZE!

I wonder if this was done to hide a problem with the amplifier or strictly for more power...

Well as you can see they're 3.3k resistors... I'll be re-installing them shortly, I'll let you know what happens.

Thanks,
Don

djk 3rd December 2006 11:22 PM

"I could see the protection being backed off a little, possibly a time limit out in to delay action. "

The 100F caps should delay the VI limiter long enough so that it doesn't activate on any musical signal, but still protects in the event of a short.

At least Fender used three sets of outputs, not like the newbies here that think they can run one set and have the amp hold together.

Grounded output stage, makes for a simple drive circuit.

Some current feedback, the later Carver M1.0T used a similar scheme.

anatech 4th December 2006 02:48 AM

Hi djk,
Yes, but Carver found the current feedback affected the gain greatly with even 1% components in the feedback loops. They therefore used a pot which caused them more grief further down the line. Just did an M 4.0t for that. ;)

I still think disabling a protection circuit completely is not intelligent.

-Chris

Frazzled 4th December 2006 02:51 AM

OK but looking at the circuit it is not completely disabled only partially right?

anatech 4th December 2006 03:03 AM

Hi Frazzled,
It is for the one pair. The proper solution would be to either change all those resistors to another value, or fix the specific problem that caused the amp to go into protect (assuming the tech couldn't find the problem due to high or open emitter resistors). There is no guarantee that those transistors will current share given how that stuff usually gets fixed.

djk,
Quote:

The 100F caps should delay the VI limiter long enough so that it doesn't activate on any musical signal, but still protects in the event of a short.
Maybe not. These amps do not reproduce music. Often they are run into sustained clipping. Therefore what we instinctively have a feel for does not apply to guitar amps sometimes. I had to think about this a little.

-Chris

djk 4th December 2006 07:27 AM

The delay looks like 500mS or so, and the current about 10A peak. Looks like it could pass a 400W squarewave at 4 ohms for an indefinite time, but go into limiting on lower impedances.


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:07 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2