Joz,
As I stated elsewhere, I won't be ordering parts or boards until Greg has signed off in a week. To get these boards made and shipped will cost several hundred dollars, and I won't do that without having a cast iron assurance that all works well from the official designer, Greg Peters. Multiple heads, including others such as Mike and Andrew, are better than one. I'm sorry to highlight this, but a little more patience will give us a better product.
Fran, unfortunately 37Vac secondaries are just too high. It would be fine for a 100W NAKSA, however. This would give around 53V rails, which is way over the limit for a pair of tiny Exicon latfets. Actually, I would go for three latfet pairs with this rail voltage, and all the other stages would need revisiting to ensure they could handle the extra voltage.
Andrew, I normally turn off the music before I switch off the amp! I was astonished you feel that the amp needs a mute to prevent it operating off the stored charge in the filter caps..... the truth is, fet mutes, widely used in the industry, frequently fail, and the jury is out about whether or not they distort when deactivated.
My layout design and yours are quite different. I'm shooting for 36V rails, 500mA quiescent, and 50W of rms power. This is 36W, 18W of heat on each output device, double your implementation. You have opted to make your own pcbs, so my design parameters do not apply.
I've made some more minor changes to tidy it up and to give builders the option of placing the output inductor offboard if desired.
Cheers,
Hugh
As I stated elsewhere, I won't be ordering parts or boards until Greg has signed off in a week. To get these boards made and shipped will cost several hundred dollars, and I won't do that without having a cast iron assurance that all works well from the official designer, Greg Peters. Multiple heads, including others such as Mike and Andrew, are better than one. I'm sorry to highlight this, but a little more patience will give us a better product.
Fran, unfortunately 37Vac secondaries are just too high. It would be fine for a 100W NAKSA, however. This would give around 53V rails, which is way over the limit for a pair of tiny Exicon latfets. Actually, I would go for three latfet pairs with this rail voltage, and all the other stages would need revisiting to ensure they could handle the extra voltage.
Andrew, I normally turn off the music before I switch off the amp! I was astonished you feel that the amp needs a mute to prevent it operating off the stored charge in the filter caps..... the truth is, fet mutes, widely used in the industry, frequently fail, and the jury is out about whether or not they distort when deactivated.
My layout design and yours are quite different. I'm shooting for 36V rails, 500mA quiescent, and 50W of rms power. This is 36W, 18W of heat on each output device, double your implementation. You have opted to make your own pcbs, so my design parameters do not apply.
I've made some more minor changes to tidy it up and to give builders the option of placing the output inductor offboard if desired.
Cheers,
Hugh
Attachments
Last edited:
Hugh
What I meant was that should I wish to order additional 2 boards later, will you have spare boards available or is this the one and only offer ?
At this stage my plan was to use a separate amp for the bass but now I am wondering if there is any benefit in tri-amping with 3 identical amps ?
Regards
JH
What I meant was that should I wish to order additional 2 boards later, will you have spare boards available or is this the one and only offer ?
At this stage my plan was to use a separate amp for the bass but now I am wondering if there is any benefit in tri-amping with 3 identical amps ?
Regards
JH
I will be ordering 100 boards, Joz, so I would say yes, if you want more later.
Personally, and this is merely my thinking, I don't favour bi or tri amping. I try to do the lot with one amp, because all too often the active crossover seems to damage the music, resulting in a grey veil over the presentation. I prefer a well tuned passive crossover in a quality speaker system.
Cheers,
Hugh
Personally, and this is merely my thinking, I don't favour bi or tri amping. I try to do the lot with one amp, because all too often the active crossover seems to damage the music, resulting in a grey veil over the presentation. I prefer a well tuned passive crossover in a quality speaker system.
Cheers,
Hugh
Done, Tore, now at 60 boards!!
2+P JoMo Adelaide SA Australia
2+P Ian Finch Coffs Harbour NSW Australia
2+P Gennaji Hyderabad India
2 Ken Lewis LA USA
2 Ron Russell Kent UK
2+P John Kenny Dublin Ireland
2+P Francis Morrin Dublin Ireland
2+P Vitalica Bucharest Romania
2+P Erik Deinum Groningen Netherlands
2+P Keith Correa ? India
2 Igor Polyakov California (city?) USA
2 Steve (aka SRH) Whangarei New Zealand
2+P George (aka JKC) Calgary Canada
2+P Anthony Mills Gold Coast Australia
2+P Dinesh (aka Chlorofille) Christchurch New Zealand
2+P Colin S. (?) (city?) NSW Australia
2 Chris Powell Sydney Australia
2+P Danny (?) Lierde Belgium
2 Sonnya (?) City (?) Denmark
4+P Jozua Cape Town South Africa
2 JT (? aka Sandyhooker) City (?) Arizona USA
2+P Nicola City (?) Vincenza Italy
2+P Sparkey (Brian ?) Melbourne Australia
2+P Chalkandtalk (?) City (?) NW England UK
4+P Woody1911a1 (?) Marblehead , MA USA
4+P George Cherhit Sacramento CA USA
2+P Tore Martensson Malmoe Sweden
Nice to see you here!
Cheers,
Hugh
2+P JoMo Adelaide SA Australia
2+P Ian Finch Coffs Harbour NSW Australia
2+P Gennaji Hyderabad India
2 Ken Lewis LA USA
2 Ron Russell Kent UK
2+P John Kenny Dublin Ireland
2+P Francis Morrin Dublin Ireland
2+P Vitalica Bucharest Romania
2+P Erik Deinum Groningen Netherlands
2+P Keith Correa ? India
2 Igor Polyakov California (city?) USA
2 Steve (aka SRH) Whangarei New Zealand
2+P George (aka JKC) Calgary Canada
2+P Anthony Mills Gold Coast Australia
2+P Dinesh (aka Chlorofille) Christchurch New Zealand
2+P Colin S. (?) (city?) NSW Australia
2 Chris Powell Sydney Australia
2+P Danny (?) Lierde Belgium
2 Sonnya (?) City (?) Denmark
4+P Jozua Cape Town South Africa
2 JT (? aka Sandyhooker) City (?) Arizona USA
2+P Nicola City (?) Vincenza Italy
2+P Sparkey (Brian ?) Melbourne Australia
2+P Chalkandtalk (?) City (?) NW England UK
4+P Woody1911a1 (?) Marblehead , MA USA
4+P George Cherhit Sacramento CA USA
2+P Tore Martensson Malmoe Sweden
Nice to see you here!
Cheers,
Hugh
I thought that I was the only one on this planet that thought so and still prefer GOOD passive filtering to active.
Thanks Hugh,
Best,
Audiofanatic
Joz,
This is exactly what I alluded to; these preferences are entirely subjective, a bit like food, wine, architecture, cars, women, the list goes on...... we each select our preferences for whatever reasons are important to us. That's why I always emphasize it's my opinion, nothing hard and fast about it.
Cheers,
Hugh
This is exactly what I alluded to; these preferences are entirely subjective, a bit like food, wine, architecture, cars, women, the list goes on...... we each select our preferences for whatever reasons are important to us. That's why I always emphasize it's my opinion, nothing hard and fast about it.
Cheers,
Hugh
I'm lost. This thread has plenty of board layouts, but no schematic. The other thread has so many schematics I never found the current official one.
Is there some way to maintain a "current" schematic and board layout at a static URL, and edit in some links to them from the first post in this thread? That way we can always find the "current" ones.
Is there some way to maintain a "current" schematic and board layout at a static URL, and edit in some links to them from the first post in this thread? That way we can always find the "current" ones.
CC,
If you had read this thread through you would have found that until the final circuit is tested good neither I, nor Greg, nor Mike, nor Lineout, nor Andrew will be publishing the schematic. Actually, reverse engineering the pcb is not so hard, why not have a go yourself? This delay is to protect the community here who may wish to build this amplifier, and ensures that nothing is published which is not tested and known to be good.
Even a simple amp like this one has a thousand details where things can go wrong. Lots of checking is needed. Nothing will be done in haste.
You do not need to come into the thread with trenchant complaint when you have failed to do your homework, and unsubtly imply that everyone here wishes to serve you. Please be patient, and considerate of the efforts being made by others to deliver something at low cost to the DIY community. As it happens the designer is ill after a long overseas trip and out of respect for him we are delaying publication until the beginning of next week.
Cheers,
Hugh
If you had read this thread through you would have found that until the final circuit is tested good neither I, nor Greg, nor Mike, nor Lineout, nor Andrew will be publishing the schematic. Actually, reverse engineering the pcb is not so hard, why not have a go yourself? This delay is to protect the community here who may wish to build this amplifier, and ensures that nothing is published which is not tested and known to be good.
