|
As this forum is rarely used anymore, we've locked it. Feel free to browse and read. Questions? Please reach out to us directly. Cheers! |
|
 |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2016 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MeV wrote: |
What is this thread about?
| mp20748 wrote: | | The thread is about the LVPS and noise. |
So scope pics from the PS's voltages under load would help to bring light into the dark. You said, you wouldn't do before/after shots nor scope shots. So what is this thread about?  |
And it has been serving its purpose, for the right people who actually own a modified marquee, and have/had a desire to make the changes. The results they will see, or have already seen after making the changes. The thread is to let them know about an upgrade that I've already made and yields good results afterwards. It's s DIY to those it was intended for and have interest. And it was a request for me to post, that's what happened, and surely the difference in the shots have been observed..
Now since you want to quantify things, post a screenshot from your setup and let me show you what I mean using your shot in comparison. Match any of those I've posted.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
El Duderino
Joined: 23 Jan 2011
Posts: 4653
Location: Portland, OR
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2016 5:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | Now since you want to quantify things, post a screenshot from your setup and let me show you what I mean using your shot in comparison. Match any of those I've posted. |
A minor objection or disagreement here. Much like the beauty of a woman, I think a screenshot is largely subjective. i.e, it’s not very quantifiable. In contrast, a measurement or specification is objective and quantifiable. “Low noise”, “High speed” “High BW” are relative subjective terms. 2uV, 5pS, or 312MHz isn’t relative or subjective.
It's not much different than subjective vs objective audiophile stuff to me. When there is a claim that $50K Nordost Odin speaker cables are vastly better than $50 10ga zip cord, I think it’s reasonable for the objectivist to ask for some metrics to ascertain how much better and in what way.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2016 6:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| El Duderino wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | | Now since you want to quantify things, post a screenshot from your setup and let me show you what I mean using your shot in comparison. Match any of those I've posted. |
A minor objection or disagreement here. Much like the beauty of a woman, I think a screenshot is largely subjective |
I agree, and have been saying that fo the longest. But at the same time Ive also been saying there is some virtue in them.
| Quote: | | i.e, it’s not very quantifiable. In contrast, a measurement or specification is objective and quantifiable. “Low noise”, “High speed” “High BW” are relative subjective terms. 2uV, 5pS, or 312MHz isn’t relative or subjective |
I agree on this as well, and that is why I've clearly indicated what rule or Standard I used when referring to things like this. And when referencing the same Standard that the manufacturer of my Pattern generator used as my reference, you shot it down because it did not line of with your belief on the subject, yet it is the same standard being used today in the Display Presentation industry.
So just because someone provide numbers, that does not mean it will squelch a debate.
[/quote]It's not much different than subjective vs objective audiophile stuff to me. When there is a claim that $50K Nordost Odin speaker cables are vastly better than $50 10ga zip cord, I think it’s reasonable for the objectivist to ask for some metrics to ascertain how much better and in what way.[/quote]
I also agree here, but the reference to the shot goes back to my argument against taking a shot for this, when I was asked to take the shot for comparison... I notice you didn't make comment when that was introduced into a thread, where any discussion on the topic was for those who also had the same gear and modifications. Which means also, why would I be answering non-relevant and speculative questions when any discussions on this would require that you have the same equipment mentioned.
I can pull out a scope all day long and show a huge difference in what would happen when adding or changing out caps, but at the same time, when watching what's on the screen, you'll not see anything. So, when able to show a difference on screen, that would mean the screen then becomes the scope in a sense, because the results are clear. Not the case with a scope, because I could easily show a huge difference after changes and using a scope. But if nothing changes on the screen, it was a waste of time. And that's why this is for those with the same equipment who can try for themselves, and at the time time should know what to look for...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2016 6:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| El Duderino wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | | Now since you want to quantify things, post a screenshot from your setup and let me show you what I mean using your shot in comparison. Match any of those I've posted. |
A minor objection or disagreement here. Much like the beauty of a woman, I think a screenshot is largely subjective |
I agree, and have been saying that for the longest. But at the same time Ive also been saying there is some virtue in them.
