sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com

Google Groups

oldschool@tubes.com: Mar 27 03:38AM -0500 I just picked up a XAM model 200 amplifier. It was cheap, and I thought it would be a nice small and simple amp for computer speakers. It's nothing fancy, just a basic amp with bass, treble, balance and volume controls, and input for tuner (aux) or phono. Probably outputs around 15 W per channel. (plenty for some bookshelf speakers connected to a computer or MP3 player).   It works fine, and sounds good. It is solid state and has a nice solid chassis and alum front panel. It says made in Taiwan on the back. Actually, it did not work when I got it. In fact it was dead. But the fuse holder was loose, and when I opened it, the wire was broke off the fuse holder. A bit of solder fixed that, and I tightended the fuse hldr. A quick and simple repair. (I put a little pure silicone caulk on the fuse hldr nut to keep it tight).   It appears to be from the late 60s or early 70s. Possibly sold by Olson electronics (I remember that store).   Anyhow, all I can find is one discussion group website: http://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/help-with-details-on-2-vintage-amps.577544   Photo here: http://i1176.photobucket.com/albums/x331/DeliriumEnder/20140215_111202_zps82uwrt1y.jpg   I dont really need a schematic at the moment, but I like to have one for all electronic stuff I own.   As usual, Google is not cooperating. Giving me schematics for everything except what I am looking for.....   Do any of you know a better way to locate this schematic?   Thanks

Tim Schwartz <tim@bristolnj.com>: Mar 27 08:43AM -0400 Good morning,   I couldn't recall if XAM was a house brand for Sam Goody record stores, or E.J.Korvette's. Looking on E-bay, it was a house brand for Korvette's. I once heard a story that "XAM" was "MAX" spelled backwards, and the MAX was the owner's (of Korvette's) dog. I've no idea if there is any truth to it.   Regards, Tim   P.S. You'll find some XAM products listed on e-bay.

Tim Schwartz <tim@bristolnj.com>: Mar 27 08:45AM -0400 Good morning,   I couldn't recall if XAM was a house brand for Sam Goody record stores, or E.J.Korvette's. Looking on E-bay, it was a house brand for Korvette's. I once heard a story that "XAM" was "MAX" spelled backwards, and the MAX was the owner's (of Korvette's) dog. I've no idea if there is any truth to it.   Regards, Tim   P.S. You'll find some XAM products listed on e-bay.

"fynnashba@yahoo.com" <fynnashba@yahoo.com>: Mar 27 01:30AM -0700 > l have come across quite a number of refrigerators that has inverter for its compressor motor these days. The problem is these compressors will not work when connected to 50 or 60HZ mains. Please can someone give me an explanation on how these circuits work, how to test both circuit and compressor? > Thanks   Thanks everyone for your support and concern. This is what makes me love this group and electronics in general, people are always ready to help.

whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>: Mar 26 03:29PM -0700 > > WOuldn't an electromagnet be better? So you can turn it on as needed?   > There is that, of course. And with neodymium magnets, switching them "off" is difficult. I was addressing the concept of magnetic fields in the first place.   > I would also suggest AC on the electromagnet as that will naturally de-magnetize anything it touches - cf.: tape-head demagnetizers.   I second this. It concerns me somewhat that the magnetic components might realign themselves when you drop 'em, too; does anyone remember that silly little toy with magetized Scottie dogs?   Accidental magnetization can affect a relay or buzzer, but is unlikely to have any permanent effect on the mainly-nickel magnetizables on surface mount devices.. The worst I can imagine, is that a ferrite might leap to the magnet face and get a fracture from the impact.

mike <ham789@netzero.net>: Mar 26 06:17PM -0700 On 3/26/2017 3:29 PM, whit3rd wrote:   >>> WOuldn't an electromagnet be better? So you can turn it on as needed?   >> There is that, of course. And with neodymium magnets, switching them "off" is difficult. I was addressing the concept of magnetic fields in the first place.   >> I would also suggest AC on the electromagnet as that will naturally de-magnetize anything it touches - cf.: tape-head demagnetizers.   I'd worry a lot about that. Transients from turning the electromagnet on and off can create voltage in nearby conductors. Sensitive inputs might not like that. Hall Effect sensors might not like magnetism either.

N_Cook <diverse@tcp.co.uk>: Mar 27 07:56AM +0100 On 27/03/2017 02:17, mike wrote: >> devices.. The worst I can >> imagine, is that a ferrite might leap to the magnet face and get a >> fracture from the impact.   Perhaps not the voltage as such, but potentially destructive high dV/dt , lowish voltage but very short duration

"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>: Mar 26 09:17PM +0200 On 2017-03-26 08:09, Jeff Liebermann wrote:   > non-compliant technology and organizations. Life blunders on.   > If adding a cell site in your neighborhood requires a tower ordinance, > you have my sympathies.   I wonder why such things are not regulated from the highest level possibly in any country. Seems absurd to my that anything smaller than a state has to regulate towers.   -- Cheers, Carlos E.R.

"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>: Mar 26 09:17PM +0200 On 2017-03-26 06:46, Jeff Liebermann wrote:   > but had to build it in a hurry: > <http://www.LearnByDestroying.com/jeffl/crud/AmestiAT&T.jpg> > I'll spare you the jokes about standing lumber trees.   ROTFL! X'-)     > People drove for considerable distances to see this abomination when > it was first installed about 20(?) years ago.   I can imagine :-)     -- Cheers, Carlos E.R.

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>: Mar 26 02:17PM -0700 On Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:17:01 +0200, "Carlos E. R."   >I wonder why such things are not regulated from the highest level >possibly in any country. Seems absurd to my that anything smaller than a >state has to regulate towers.   I'm not going to speculate why, but the various parts of cell tower installation are divided between Federal, State, and local authorities by areas of influence. Anything that has to do with RF is owned by the FCC. Anything that has to do with aviation hazards, is run by the FAA and managed by the FCC. The FCC also deals with licenses, auctions, and protecting monopolies. If there are local public utilities commissions involved, then those are run by the State. Site selection, co-location, construction practices, aesthetics, compliance the local general plan, and taxing users, are handled by the local authorities (city and/or county).   It might be possible to consolidate all these into some kind of national personal communications bureaucracy, which would run things at all levels. To some extent, that's roughly what happened when the DHS (dept of homeland security) was established in 2001. I believe that might be what you're suggesting. Yes, it could be done, but do we really need yet another bureaucracy when the inefficient but tolerably effective existing tangle of overlapping agencies, departments, and boards are adequate? Sometimes, they need a kick in the posterior, as with the FCC imposing a "shot clock" to get things moving, but mostly, things lurch and blunder forward without bloodshed or additional taxes.   Also, the cellular industry basically started in about 1990 and is now only 27 years old. In another 15 years or so, we'll probably be overly connected at gigabit speeds going to work via virtual reality and traveling around via augmented reality. Creating yet another bureaucracy just to speed up the process doesn't seem like a great idea. We may even be communicating by telepathy via implants. Be patient. The future will arrive at the usual erratic pace quite nicely without faster regulations and additional bureaucracy.   -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>: Mar 27 04:51AM +0200 On 2017-03-26 23:17, Jeff Liebermann wrote: > the posterior, as with the FCC imposing a "shot clock" to get things > moving, but mostly, things lurch and blunder forward without bloodshed > or additional taxes.   I wasn't thinking only or specifically of the USA ;-)   -- Cheers, Carlos E.R.

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.