Even a simple amp like this one has a thousand details where things can go wrong. Lots of checking is needed. Nothing will be done in haste.
You do not need to come into the thread with trenchant complaint when you have failed to do your homework, and unsubtly imply that everyone here wishes to serve you. Please be patient, and considerate of the efforts being made by others to deliver something at low cost to the DIY community. As it happens the designer is ill after a long overseas trip and out of respect for him we are delaying publication until the beginning of next week.
Cheers,
Hugh
Hugh,
As these projects get more like professional products, the schematics and boards need professional discipline and revision control software like subversion, SCCS, RCS, Visual Source Safe etc. to provide atomic commit, file locking for collaboration, manage branches and history etc. and include a matching title block in each, including printed or written on the boards. Then professional clarity can replace paranoid refusal to share work in process instead of just final product. The benefits will continue beyond release and into support; change is eternal. This common bulletin board historical thread format serves some needs better than others. The historical threads are a valuable trail of where this has been. I'm just suggesting that it's less than ideal at succinctly communicating where it's at now, the current work in progress. My ideas really apply better to the other engineering thread.
What's with the condescending personal attack? I clearly take full responsibility for getting lost. My patience is not a problem, as I am not a customer and don't care about any delay. I have no delusiions this thread serves me, this thread is yours and serves you, so that others may share the fruit. If you liked the idea, a few seconds embedding the links would then require no further effort as you work from the link targets; there was nothing selfish nor demanding. Please don't confuse my perspective for disrespect of the process or engineers involved. We're all certainly appreciative of the objective and grateful for the fruit of collaboration, especially the delicate dark arts around component diversity and availability, measurement, stability, reliability, oscialaltion, RF, tolerances, repeatability, lifespan, production and yes, layout. I did read this thread and kept up with most of the other; my frustration is keeping up with the direction of so many threads of interest, something persons of more narrow interest may not understand. I didn't ask about anyone's health, where did that come from?
My real father still lives, so do not presume to tell me what I do or do not need to do, or to assign my homework, or to mis-characterize implications stemming from your imagination. If you don't like an idea, just say so or why. I didn't ask about publishing a final schematic, my interest is process, direction, and learning. My professional field encompasses project and process, collaboration, presentation, & user interface software, documentation, support, packaging, testing, certification... My ideas in these areas deserve some respect too, even if you disagree. It's sad a closed mind sees ideas for change as "trenchant complaint".
You can be as controlling of your relationship with customers as you like. But expect to hear about the limitations of those policies in a public forum. When you tell me to reverse-engineer rather than share the schematic you're working from, this is not about content but neither is it in the noble DIY spirit of sharing.
Cheers, Hugh? Your condescending disrespectful and unprofessional attitude is not a champagne toast, and I regret having to lower this reply to the common denominator you factored into your reply. Play nice. Live long and...share.
As these projects get more like professional products, the schematics and boards need professional discipline and revision control software like subversion, SCCS, RCS, Visual Source Safe etc. to provide atomic commit, file locking for collaboration, manage branches and history etc. and include a matching title block in each, including printed or written on the boards. Then professional clarity can replace paranoid refusal to share work in process instead of just final product. The benefits will continue beyond release and into support; change is eternal. This common bulletin board historical thread format serves some needs better than others. The historical threads are a valuable trail of where this has been. I'm just suggesting that it's less than ideal at succinctly communicating where it's at now, the current work in progress. My ideas really apply better to the other engineering thread.
What's with the condescending personal attack? I clearly take full responsibility for getting lost. My patience is not a problem, as I am not a customer and don't care about any delay. I have no delusiions this thread serves me, this thread is yours and serves you, so that others may share the fruit. If you liked the idea, a few seconds embedding the links would then require no further effort as you work from the link targets; there was nothing selfish nor demanding. Please don't confuse my perspective for disrespect of the process or engineers involved. We're all certainly appreciative of the objective and grateful for the fruit of collaboration, especially the delicate dark arts around component diversity and availability, measurement, stability, reliability, oscialaltion, RF, tolerances, repeatability, lifespan, production and yes, layout. I did read this thread and kept up with most of the other; my frustration is keeping up with the direction of so many threads of interest, something persons of more narrow interest may not understand. I didn't ask about anyone's health, where did that come from?