| Quote: | | i.e, it’s not very quantifiable. In contrast, a measurement or specification is objective and quantifiable. “Low noise”, “High speed” “High BW” are relative subjective terms. 2uV, 5pS, or 312MHz isn’t relative or subjective |
I agree on this as well, and that is why I've clearly indicated what Rule or Standard I used when referring to things like this. And when referencing the same Standard that the manufacturer of my Pattern generator used as my reference, you shot it down because it did not line of with your belief on the subject, yet it is the same standard being used today in the Display Presentation industry and is recognized by NIST.
So just because someone provide numbers, that does not mean it will squelch a debate.
[/quote]It's not much different than subjective vs objective audiophile stuff to me. When there is a claim that $50K Nordost Odin speaker cables are vastly better than $50 10ga zip cord, I think it’s reasonable for the objectivist to ask for some metrics to ascertain how much better and in what way.[/quote]
I also agree here, but the reference to the shot goes back to my argument against taking a shot for this, when I was asked to take the shot for comparison... I notice you didn't make comment when that was introduced into a thread, where any discussion on the topic was for those who also had the same gear and modifications. Which means also, why would I be answering non-relevant and speculative questions when any discussions on this would require that you have the same equipment mentioned.
I can pull out a scope all day long and show a huge difference in what would happen when adding or changing out caps, but at the same time, when watching what's on the screen, you'll not see anything that would support a change has happened.
So, when able to show a difference on screen, that would mean the screen then becomes the scope (measuring device) in a sense, because the results are clear. Not the case with a scope, because I could easily show a huge difference after changes and using a scope. But if nothing changes on the screen, it was a waste of time. And that's why this is for those with the same equipment who can try for themselves, and at the time time should know what to look for...
I use several scopes to make this happen of course, and have many procedures and technics to run down, isolate and deal with the noise problem.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
El Duderino
Joined: 23 Jan 2011
Posts: 4653
Location: Portland, OR
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2016 7:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | So, when able to show a difference on screen, that would mean the screen then becomes the scope (measuring device) in a sense, because the results are clear. |
Agreed. A/B comparison screenshots where the only difference is the parameter in question could be objective and valuable. One could contrast, compare and even measure any deltas. However, that’s not what I see with these shots. I see only the “B” in isolation. There is nothing that shows me a difference on screen as there is no A/B comparison. You said you wouldn’t do A/B comparisons?
| mp20748 wrote: | | Also, I'm not into doing before/afters |
Contrasting and comparing with someone elses screenshots would be largely moot to me because there would be way too many other parameter differences other than the parameter or mods in question.
If you want to show a difference with sceenshots, then showing screenshots in an A/B manner seems reasonable to me.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2016 8:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| El Duderino wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | | So, when able to show a difference on screen, that would mean the screen then becomes the scope (measuring device) in a sense, because the results are clear. |
Agreed. A/B comparison screenshots where the only difference is the parameter in question could be objective and valuable. One could contrast, compare and even measure any deltas. However, that’s not what I see with these shots. I see only the “B” in isolation. There is nothing that shows me a difference on screen as there is no A/B comparison. You said you wouldn’t do A/B comparisons?
| mp20748 wrote: | | Also, I'm not into doing before/afters |
Contrasting and comparing with someone elses screenshots would be largely moot to me because there would be way too many other parameter differences other than the parameter or mods in question.
If you want to show a difference with sceenshots, then showing screenshots in an A/B manner seems reasonable to me. |
Posting A/B screenshots to me is just plain STUPID. There are too many variables to make such evaluation meaningful. So again, I'm not for it, nor was my mention of it in this thread for A/B comparison. I asked for a shot to be posted for another reason, which btw you have no idea what my intent was. Yet you keep creating a story out of stones.
