Sonal,
It's looking very very cool. My only request is whether or not it is possible to shave 8mm of the length of the board to keep under 100mm? If too difficult - don't worry I wil just have to pay the extra when manufacturing. There is a big price break below 100mm.
Thanks,
X
It's looking very very cool. My only request is whether or not it is possible to shave 8mm of the length of the board to keep under 100mm? If too difficult - don't worry I wil just have to pay the extra when manufacturing. There is a big price break below 100mm.
Thanks,
X
If the Inductor is moved off the PCB and put into the cable running to the speaker terminals, then lots of space left over to fit the terminals in between the big decoupling capacitors. Then some rationalisation of the traces can be made to improve the layout slightly.
This should easily get under the 100mm length.
It might be worth looking at moving the feedback tappings and the speaker out away from the strip trace that passes between the source/emitter resistors. At the moment the feedback and the speaker out are on opposite sides of the source resistor trace, (I can see avoidance measures for D.Self's avoidable distortion).
The two 1k0 feedback resistors could be commoned at the left side. Then a single feedback trace could be run passed all the other components.
This should easily get under the 100mm length.
It might be worth looking at moving the feedback tappings and the speaker out away from the strip trace that passes between the source/emitter resistors. At the moment the feedback and the speaker out are on opposite sides of the source resistor trace, (I can see avoidance measures for D.Self's avoidable distortion).
The two 1k0 feedback resistors could be commoned at the left side. Then a single feedback trace could be run passed all the other components.
Last edited:
Also, the inductor can be stood up vertically above the resistor like I usually do and that takes less room.
Thanks.
Thanks.
the inductor gets no benefit from being attached to the pCB. It works perfectly well off the PCB.
There could be an argument that the amplifier will work better if the field of the inductor is well away from the input stage.
There could be an argument that the amplifier will work better if the field of the inductor is well away from the input stage.
a sour job, maybe, but it is very useful that someone carry the burden. Just to keep people to fall in the self-gratification too early, specially when there are still details to polish 🙂)
Hi Sonal ,
is there a need to cut square hole? Can it be done with a oversized round hole, like done in case of Jason's VSSA PCB ?
reg
Prasi
CHF7 in 100mm X 77.5mm.
CHF7 Sprint file has both version 1.06 of layout with inductor and version 1.07 without inductor.
Gerber has only without inductor version.
CHF7 Sprint file has both version 1.06 of layout with inductor and version 1.07 without inductor.
Gerber has only without inductor version.
Attachments
A thankless job but great to have someone looking over closely on circuitry we try out. Sometimes errors or plain application looks ok to us even on a double check but it will get caught out by a second person. So it's great that Andrew does this. We need to thank him ! Can raise hackles sometimes with other people but, generally speaking, a good thing ! 🙂
He does praise in rare occasions, just look at his post#150
As Ashok said, he can raise hackles sometimes with other people but he also give good pointers.
Actually many of us think we have done a great job. That should be enough ( self!) praise ! We can see some ego's soaring around here.Surely that should be enough I think. 😀
We don't need it from everybody. If just one person says 'nice' that should be enough as it acknowledges that the ROW appreciates it. But is that really required ?
What matters is if what we made sounds very good. That's should be sufficient I guess !
And we have all heard that " Pride goes before a fall " . So limited amounts of positive acknowledgement should be enough ! 😀
Last edited: