![]() |
Tweakers' Asylum Tweaks for systems, rooms and Do It Yourself (DIY) help. FAQ. |
|
In Reply to: Re: black gates in parallel posted by Big Richard on December 21, 2001 at 02:38:23:
The polypropylene caps should be placed as close as possible to the electrolytic. I’ve found monolithic capacitors to be the best by far for decoupling. I can’t remember how I came to this conclusion - perhaps it is their lower internal resistance or something.In testing (years ago) I was convinced I could hear the difference. I changed the decouplers on some other people’s amps and they were very happy with the results as well.
The usual place for decouplers is right where the power supply lines meet the PCB. The other place is at the end of the power rail (follow the main power rail to its end then terminate it with a monolithic ceramic).
But this is not as simple as it sounds. I completed a design last year that buzzed when decouplers were placed at the end of the power supply rail, but all my power amplifier designs have been quieter with them.
Kind Regards,
Robert Karl Stonjek
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: black gates in parallel - Robert Karl Stonjek 12/21/0102:56:44 12/21/01 (36)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Big Richard 04:47:58 12/21/01 (35)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Robert Karl Stonjek 13:02:41 12/21/01 (34)
- Re: black gates in parallel - john curl 16:36:10 12/21/01 (26)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Steve Eddy 20:06:56 12/21/01 (1)
- Re: black gates in parallel - john curl 23:18:09 12/21/01 (0)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Robert Karl Stonjek 17:26:45 12/21/01 (23)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Steve Eddy 20:34:41 12/21/01 (22)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Robert Karl Stonjek 21:17:11 12/21/01 (21)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Steve Eddy 22:46:00 12/21/01 (20)
- Could this be why? - Big Bear 09:14:40 12/22/01 (1)
- Re: Could this be why? - Steve Eddy 10:43:22 12/22/01 (0)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Robert Karl Stonjek 23:52:45 12/21/01 (17)
- Re: black gates in parallel - john curl 15:46:20 12/22/01 (5)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Robert Karl Stonjek 17:34:22 12/22/01 (4)
- Re: black gates in parallel - john curl 20:27:42 12/22/01 (3)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Robert Karl Stonjek 13:54:04 12/23/01 (2)
- Re: black gates in parallel - john curl 15:31:52 12/23/01 (1)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Robert Karl Stonjek 16:18:41 12/23/01 (0)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Steve Eddy 11:38:29 12/22/01 (10)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Robert Karl Stonjek 13:00:31 12/22/01 (9)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Steve Eddy 00:26:21 12/23/01 (8)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Robert Karl Stonjek 12:05:17 12/23/01 (7)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Steve Eddy 13:31:09 12/23/01 (5)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Robert Karl Stonjek 14:24:58 12/23/01 (4)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Steve Eddy 18:46:19 12/23/01 (3)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Robert Karl Stonjek 21:03:32 12/23/01 (2)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Steve Eddy 22:38:26 12/23/01 (1)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Robert Karl Stonjek 13:19:43 12/24/01 (0)
- Re: black gates in parallel - john curl 12:56:05 12/23/01 (0)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Steve Eddy 13:27:46 12/21/01 (6)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Robert Karl Stonjek 13:54:17 12/21/01 (5)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Steve Eddy 20:19:01 12/21/01 (0)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Big Richard 14:18:10 12/21/01 (3)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Steve Eddy 20:25:06 12/21/01 (2)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Big Richard 02:57:36 12/22/01 (1)
- Re: black gates in parallel - Steve Eddy 11:57:41 12/22/01 (0)