My real father still lives, so do not presume to tell me what I do or do not need to do, or to assign my homework, or to mis-characterize implications stemming from your imagination. If you don't like an idea, just say so or why. I didn't ask about publishing a final schematic, my interest is process, direction, and learning. My professional field encompasses project and process, collaboration, presentation, & user interface software, documentation, support, packaging, testing, certification... My ideas in these areas deserve some respect too, even if you disagree. It's sad a closed mind sees ideas for change as "trenchant complaint".
You can be as controlling of your relationship with customers as you like. But expect to hear about the limitations of those policies in a public forum. When you tell me to reverse-engineer rather than share the schematic you're working from, this is not about content but neither is it in the noble DIY spirit of sharing.
Cheers, Hugh? Your condescending disrespectful and unprofessional attitude is not a champagne toast, and I regret having to lower this reply to the common denominator you factored into your reply. Play nice. Live long and...share.
Did someone forgot to take his pills ?
no i think two people need to take six of these
then call us in the morning
CC,
Thanks for your reply, I can appreciate your POV but neither do I take back what I said. Actually, I thought you were being disrespectful!
Your suggestions about engineering discipline apply to corporates, not to this forum thread. I have actually prepared schematics, parts lists, and layout, but to show them now before others have examined them would be inappropriate.
The top of the very page you posted to stated that the schematic would not be published until the next week, and gave the reason moreover. My suggestion about homework was based entirely on the fact you had either not read it, or worse, read it and ignored it.
Suffice to say full publication is now very close.
You can show consideration and politeness for months in a row on this forum, but one episode like this one can dash your reputation on the rocks. If something written can be taken two ways, then it is a sad fact that the worst interpretation will always be assumed on a forum. This means you must be very careful to write exactly what you mean, and at the least reread it two or three times before posting.
I said what I said and don't resile. I am awaiting clearance from Greg and Mike, nothing more.
I think the matter is closed.
Now, where were we? Attached is the latest pcb.
Hugh
Thanks for your reply, I can appreciate your POV but neither do I take back what I said. Actually, I thought you were being disrespectful!
Your suggestions about engineering discipline apply to corporates, not to this forum thread. I have actually prepared schematics, parts lists, and layout, but to show them now before others have examined them would be inappropriate.
The top of the very page you posted to stated that the schematic would not be published until the next week, and gave the reason moreover. My suggestion about homework was based entirely on the fact you had either not read it, or worse, read it and ignored it.
Suffice to say full publication is now very close.
You can show consideration and politeness for months in a row on this forum, but one episode like this one can dash your reputation on the rocks. If something written can be taken two ways, then it is a sad fact that the worst interpretation will always be assumed on a forum. This means you must be very careful to write exactly what you mean, and at the least reread it two or three times before posting.
I said what I said and don't resile. I am awaiting clearance from Greg and Mike, nothing more.
I think the matter is closed.
Now, where were we? Attached is the latest pcb.
Hugh
Attachments
Last edited:
Ian Finch has suggested that I take readers through the iterations leading to this latest pcb. Very good idea; the two threads are long, and exhausting.
Here are the design approaches of Greg Peters, Mikelm and myself so far. I would point out this has all been the original brainchild of Lineout, the redoutable northern Swede who while he lives in one of the coldest places on the planet has an almost feverish, active mind.
#1 1st stage: singleton input device. After much discussion and a few trials, Greg has opted for a jfet, as this gives very low transconductance, around 20mS, and this keeps loop gain low which seems important to the good sound of this amplifier despite higher THD figures.
#2 IIRC Lineout's original design called for a single ended input and VAS with complementary push pull output stage using DC coupling throughout. Essentially this meant eliminating the feedback shunt cap, a 1000uF beast that Mikelm in particular disliked. The problem is that offset control without a servo - which adds complexity and detracts from the circuit simplicity - is very poor with DC coupling as DC gain is no longer unity, but the reciprocal of the gain. In amp design the DC offset control is not a trivial design problem, as it has the potential (literally!) to destroy speakers if poor. Accordingly, Greg has chosen to continue with AC coupling, so back in goes the cap, and DC offset is now very good. I endorse this choice strongly.
