sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com

Google Groups

"Gareth Magennis" <gareth.magennis@ntlworld.com>: Feb 06 09:02PM http://www.markertek.com/product/lmx/pro-co-sound-lmx-inline-barrel-xlr-mic-to-1-4in-line-level-adapter

rev.11d.meow@gmail.com: Feb 06 01:25PM -0800 http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/electronics/f4b735b4cabc30ea/   Audio-Technica CP8201 In-Line Transformer   http://www.musiciansfriend.com/accessories/audio-technica-cp8201-in-line-transformer

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: Feb 06 04:35PM -0800 Gareth Magennis wrote:   > http://www.markertek.com/product/lmx/pro-co-sound-lmx-inline-barrel-xlr-mic-to-1-4in-line-level-adapter     ** That gadget ( likely a transformer ) is meant to take a line level input ( keyboard etc) and convert it to suit an XLR mic input.   IOW it's DI box.     ... Phil

"Gareth Magennis" <gareth.magennis@ntlworld.com>: Feb 07 12:57AM "Phil Allison" wrote in message news:d00c612f-ec02-4d6c-91c1-bff3fed78610@googlegroups.com...     Gareth Magennis wrote:   > http://www.markertek.com/product/lmx/pro-co-sound-lmx-inline-barrel-xlr-mic-to-1-4in-line-level-adapter     ** That gadget ( likely a transformer ) is meant to take a line level input ( keyboard etc) and convert it to suit an XLR mic input.   IOW it's DI box.     ... Phil         Pro Co Sound LMX InLine Barrel XLR Mic to 1/4In Line Level Adapter   Thing is, I can't quite make out whether the XLR is male or female, so at this point the Jury is out.     Gareth.

rev.11d.meow@gmail.com: Feb 06 05:07PM -0800 On Friday, February 6, 2015 at 4:57:41 PM UTC-8, Gareth Magennis wrote:   > Thing is, I can't quite make out whether the XLR is male or female, so at > this point the Jury is out.   > Gareth.   The photo doesn't match the description. There is no 1/4" anything on the photo, only XLR, probably female and male, one on each end.

jurb6006@gmail.com: Feb 06 05:10PM -0800 Well I told them they could probably use a high impedance mic on it successfully. I alkso told them tha tI MIGHT be able to make it work with a low impedace mic but it would have to be adapted to ¼". I did not modify the XLR input. It is separate and goes to the other side of the dual OP AMP. The outputs are mixed after that. Maybe they did that to make it work better if you want to use both inputs simultaneaously. Why else ? Alot of things I se just use a couple of resistors, and that also gives them balance ¼" capability. But not this one. No ring at all, just shield and tip.   I think the guy is just going to use a high ipedance mic on it and be done with it. I stuck one rsistor in it, I paralleled a 33K with a 10K. That should quadruple the voltage gain right ?   I didn't want to go higher gain because then it would be way too touchy on a line input like a mixer. I would do it, but if so I would mark it, that it is no longer a line level input.   It probably owuld have been better to modify the XLR input gain. It is more logical but it takes more reverse engineering. tyhat means time and money and htis place doens't want ot make too much. Their rates are very low, which is something we will have to discuss one of these days. Seems like more stuff is coming in though. The one main place in town charges over double what they charge. Get a foothold aand then I will tell them what they should be charging. By then I will know what I am talking about because I will research it.   But really, the same bullshit exists as in the TV business. People put 25 amp fuses in, stick paper or something under whatever to make it work. Let their idiot borther in law work on it.   Got an amp I almost rejected but the boss said it belongs to our pizza guy. Someone puit a wrong screw in the front panel ant it busted the cleat OUT OF ALUMINUM ! And I have never had to drill out more screws in my life. Soldered it up a binch of times and now the thing won't come out of protect. Shitcan it, I already got too much time in it to even lose reasonable money at what they charge.   And that one with the class D Icepower module ? I put a note on it, forget it and stick it out there and then find out LATER that they just sold the thing !   Same shit, different day and less money.   Whatever. Go ahead and rant, I do.

rev.11d.meow@gmail.com: Feb 06 05:13PM -0800 On Friday, February 6, 2015 at 4:35:12 PM UTC-8, Phil Allison wrote:   > ** That gadget ( likely a transformer ) is meant to take a line level input ( keyboard etc) and convert it to suit an XLR mic input.   > IOW it's DI box.   > ... Phil     The pictured unit, not the same as in the description, is bi-directional.