So instead, why don't you post quotes from those who wanted the comparisons with screenshots. Why are you insisting on trying to make it look like I'm for A/B screenshots, when its well known I'm against it. And unless you actually know WHY I wanted the shot posted, everything you keep posting on this is a waste of time.
How much experience do you have with taking and dealing with Screenshots?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2016 10:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
This time I'm posting a shot of my convergence grid. The Marquee has LUG tubes and the standard stock yokes. My most recent work is still power supply related, but this time I've left the LVPS for now and made changes on another boards rails and decoupling stages.
Some have been asking about scope shots. The process of running down noise is a learnt technique that you mostly acquire from experience using the common method that's limited in getting good end results. When you acquire a good technique for this, you're find that a high bandwidth scope is not necessary to search for noise.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MeV
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 26
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2016 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: |
And it was a request for me to post, that's what happened, and surely the difference in the shots have been observed..
|
What difference? To be specific to what can I or someone else compare your posted screenhots and say "Yes, there's is a difference!"
To my own setup? (Not my real setup, it's meant hypothetic)
| mp20748 wrote: | | There are too many variables to make such evaluation meaningful. |
A bit out of context but also applies here.
So I compare this shot with my memories of your setup (I maybe have seen before).
| mp20748 wrote: | | So, when able to show a difference on screen, that would mean the screen then becomes the scope (measuring device) in a sense, because the results are clear. Not the case with a scope, because I could easily show a huge difference after changes and using a scope. But if nothing changes on the screen, it was a waste of time. And that's why this is for those with the same equipment who can try for themselves, and at the time time should know what to look for... |
And this is why I initially start questioning, how you "measure" and come to the conclusion, yes there's a difference.
| mp20748 wrote: | | So just because someone provide numbers, that does not mean it will squelch a debate. |
That's only the half story, numbers mean nothing when they wouldn't be interpreted. This also means to look for how they captured.
You didn't measure a direct number, but same applies here. Your statement (there is a difference) is very questionable, when you just rely on your memories. The brain can be very faulty when it come to remember fine details.
The last two sentence are my assumption since you don't enlighten us how your actually come to your statement.
| mp20748 wrote: | | I can pull out a scope all day long and show a huge difference in what would happen when adding or changing out caps, but at the same time, when watching what's on the screen, you'll not see anything that would support a change has happened. |
Agree and you don't even have to add something like a cap, just changing the wires going to your scope could also make a huge difference
But when it's done right on the rails where noise, ripple can cause noise (aka snow) in the projected picture, it can help finding the causer (bad decoupled other compoments or bad shielding or...). It also clarify when comparing to other LVSP if this is a general problem or just a problem with one unit (caps were bad on your unit, maybe even more components). Okay, there's variety of Marquees out there, but at least it is an indication.
Other idea: Measuring the noise of the crt driver output or at least the stage before. If there's a direct correlation between noise of crt driver output and PS noise, you could capture this with a scope.
| mp20748 wrote: | | When you a good technique for this, you're find that a high bandwidth scope is not necessary to search for noise. |
If you use other techniques, please share your knowledge.
| mp20748 wrote: | | And unless you actually know WHY I wanted the shot posted, everything you keep posting on this is a waste of time. |
I'm also a bit clueless. Please explain, when you find the time.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 19, 2016 1:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="MeV"] | mp20748 wrote: |
And it was a request for me to post, that's what happened, and surely the difference in the shots have been observed..
----------------------------
What difference? To be specific to what can I or someone else compare your posted screenhots and say "Yes, there's is a difference!"
|
There are plenty things screenshots should not be used for, but there are some things they can be quite useful. And to help you out on this. If you look IN some of my shots you would clearly be able to see the clarity in an entire room. Or be able to make out what's on the walls and at times even see the texture of things in the image. That level of detail is very obvious in some of my shots. And since it is NOT something you'll commonly see on a projected CRT image, it should be something obvious, especially to someone who understand some of the attributes of image quality.
| mp20748 wrote: | There are too many variables to make such evaluation meaningful........................
A bit out of context but also applies here.
So I compare this shot with my memories of your setup (I maybe have seen before) |
I answered previously. If one is not able to clearly see the overall clarity and transparency of the background in the shots, this discussion is over their heads, because it was immediately pickedup by those who really understand the differences - everythning is not for everybody.
| mp20748 wrote: | So, when able to show a difference on screen, that would mean the screen then becomes the scope (measuring device) in a sense, because the results are clear. Not the case with a scope, because I could easily show a huge difference after changes and using a scope. But if nothing changes on the screen, it was a waste of time. And that's why this is for those with the same equipment who can try for themselves, and at the time time should know what to look for.......................
And this is why I initially start questioning, how you "measure" and come to the conclusion, yes there's a difference |
Again, this is not for everybody. So if you own a projected CRT image and you're able to see that level of detail that is in some of my shots, I can understand why you're not able to see what I'm talking about here.
| mp20748 wrote: | So just because someone provide numbers, that does not mean it will squelch a debate...............
That's only the half story, numbers mean nothing when they wouldn't be interpreted. This also means to look for how they captured.
You didn't measure a direct number, but same applies here. Your statement (there is a difference) is very questionable, when you just rely on your memories. The brain can be very faulty when it come to remember fine details.
The last two sentence are my assumption since you don't enlighten us how your actually come to your statement |
You can't put everything into numbers. Some things are however obvious to THOSE who are discerning of this. And to them it is quite obvious. And again, I had mentioned the thread was primarily for those who have my mods already and should know from a different perspective of what I meant.
| mp20748 wrote: | I can pull out a scope all day long and show a huge difference in what would happen when adding or changing out caps, but at the same time, when watching what's on the screen, you'll not see anything that would support a change has happened.......................
Agree and you don't even have to add something like a cap, just changing the wires going to your scope could also make a huge difference
But when it's done right on the rails where noise, ripple can cause noise (aka snow) in the projected picture, it can help finding the causer (bad decoupled other compoments or bad shielding or...). It also clarify when comparing to other LVSP if this is a general problem or just a problem with one unit (caps were bad on your unit, maybe even more components). Okay, there's variety of Marquees out there, but at least it is an indication.
Other idea: Measuring the noise of the crt driver output or at least the stage before. If there's a direct correlation between noise of crt driver output and PS noise, you could capture this with a scope |
We're agreeing here, and you obviously have a good understanding on what I do and the particular areas that are important. It's good for a chance to have this dialog (or reply) to someone that's not shooting from a gun loaded with theory only for once.
Dealing with noise is VERY complicated. I have years learning it from a practical perspective. And have consulted many in the design engineering field for help and insight on it over the years.
| mp20748 wrote: | When you a good technique for this, you're find that a high bandwidth scope is not necessary to search for noise....................
If you use other techniques, please share your knowledge |
This is complicated, because my strongest learning on this was when I attended an FCC Compliance siminar on Noise and Interference. Though I was already playing with lowering noise, it was that seminar that really pointed me in the right direction. Because there, I was able to ask a ton of questions and they were loaded with good and direct answers. So some of my techniques were birthed during that training. I've had the knowledge for awhile, that plus being a troubleshooter, it was only recently that I really started combining all that I had learnt to include gathering all my notes and other nuggets. That I was able to really take things to another level. My test bed had been down for years, and it was only the past months that I now have one to work with. So I loaded my guns and been back at the noise thing, but this time to an entirely different level. I remember a few years back when I had requested some sample chips from Intersil. Their application engineer called me, because that is what they did then when you requested certain parts from them. He asked me if I understand the picky-ness of high bandwidth IC's. I told him yes, and then went on to tell him what I had been doing so far with these chips. I found it funny that he was very impressed with my understanding and that I had learnt how to tuned out the oscillation using my scope that also reads the frequency of the siganl and that PP level on a separate display. He of course was using a different method of course, but he also liked mine.