#3 Lineout originally chose the IRFP9610 p mosfet as VAS. Briefly the advantages of a bipolar device such as the 2SA1360 were mooted, but Greg noticed, and Andrew confirmed, that a mosfet VAS required no Miller capacitance for rock solid stability. It also gave a more 'lively' sound with palpable vitality. I went looking for a better mosfet VAS, one with a lower current rating to improve its linearity at very low drain currents, typically around 12mA in this application. Greg had suggested the Zetex ZVP3110A, but it's only a TO92 and limited to 740mW. In this application, and with the original 20mA VAS current selected, this gave very high dissipation, too high, so I felt the 2W smd Zetex ZVP2110G would be superior as it was essentially the same chip in a SOT223 high power package. Eventually we decided that since the Ciss of each output device gate was bootstrapped, 20mA of VAS current was not needed, and ultimately we've settled on just less than 12mA, a good compromise.
#4 Originally Lineout had selected a bootstrap CCS for the VAS, but this seemed to detract from the bass response of the amp, though it does sound very good on vocals. Paul Bysouth, a clever Melbourne engineer and good friend, suggested using the Supertex DN2530 as a CCS/bootstrap hybrid in an attempt to get the best of both worlds - good bass, and engaging vocals. The jury is still out on this clever modification, but it's incorporated into the pcb as T3 and on Monday Greg will be able to tell us how it sounds.
#5 I decided to offer a pcb as a means of getting Aspen's name out there, and thought it might be convenient to put independent power supplies for each rail directly onto the amp pcb. These power supplies use ultra fast soft recovery diodes and RC decoupling between the two filter caps on each rail; this adds some refinement to the sound quality. Since Greg had also found that it sounded better at 300mA than 100mA quiescent, and better again at 1A, I felt that appreciable distance between the output devices was required so that we could install the board directly onto a longish 0.42C/W heatsink. The Fetzilla board is therefore 230mm long and only 69mm deep, with 120mm between the outputs, and this gives useful options to set quiescent current nominally at 500mA with 36V rails, or 1A with 24V rails in cooler climates than Oz, all with a simple convection heatsink and no fans.
#6 Every precaution is taken in the board layout to ensure unconditional stability. This includes loading the amplifier with electrostatic speakers, known to be very difficult loads. Phase margin is high, and unity gain loop frequency is just over 700KHz. There is considerable ground plane, and some separation of input/VAS stages and output. An output Zobel, inductor and parallel damping resistor is fitted to the pcb, and the bias generator is range limited by a 4.7V zener diode to prevent overcurrent blowups. There is also provision for experimentation with lag compensation (Miller cap) and phase lead (the JLH feature), making this design highly suited to a novice learning the ropes of audio amp design.
#7 I have suggested polarising both signal coupling caps, at the input and the fb shunt positions. This approach improves sound quality hugely, particularly if the polarising voltage is greater than the peak AC voltage passing through the cap. Accordingly, the input gate is set at around 2.5V positive to achieve the necessary zero output offset.
#8 This circuit is deliberately low loop gain (around 30dB), and very simple, using only one type of semiconductor, ALL of them FETS. This should draw considerable interest, as it appeals to many to own an amp which is designed for a different style of semiconductor. Most are bipolar.
The pcb is 70um copper, two sides, 2mm FR4, overlay both sides and soldermasked. I will attach the smd VAS prior to despatch.
I have attached the parts list for this amplifier as a Word file.
Cheers,
Hugh
Here are the design approaches of Greg Peters, Mikelm and myself so far. I would point out this has all been the original brainchild of Lineout, the redoutable northern Swede who while he lives in one of the coldest places on the planet has an almost feverish, active mind.
#1 1st stage: singleton input device. After much discussion and a few trials, Greg has opted for a jfet, as this gives very low transconductance, around 20mS, and this keeps loop gain low which seems important to the good sound of this amplifier despite higher THD figures.
#2 IIRC Lineout's original design called for a single ended input and VAS with complementary push pull output stage using DC coupling throughout. Essentially this meant eliminating the feedback shunt cap, a 1000uF beast that Mikelm in particular disliked. The problem is that offset control without a servo - which adds complexity and detracts from the circuit simplicity - is very poor with DC coupling as DC gain is no longer unity, but the reciprocal of the gain. In amp design the DC offset control is not a trivial design problem, as it has the potential (literally!) to destroy speakers if poor. Accordingly, Greg has chosen to continue with AC coupling, so back in goes the cap, and DC offset is now very good. I endorse this choice strongly.