"Gareth Magennis" <gareth.magennis@ntlworld.com>: Feb 07 01:22AM FFS.   Buy a 15 dollar box and fix yours and the customers problem.     Sorted.               wrote in message news:7984d8f8-418b-4aaa-9c45-99c3a24fccc5@googlegroups.com...   Well I told them they could probably use a high impedance mic on it successfully. I alkso told them tha tI MIGHT be able to make it work with a low impedace mic but it would have to be adapted to ź". I did not modify the XLR input. It is separate and goes to the other side of the dual OP AMP. The outputs are mixed after that. Maybe they did that to make it work better if you want to use both inputs simultaneaously. Why else ? Alot of things I se just use a couple of resistors, and that also gives them balance ź" capability. But not this one. No ring at all, just shield and tip.   I think the guy is just going to use a high ipedance mic on it and be done with it. I stuck one rsistor in it, I paralleled a 33K with a 10K. That should quadruple the voltage gain right ?   I didn't want to go higher gain because then it would be way too touchy on a line input like a mixer. I would do it, but if so I would mark it, that it is no longer a line level input.   It probably owuld have been better to modify the XLR input gain. It is more logical but it takes more reverse engineering. tyhat means time and money and htis place doens't want ot make too much. Their rates are very low, which is something we will have to discuss one of these days. Seems like more stuff is coming in though. The one main place in town charges over double what they charge. Get a foothold aand then I will tell them what they should be charging. By then I will know what I am talking about because I will research it.   But really, the same bullshit exists as in the TV business. People put 25 amp fuses in, stick paper or something under whatever to make it work. Let their idiot borther in law work on it.   Got an amp I almost rejected but the boss said it belongs to our pizza guy. Someone puit a wrong screw in the front panel ant it busted the cleat OUT OF ALUMINUM ! And I have never had to drill out more screws in my life. Soldered it up a binch of times and now the thing won't come out of protect. Shitcan it, I already got too much time in it to even lose reasonable money at what they charge.   And that one with the class D Icepower module ? I put a note on it, forget it and stick it out there and then find out LATER that they just sold the thing !   Same shit, different day and less money.   Whatever. Go ahead and rant, I do.

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: Feb 06 05:39PM -0800 Gareth Magennis wrote:     > Pro Co Sound LMX InLine Barrel XLR Mic to 1/4In Line Level Adapter   > Thing is, I can't quite make out whether the XLR is male or female, so at > this point the Jury is out.   ** No it isn't.   http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/images2000x2000/231520.jpg     ... Phil

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: Feb 06 05:43PM -0800 > > > http://www.markertek.com/product/lmx/pro-co-sound-lmx-inline-barrel-xlr-mic-to-1-4in-line-level-adapter   > The photo doesn't match the description.   ** It does actually.   > There is no 1/4" anything on the photo,     ** Yes there is - a Neutrik style, locking jack socket.   The gadget plugs into a mixing desk and a jack lead from the line level source into it.   http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/images2000x2000/231520.jpg     .... Phil

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: Feb 06 05:47PM -0800 > > IOW it's DI box.   > The pictured unit, not the same as in the description, is bi-directional.   ** Not meant to be - the male XLR on one end makes it impossible to plug a mic or XLR mic lead into it.     .... Phil

rev.11d.meow@gmail.com: Feb 06 05:50PM -0800 On Friday, February 6, 2015 at 5:43:07 PM UTC-8, Phil Allison wrote:   > The gadget plugs into a mixing desk and a jack lead from the line level source into it.   > http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/images2000x2000/231520.jpg   > .... Phil     The Male XLR plug will not fit a 1/4" Female jack. D'OH   Wrong part for solution to this problem.   Besides that, OP needlessly and incorrectly modified the amp.