But sharing this info. No... I've shared plenty already. I think one should learn their own way of doing some of this stuff
| mp20748 wrote: | And unless you actually know WHY I wanted the shot posted, everything you keep posting on this is a waste of time.........................
I'm also a bit clueless. Please explain, when you find the time. |
I wanted the person to take a screenshot and post it so that I could point out the very obvious.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MeV
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 26
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Can you provide your screenshots in full resolution in a losless format? It's hard for me to see finer details in your shots when the picture resolution is lower than the projected image resolution.
Although if I wanted to, my 909 is faulty, astig amp is gone.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MeV wrote: | Can you provide your screenshots in full resolution in a losless format? It's hard for me to see finer details in your shots when the picture resolution is lower than the projected image resolution.
Although if I wanted to, my 909 is faulty, astig amp is gone. |
Lol.. In other words, you'll need true resolution capability to be able to see what I mentioned. I figured you would say that, exactly what I was waiting for for a response.
And since you've rendered screenshots to be completely useless, what else should we use for discussion?
I didn't know you also owned a 909.
Anyway, it is hard to determine much from the shots, especially considering the lvps is not the only thing I've made changes to. So with that admission, this thread served its purpose.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MeV
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 26
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2016 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You should have become poletician. Answering questions without saying anything
| mp20748 wrote: | | Lol.. In other words, you'll need true resolution capability to be able to see what I mentioned. I figured you would say that, exactly what I was waiting for for a response. |
So is that a yes or a no? What do you mean by "true resolution capability"? Do you refer to my video chain? Or to your camera? Or to your uploaded screenshot in lousy quality?
I guess you mean my video chain.
| mp20748 wrote: | | I answered previously. If one is not able to clearly see the overall clarity and transparency of the background in the shots, this discussion is over their heads, because it was immediately pickedup by those who really understand the differences - everythning is not for everybody. |
| mp20748 wrote: | | Anyway, it is hard to determine much from the shots, especially considering the lvps is not the only thing I've made changes to. |
Is it obvious or is hard to determine? "everythning is not for everybody"... and there are no stupid questions, just stupid answer. However this word combat will lead to nothing.
I think you get me wrong on this. I wanted to know, how you come to the conclusion: There's a difference in my projected image after modifying the LVPS compared to an unmodified LVPS.
I described how someone eventually come to this statemant. It has never been about overall clearity/sharpness in your projected image compared to others CRT PJ. It's about this little difference you claimed to reach with your modified LVPS.
| mp20748 wrote: | | And since you've rendered screenshots to be completely useless, what else should we use for discussion? |
Where did I say that screenshot are useless? Please quote.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2016 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MeV wrote: |
I think you get me wrong on this. I wanted to know, how you come to the conclusion: There's a difference in my projected image after modifying the LVPS compared to an unmodified LVPS.
I described how someone eventually come to this statemant. It has never been about overall clearity/sharpness in your projected image compared to others CRT PJ. It's about this little difference you claimed to reach with your modified LVPS |
Well, you keep missing important things that were already said:
| mp20748 wrote: | | Anyway, it is hard to determine much from the shots, especially considering the lvps is not the only thing I've made changes to. So with that admission, this thread served its purpose. |
So as you see, there was substantially more changes made than JUST to the LVPS. Plus, it's VERY obvious you neither understand Screenshots nor do you know what to look for.
Again, the thread has served it's purpose.. 
| mp20748 wrote: | And since you've rendered screenshots to be completely useless, what else should we use for discussion?
-----------------------------
Where did I say that screenshot are useless? Please quote. |
Several others were able to look at my shots, the ones I had posted before this period, and the ones that I've posted around the time of the shots. And they like myself were able to clearly see a difference in the various shots over a period of time. Which should have been the best determiner on this. The shots got better, but the end results involved the LVPS, but not ONLY the LVPS. And with that clear evidence, you still question the validity... the proof is there, you just need to look for it.