#3 Lineout originally chose the IRFP9610 p mosfet as VAS. Briefly the advantages of a bipolar device such as the 2SA1360 were mooted, but Greg noticed, and Andrew confirmed, that a mosfet VAS required no Miller capacitance for rock solid stability. It also gave a more 'lively' sound with palpable vitality. I went looking for a better mosfet VAS, one with a lower current rating to improve its linearity at very low drain currents, typically around 12mA in this application. Greg had suggested the Zetex ZVP3110A, but it's only a TO92 and limited to 740mW. In this application, and with the original 20mA VAS current selected, this gave very high dissipation, too high, so I felt the 2W smd Zetex ZVP2110G would be superior as it was essentially the same chip in a SOT223 high power package. Eventually we decided that since the Ciss of each output device gate was bootstrapped, 20mA of VAS current was not needed, and ultimately we've settled on just less than 12mA, a good compromise.
#4 Originally Lineout had selected a bootstrap CCS for the VAS, but this seemed to detract from the bass response of the amp, though it does sound very good on vocals. Paul Bysouth, a clever Melbourne engineer and good friend, suggested using the Supertex DN2530 as a CCS/bootstrap hybrid in an attempt to get the best of both worlds - good bass, and engaging vocals. The jury is still out on this clever modification, but it's incorporated into the pcb as T3 and on Monday Greg will be able to tell us how it sounds.
#5 I decided to offer a pcb as a means of getting Aspen's name out there, and thought it might be convenient to put independent power supplies for each rail directly onto the amp pcb. These power supplies use ultra fast soft recovery diodes and RC decoupling between the two filter caps on each rail; this adds some refinement to the sound quality. Since Greg had also found that it sounded better at 300mA than 100mA quiescent, and better again at 1A, I felt that appreciable distance between the output devices was required so that we could install the board directly onto a longish 0.42C/W heatsink. The Fetzilla board is therefore 230mm long and only 69mm deep, with 120mm between the outputs, and this gives useful options to set quiescent current nominally at 500mA with 36V rails, or 1A with 24V rails in cooler climates than Oz, all with a simple convection heatsink and no fans.
#6 Every precaution is taken in the board layout to ensure unconditional stability. This includes loading the amplifier with electrostatic speakers, known to be very difficult loads. Phase margin is high, and unity gain loop frequency is just over 700KHz. There is considerable ground plane, and some separation of input/VAS stages and output. An output Zobel, inductor and parallel damping resistor is fitted to the pcb, and the bias generator is range limited by a 4.7V zener diode to prevent overcurrent blowups. There is also provision for experimentation with lag compensation (Miller cap) and phase lead (the JLH feature), making this design highly suited to a novice learning the ropes of audio amp design.
#7 I have suggested polarising both signal coupling caps, at the input and the fb shunt positions. This approach improves sound quality hugely, particularly if the polarising voltage is greater than the peak AC voltage passing through the cap. Accordingly, the input gate is set at around 2.5V positive to achieve the necessary zero output offset.
#8 This circuit is deliberately low loop gain (around 30dB), and very simple, using only one type of semiconductor, ALL of them FETS. This should draw considerable interest, as it appeals to many to own an amp which is designed for a different style of semiconductor. Most are bipolar.
The pcb is 70um copper, two sides, 2mm FR4, overlay both sides and soldermasked. I will attach the smd VAS prior to despatch.
I have attached the parts list for this amplifier as a Word file.
Cheers,
Hugh
Last edited:
A mighty summary and thanks for the provisional parts list, AKSA. Rather than lose it in the thread, would it be possible to also post it as another (closed) thread with a similar title so visitors can see it first up when browsing? Presumably, any attachments could still be updated if needed.
Done Ian, update transferred to the first post in this sticky....
Thank you for your kind words,
Hugh
Done Ian, update transferred to the first post in this sticky....
Thank you for your kind words,
Hugh
Last edited by a moderator:
Hugh,
After looking at the parts list, I noticed that there were 2 Blackgate NX caps in the list. These are now unobtainable parts, though you may have a full bin at your disposal. I think you might want to look into a different cap for C3 and C7.
Steve
BTW, since I'm finally posting on this thread, I'd best get my name on the board list for a pair of boards.
After looking at the parts list, I noticed that there were 2 Blackgate NX caps in the list. These are now unobtainable parts, though you may have a full bin at your disposal. I think you might want to look into a different cap for C3 and C7.
Steve
BTW, since I'm finally posting on this thread, I'd best get my name on the board list for a pair of boards.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.