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: Feb 06 06:02PM -0800 > > http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/images2000x2000/231520.jpg   > The Male XLR plug will not fit a 1/4" Female jack. D'OH     ** FFS what planet are you on ?   The MALE XLR plugs into the MIC input on a desk.   It's a mini DI (Direct Injection) box   - got a clue what that is ??     > Besides that, OP needlessly and incorrectly modified the amp.   ** Bollocks he did.     .... Phil

jurb6006@gmail.com: Feb 06 04:52PM -0800 I am told what happened is they tried to switch amps to see how the other one sounded, when it was turned on the breaker in the panel tripped.   One is a Stagg. I forget the model but suffice it to say it is in the few hundred watt range, using a bridged configuration. I pop that and BOTH legs of the bridge are shorted. I had enough transistors for one leg and that's all it needs, but I ran out and haven't dry tested the other leg yet but I suspect it only needs outputs as well. How could one blow the other even if it shorted ? Ain't there current limniting or something ? It has double pairs of outputs on each leg.   (by dry test I mean cut the collector legs and see if you ast least get the DC centered)   The other amp is an Ampeg, I think a something someting 3500. It is a normal configuration with a triple set of MOSFETS. It has good outputs. The protection relay not only disconnects the outputs, but also shorts the speaker wire to ground. (I remember the discussion about the magnet on the relay, but that was a kilowatt rainge amp, this is only maybe 500 watts) Both NC and NO terminals were shorted causing the amp to run into ground.   Luckily it has current limiting but working into that short, it fooled me on the dim bulb test at first. Obviously it couldn't correct the DC offset at that low a voltage. The bulb was not completely lit. After a few tests I plugged it in directly and it did not emit any smoke. (one of these days I think I will put a meter across that bulb just to get another piece of information) Lifting the temrinal to ground got the amp working but I can't ship it that way of course.   Anyway, with this scenario, what kind of frigged up failure mode happened here ? The one thing I can tink of is that they connected the speaker to the next amp without disconnecting it from the first one. Well, they're musicians...   However they deny that. However, maybe more than one of them was doing this little hookup thing and they don't know what happened for sure.   Thing gets me is that one it blew the breaker. Two, BOTH legs of the Stagg are blown. If you short that out it would blow whatever side of the line got shorted, right ? It would not need all eight outputs.   So at this point I am wondering if we are dealing with some sort of ground fault deal. This happened at the shop which is a commercial building. You kinda think it would be wired right. (maybe I should chck ?)You know there are still those amps around that can shock you if the ground switch is set wrong. However neither of these amps have a ground switch at all.   Other thing is i have o idea what else was plugged in. These are bass amps, far as I know they were not going to record or anything so ther ewere not likely plugged into a mixing board or something like that.   Wrack your brain on that and have a beer. It is Friday.

dplatt@coop.radagast.org (Dave Platt): Feb 06 05:15PM -0800 In article <1018e621-a7d1-4df0-b90d-94fd4d3134d0@googlegroups.com>, >is a commercial building. You kinda think it would be wired right. (maybe I should chck ?)You know there are still >those amps around that can shock you if the ground switch is set wrong. However neither of these amps have a ground >switch at all.   Definitely worth checking for a ground fault. A reversed hot/neutral connection might also contribute to such a failure.   Another possibility: somebody might have decided to "save time and save carrying around a bunch of different wires" by using ordinary AC three-wire extension cords as "speaker cables", with a cheater of some sort at each end to adapt to the amps and speakers. If one end of such a cheated cable ends up being plugged into an AC outlet, and the other end gets plugged into an amp... POP/FZZZ/smoke.   Yes, there are "roadies" careless enough to do things this way.