Here's what you do to better get an answer. I'll post more shots today and later. Look at those shots while also looking at anything previous, since you demand verification. And I say, what better proof could there be..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MeV
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 26
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2016 7:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You would be a perfect politician
| mp20748 wrote: | | So as you see, there was substantially more changes made than JUST to the LVPS. Plus, it's VERY obvious you neither understand Screenshots nor do you know what to look for. |
Okay, can you help me out? What did I miss? What did the others see, that I'm don't see?
| mp20748 wrote: | | Here's what you do to better get an answer. I'll post more shots today and later. Look at those shots while also looking at anything previous, since you demand verification. And I say, what better proof could there be.. |
Please post in full resolution uncompressed The only thing I see in your screenshot is that colors are off, picture is a bit unsharp and a great loss of low light details. So please feel free to post in full resolution uncompressed to mimize degration.
| mp20748 wrote: | | And they like myself were able to clearly see a difference in the various shots over a period of time. Which should have been the best determiner on this. The shots got better, but the end results involved the LVPS, but not ONLY the LVPS. And with that clear evidence, you still question the validity... the proof is there, you just need to look for it. |
So why not post pictures from your scences that you already captured as screenshot befor your modification?
| mp20748 wrote: | | Posting A/B screenshots to me is just plain STUPID. There are too many variables to make such evaluation meaningful. |
But why is it now okay to use other, not the same scenes you captured before to make comparsion? And if they are so "obvious", why not postin A/B, you have nothing to loose
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2016 9:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wow.. You have really let this get under your skin. Let's see, you're in a thread that (supposedly has nothing to do with anything you own) trying to point out to me that my shots are bad and not to your expectations, yet you have none to post yourself. And you go futher to try and and nit-pick the subject to get me to set some ground rules or standards so that you'll feel better about what I'm doing, when it's only fair that I remind you that I care less.
And to go futher, in my shots not being properly color balanced or sharp to your satisfaction, I'll also like to remind you that they're also not converged properly and could also use better focusing.
But hey, since I've been posting them this exact same way for almost a decade. Do you think anything you say now will have me standing at attention based on the rhetoric you keep typing here.
Or maybe you think the least i could do is get a better cheap point and shoot camera. I'll give that one some thought.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MeV
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 26
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2016 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | it's VERY obvious you [...] understand |
or you don't
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GREG1292
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 417
Location: indiana
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
1
Last edited by GREG1292 on Tue Apr 19, 2016 5:53 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GREG1292
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 417
Location: indiana
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 26, 2016 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
11
Last edited by GREG1292 on Tue Apr 19, 2016 5:53 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cmjohnson
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2016 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mike, what would be your opinion on recapping the LVPS using oscons and other low ESR types where possible?
Worth doing, or waste of money?
Because it appears that I'm going to have to recap THREE LVPS units at the same time now. So I'll buy the whole kit of caps all at once and get them done, assembly line fashion.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2016 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cmjohnson wrote: | Mike, what would be your opinion on recapping the LVPS using oscons and other low ESR types where possible?
Worth doing, or waste of money?
Because it appears that I'm going to have to recap THREE LVPS units at the same time now. So I'll buy the whole kit of caps all at once and get them done, assembly line fashion. |
I've never noticed any real advantage with those boutique caps. I say you go with any known brand like Nichicon, or one of the other tried and true brands. They would have to be 105 temp and electrolytic. Oscon's I'm not sure would be a good idea in a high frequency switching power supply. I've never seen either the Oscon's or tants in a switching power supply.
If the caps are already good, which is usually the case with these supplies, you should only concentrate on putting 0.1uf to 1uf caps across each of the electrolytic's that's already there.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Forum powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
|
|
