Group Buy Interest?

  • Thread starter Thread starter chance
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
zmix's work seemed rather conclusive to me. The difference in max collector current between the correct part and the installed part is something like 10x. That, and the heat observed, would lead me to believe it's a long-term reliability problem even if no oscillation is present.

We're talking about line level audio signals, so the base current should be single digit milliamps even at peak levels, right? Could there be a DC bias at the base?

The follow-on post said that the negative cycle distortion was actually caused by a single defective transistor. That's what leads me to wonder if the whole parasitic RF issue might be a red herring (in which case the difference might be something as simple as better EMI rejection in the NTE parts).

What makes seem particularly strange to me is this test result:

chris carter on PSW said:
hi-mid gain: Low pitch buzz # -100%, no buzz @ -95%, regular buzz from -95% to +95%, no buzz @ +95%, loud buzz @ +100%

So it hums more at the two extremes, falls off completely, then comes back in the middle. I'm struggling to make sense of that behavior unless they wired the pot with the ground in the middle, in which case it could possibly be explained by hum on the ground bus.
 
Is the heat being generated by the current of normal operation, or by the current of oscillation? If the oscillation could be stopped by a small bypass cap, would the installed transistor then function within its operating parameters?

Well put.

(10 characters)
 
As Chuck (zmix) posted Those 2 wrong transistors were causing the oscillation and heat. He also said that the schem was wrong. Everything else was exact to the originals
 
We're talking about line level audio signals, so the base current should be single digit milliamps even at peak levels, right? Could there be a DC bias at the base?

I don't have the schemo in front of me at the moment, but I recall Q5 is a current source for Q4, set with a bias at 1.3V and current of something like 5mA. These are all BJTs, so the bases have to have DC bias or the audio signal would be rectified. But I believe it's collector current and not base current that is at issue.

But the AC load on the collector could be potentially large. I don't recall if the Q5 base had a decoupling cap; I think bias was set by divider resistors and a diode (for temp stability?). So that is one potential area for oscillation.

zmix did suggest in his initial hypothesis that a fix could be bypass caps, but he did not select that approach as the solution. I don't quite have the ability to fully analyze the circuit, especially from an RF perspective, so you'd have to ask him why the component change is necessary.

As I understand the issue, the heat is from oscillation, not the other way around. But again, Neve used parts with much higher max collector currents and heatsinks as well. I assume that was for a reason.
 
As Chuck (zmix) posted Those 2 wrong transistors were causing the oscillation and heat. He also said that the schem was wrong. Everything else was exact to the originals

I have no doubt that swapping the transistors takes care of the hum problem. What I'm not convinced of is that this is the best fix for the problem. You're talking about subbing in a fairly hard-to-find part with exceptionally good current handling capabilities that was hand-binned as being the best testing of all the silicon out of a production run. Those parts are the equivalent of the 3.33 GHz Core 2 Duo parts. They exist, but maybe one out of ten thousand parts passes at that level. If a circuit fails completely unless it contains a part that is binned at the very top grade, that circuit has something else wrong with it, and hand-picking parts to avoid failures, while an acceptable solution for one-off purposes (e.g. folks fixing their own devices), is not viable for mass manufacturing.

The question, then, is why the transistors are behaving in the way that they are. Those parts shouldn't be seeing nearly enough current from an audio signal to cause problems. They should be safe by two orders of magnitude. If they're seeing that much current, it may be an indication that something else is also wrong. By swapping the transistors, you may just be masking the symptom but leaving the root cause uncorrected. The root cause may also be easier to fix.

BTW, as best I understand it, it isn't two transistors. It is several sets of two transistors apiece, two each per EQ stage times... I think... four EQ stages.

And again, I question the analysis that the hum is in any way caused by oscillation. The noise that was originally described as oscillation did -not- go away even after subbing out the transistors. link to page containing relevant post

If the problem is truly caused by ultrasonic oscillation, it should be possible to use a capacitor to short everything over some reasonably high frequency limit to ground. That's a lot easier than subbing a hard-to-find transistor. That said, I don't think for a minute we're seeing only a single problem here, though. There have already been three or four posts (by the same author) that suggest other unrelated causes for hum, including positioning of the transformer relative to the inductor, etc. Heck, some of the oscillation could be something as trivial as the leads on one transistor being left too long.

I'm not saying that the proposed fix won't solve the problem---it almost certainly will. I'm saying that we should continue to look for the root cause and see if there is a simpler fix that will correct the circuit without going to high-test parts.
 
I'm not saying that the proposed fix won't solve the problem---it almost certainly will. I'm saying that we should continue to look for the root cause and see if there is a simpler fix that will correct the circuit without going to high-test parts.

There are probably scores of more commonly available transistors that will work, but they are likely mostly TO-202 or TO-220 parts. As such, their pins are too large to fit holes intended for TO-92s, and the pinouts may be incorrect. The TO-39s avoid those problems, but are harder to find.

I don't necessarily agree with the assumption that line-level audio signals should not require such parts in this case. That's true for most modern gear, but this is a very old design that by design wastes a tremendous amount of power. I mean, it has an output transistor that could probably be used to drive a speaker.

Anyway, take your points over to prodigy-pro and they will fill you in on the details, I'm sure.
 
I don't have the schemo in front of me at the moment, but I recall Q5 is a current source for Q4, set with a bias at 1.3V and current of something like 5mA. These are all BJTs, so the bases have to have DC bias or the audio signal would be rectified. But I believe it's collector current and not base current that is at issue.

If I'm looking at this circuit right, they've effectively put in a capacitor bypass (4C1) across 4R11. While that makes sense if you want to get the absolute maximum gain out of the part, it prevents 4R11 from limiting the collector current. What would happen if you just disconnected 4C1?
 
I don't necessarily agree with the assumption that line-level audio signals should not require such parts in this case. That's true for most modern gear, but this is a very old design that by design wastes a tremendous amount of power. I mean, it has an output transistor that could probably be used to drive a speaker.

That's true. :)
 
My order showed up today!:)


unfortunately I won't get to play with any of it until thanksgiving weekend.:(


Of course I got everything out of the box already. Everything looks great. I can't wait to hear how it sounds!
 
I am enjoying all the reviews, clips from drbill and Harvey, and especially the good reports about the 73 and the 84. Hopefully zmix has the 81 solved, and all will be good. I usually check the console a couple times a day to make sure its not me slowing the process down, was red today, but not tonight!! As fast as my fingers could type, I paid the invoice, and now the excitement swings into high gear. Thanks again Chance.

For those interested in shipping cost estimates, 2 pres and 2 mics to Atlanta via Fedex is $55.
 
What letter are you on?

I don't do the pack & ship. When the shippers send me orders that are ready for shipping, I do the invoicing. I think, judging by the administration console, we are past the half way point. Things are going much faster now as people are remitting payment quickly.
 
I invoiced about 20 orders late last night, so check your consoles.
Rats! Skipped over again. If I wasn't already an emotional void, I think I'd get a complex. I was never chosen for stick ball when I was a kid :(..... When is our next meeting, AC?

:D
 
Passed over again!
I've been holding off a cute little female singer songwriter waiting on the new gear.
Not only do I want to try it all out on her as she is an excellent vocalist,I also really like having her around.
:cool:
 
sadDog.jpg

Please sir, may I have some gear? :(
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top