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: Feb 06 05:59PM -0800 > Anyway, with this scenario, what kind of frigged up failure mode happened here ? The one thing I can tink of is that they connected the speaker to the next amp without disconnecting it from the first one. Well, they're musicians...   ** Probably had two leads going into the same cabinet - most cabs have dual jack or Speakon sockets to allow chaining.   It's a dead sitter for dopey musicians to use both of them into each channel of a stereo amp OR in this case two different amps.   The result is almost always he same.   The driven channel or amp sees a short circuit, blows and destroys the other OR the un-driven amp blows as discussed recently and does the same.     .... Phil

whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>: Feb 06 05:35PM -0800 On Wednesday, February 4, 2015 at 8:22:40 PM UTC-8, Michael Black wrote:   > talking about that recently elsewhere something about Fluke (I think it > wsa) going to Intersil, and then Intersil released the IC as a new > product, or maybe a modified version.   The way I heard it, Fluke got Intersil to make a custom part, and Intersil later released it   <http://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/history-of-the-fluke-8020-series/>

Scotophor <a.j.franzman@verizon.net>: Feb 06 03:01PM -0800 > The discussion on the other forum, where the fellow will overmold > conventionally encapsulated LEDs in the desired form factor for you, > sounds far more promising.   I fail to understand how dark current is applicable here.   But if you think that's a lot of epoxy, look into the Kingbright L-885/6*DT and WP-885/6*DT, SunLED XEM*26D, and LEDtronics 23SL200*3 series, where "*" is a letter representing color code (either G, I, R or Y). These are 6-chip versions similar to the 3-chip version I'm looking for, but with the modern increased chip-to-chip spacing that I don't want. These were manufactured until very recently and are apparently still available from some industrial suppliers. There are/were also similar but even larger 8-chip versions. This strongly suggests to me that your hypothesis is erroneous -- if the ones I want were discontinued due to being unreliable simply because of their size, wouldn't even larger ones be at least as unreliable, and therefore be discontinued at the same time, or even earlier?   If I find sufficient quantity of the vintage parts and "go through them like Kleenex", I'll deal with that issue when the time comes. Let /me/ decide what I want.   As a last resort, I am prepared to undertake a similar encapsulating process to that of the fellow on the other forum, which will give me better results for less cost with respect to his method. But I haven't yet given up on obtaining sufficient quantity of the originals.   Statistically speaking, I find it hard to believe that: upon identifying the LEDs, (A) I already had two of them, unused, among my supplies, (B) I already knew someone whom I believed might also have some, which I was able to verify in minutes by browsing his website. I later obtained more than a dozen of them from him, a mix of unused examples and pulls. (C) Within days I had found another person online who sent me three more, yet (D) In the 6+ months since, I have not been able to locate even a single additional example. What are the odds that I could locate and acquire the world's entire available supply of these in such a short time, and that I already knew the person who had most of them? It boggles my mind to think that I found as many as I did so quickly, yet there now don't appear to be any more to be had, anywhere. I believe there must be more out there; it's just going to take more time and effort to discover them.

spamtrap1888@gmail.com: Feb 06 05:14PM -0800 On Friday, February 6, 2015 at 3:01:05 PM UTC-8, Scotophor wrote: > > conventionally encapsulated LEDs in the desired form factor for you, > > sounds far more promising.   > I fail to understand how dark current is applicable here.   Dark current is (leakage) current that does not contribute to light output. It increases as the various crystal defects grow and propagate. LED failure is generally defined as the point where the light output has dropped by 50%. Selection of encapsulant can either accelerate or retard this effect.   > Statistically speaking, I find it hard to believe that: upon identifying the LEDs, (A) I already had two of them, unused, among my supplies, (B) I already knew someone whom I believed might also have some, which I was able to verify in minutes by browsing his website. I later obtained more than a dozen of them from him, a mix of unused examples and pulls. (C) Within days I had found another person online who sent me three more, yet (D) In the 6+ months since, I have not been able to locate even a single additional example. What are the odds that I could locate and acquire the world's entire available supply of these in such a short time, and that I already knew the person who had most of them? It boggles my mind to think that I found as many as I did so quickly, yet there now don't appear to be any more to be had, anywhere. I believe there must be more out there; it's just going to take more time and effort to discover them.   Sooner or later, crap tends to get flushed.

