http://www.samcatchesides.com/'s photostream  

Went out on Saturday hoping for a sunset like we had on Thursday and Friday when I was stuck at work... Unfortunatly it wasnt anywhere near as special, but I still managed to get a few shots that I am happy with.
Roll on some more great sunsets!

Went out on Saturday hoping for a sunset like we had on Thursday and Friday when I was stuck at work... Unfortunatly it wasnt anywhere near as special, but I still managed to get a few shots that I am happy with.
Roll on some more great sunsets!

www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?p=1559947#post...
Originally Posted by Hacker
Where you might find benefit is to use film capacitors for C9/C11 instead of the currently specced electrolytics. Something like these 2.2uF/63V MMKs should work very well. You'll need a 5mm lead pitch. You could omit C10 and C12 (just don't fit them at all) and put the 2u2 MMKs in C9 and C11 instead of the Panasonic FC electrolytics.

Come to think of it, in addition to C9 and C11 you could actually replace C5, C6, C7, and C8 with the MMKs, too. If you did that you'd completely eliminate all of the electrolytics from the on-board front-end PSU.

The thinking behind this is that the currently-specced large electrolytics in C5,C6,C7,C8,C9,C11 are a hangover from the legacy designs in which front-end supplies are derived from the output stage supplies. In those amps the front-end needs a high degree of isolation from PSU rail disturbances caused by the output stage; the isolation is provided by RC filters using large (100uF or so) capacitors.

The HackerNAP's front-end, on the other hand, has a completely separate PSU and is therefore unaffected by the behaviour of the output stage. My thinking is that having done away with the source of the old problem we can also do away with the old solution! Instead of large electolytics, let's try smaller films.

Oh, I'd drop one of those MMKs into C25, too.