yabba235 Posted April 30 Report Share Posted April 30 Hi! I am renewing 25-years 717's and I observe strange things: I noticed a lot of wet places - as if sweaty - I suspect it has something to do with high voltage, have you noticed such symptoms in your old Stax? It's probably old flux - but these are places where it shouldn't be - output sockets, bottom of heat sinks (between PCBs). The second issue - how does the output protection system work - it draws voltages only from two outputs +L and +P? Because that's what I saw on PCB. What are the soldering points marked 81,82, 83 and Test: R,L,V for? I know that Kevi n had a diagram of this system somewhere, but it is no longer available . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin gilmore Posted April 30 Report Share Posted April 30 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yabba235 Posted April 30 Author Report Share Posted April 30 Thank's ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yabba235 Posted May 3 Author Report Share Posted May 3 (edited) Kevin, one more questions: under original schematic resistors r45 and r46 is connect between base q19/20 and emitter q23/24. But in real pcb is connected to base q23/24. I checked it a few times, no mistake - I do not know what to think about it... Edited May 3 by yabba235 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin gilmore Posted May 3 Report Share Posted May 3 suggest you redraw that part of the schematic that you think is wrong. there have been mistakes in stax schematics in the past. especially the t2. once it enters production and works... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spritzer Posted May 6 Report Share Posted May 6 I've been told by more than one source that they put those "mistakes" in on purpose, same as they always labeled the balance pot "offset" and vice versa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Sawyers Posted May 7 Report Share Posted May 7 (edited) Similar thing happened with Tektronix back in the day. A big part of their business was supplying to the US DOD. But in an attempt to reduce cost the DOD placed an order with Hickock and Lavoie, saying that they wanted them to copy the Tektronix scopes. Tek got wind of it and started putting a random hole in the rear panel of the vertical plugin. When this appeared in the Hickock copy, Tektronix sued the UK government in 1961. Took a while (18 years!), but Tek won $4.5m in damages from the US Government. Described here https://vintagetek.org/clone-scopes/ So "mistakes" can show up a plagiarizer of the design. Edited May 7 by Craig Sawyers 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsavitsk Posted May 7 Report Share Posted May 7 8 hours ago, Craig Sawyers said: Similar thing happened with Tektronix back in the day. A big part of their business was supplying to the US DOD. But in an attempt to reduce cost the DOD placed an order with Hickock and Lavoie, saying that they wanted them to copy the Tektronix scopes. Tek got wind of it and started putting a random hole in the rear panel of the vertical plugin. When this appeared in the Hickock copy, Tektronix sued the UK government in 1961. Took a while (18 years!), but Tek won $4.5m in damages from the US Government. Described here https://vintagetek.org/clone-scopes/ So "mistakes" can show up a plagiarizer of the design. "Map traps" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictitious_entry 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.