jurb6006@gmail.com: Feb 06 02:51PM -0800 It's not ALL L-R like the OP's situation seems to be, but it is an objectionalbe level as far as I am concerned. Then when they run it through that digital delay for surround I consider it unlistenable. They even soemtimes have that in the L+R so switching it to mono won't get rid of it.   TV sucks in this country. they do not have their HDTVC shit together. Half the time it is overscanned and you lose half the picture or you get a 20" picture on a 32" screen.   Glad I don't really fix them anymore, You can't tell if they're broke ! With all the special effects and the size whatever, I am to the point where if I had a lttle bit more money and soemone told me their TV was broke I would tell them to go find a book to read. Seriously.   It doens't bother me, I can't stand anything made in the last ten years anyway. Looks like the cmaeraman was either drunk or it was shot by a school kid, and that's when they give yopu a picture with normal color even, rather than bue or red or blaxk and white with noise streaks in it on purpose. I thnink what it is is that they don't know how to write anything anymore so they are just dazzling the sheeple. Probably doesn't go over all that well in some countries.

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: Feb 06 04:26PM -0800 Leif Neland wrote:     > L-R = out of phase.   ** Nope.   L-R = the difference signal.   If it is small compared to L or R, then the signal is mono. If it is comparable with L or R, that is normal stereo.   If is it larger than either L or R, then you have an out of phase pair.   In early FM broadcast systems, this signal was sent along with a mono signal using an amplitude modulated, 38kHz sub-carrier. In the receiver, both signals were recovered and by adding and subtracting, L and R produced.   L+R + (L-R) = 2L   L+R - (L-R) = 2R     .... Phil

spamtrap1888@gmail.com: Feb 06 10:22AM -0800 On Friday, February 6, 2015 at 3:59:18 AM UTC-8, N_Cook wrote:   > > This Zenith DVD2381 has worked for years, except for a spell a few > > years ago when the tray would shudder but not quite open and close. > > I managed to free it up.   ... > try googling model number and "badcaps"   Thanks for your response!   Nothing leapt out at me. The electrolytics in and around the power supply also look pristine. They are marked "KME" and "SMS", so likely Chemi-Con.   Do Chemi-Con electrolytics have a bad reputation? They are not called out as bad on the badcaps site.

Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca>: Feb 06 02:13PM -0500

N_Cook <diverse@tcp.co.uk>: Feb 06 07:23PM On 06/02/2015 19:13, Michael Black wrote: > suspect when something with a switching supply goes bad. They are more > likely to go bad than a diode or other component.   > Michael   In the old days you would never see 120 deg C rated caps, even with all those glowing valves the caps did not get that hot. Combined with smaller physical size for the same rating. Has QC of elecrolyte and materials really got that good to allow for half size caps , compared to sizws before?

dplatt@coop.radagast.org (Dave Platt): Feb 06 11:24AM -0800 >The thing still looks pristine inside, so I hate to junk it without >giving repair a shot.   >Does this sound like a simple problem to fix?   One not-uncommon failure mode in such devices, is bad electrolytic capacitors. They may go "high ESR" and fail to filter the power supply voltages properly, or they may swell and leak (failing to filter, and possibly damaging the PC board traces).   A decent capacitor ESR tester (which is different than a capacitance meter) can often identify such caps.   "Re-capping" the device requires identifying the failed caps (or just identifying "all the usual suspects"), removing, and replacing. If PC board traces have been damaged by electrolyte leakage, it would be necessary to rebuild them or bridge over the damaged areas.   It's definitely possible to do. It often isn't done commercially for lower-value products due to the cost of labor. When you can buy a DVD player for under $100, spending an hour of technician labor at $100 isn't a great bargain.

You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to sci.electronics.repair+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.