Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mackie PPM1008 Powered Mixer

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Here are your voltages:
    Click image for larger version

Name:	Ch3 Voltages.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	82.6 KB
ID:	824640

    Can you confirm the voltage on U68-1 (=U3-11). Is it 3.5V or -3.5V? (I guess it is negative as U68-2 is positive).

    If U77-1 is 0V, then the left end of R620 must be 0V (unless there is a broken track!). The right end of U620 has a small negative voltage on it. This point is known as a virtual earth. Virtual earths are one of the cool things about op-amps. A bit too complex to explain here. A virtual earth point is not connected to earth, but behaves electrically as though it is. The fact that you have a small negative voltage there is a big clue. As U80-1 has an almost full-rail positive voltage, the only place the negative voltage can come from is out of U3-12.

    This still looks like a faulty U80, but as that has been changed, I think we must have a duff U3.

    Can you check all the voltages on U3 please including the ones used by the other channels.

    This is what I would expect:
    1 should be at or near +15V
    16 should be +15V
    9 should be -15V
    3, 6, 11 and 14 are the control voltage pins for the 1st 4 channels. Voltage will be signal and Threshold dependant. Worth comparing the channels though. We know 11 will look strange but that is because of the fault, not the cause of it.
    All other pins should be 0V - Clearly pins 10 and 12 are not, but they should be.

    The datasheet is here: http://www.milton.arachsys.com/nj71/pdf/ssm2164.pdf
    Mackie have pretty well built the circuit on page 8. All they have done is to loop the output back to the input. I think that by putting the VCA in the feedback loop of the op-amp they achieve a lower distortion at low levels and a higher distortion at high levels when you wouldn't hear it as it is hidden by the loud signal.

    Any clever clogs reading this have a better explanation?

    Do you have an oscilloscope? If so, can you look at the VCA outputs to see if anything is oscillating? Sometimes, when something oscillates, the signal can get rectified by a diode or transistor inside a chip and so manifest itself as a DC voltage. C608 is 20pF in Mackie's design but shown as 100pF in the datasheet. If we do have oscillation, you could try bridging a larger value across the 20pF to see if it changes. It is there for stability. Too large a value will only roll off a bit of the treble. The chip can operate up to 500kHz so no worry there. It does also mean that it could be hooting way out of the audio range.

    If you don't have a scope, put your multimeter on AC volts or millivolts and attach a capacitor (anything you have, say 1uF) between the black probe and ground. If you still see a signal where you were seeing DC, it must be oscillating as the cap is blocking any DC from reaching the meter.

    If you do take U3 off the board, I am pretty sure that the whole mixer will run quite happily without it - apart from having no compression of course. If U80-1 reverts to 0V with no U3, then you have found the problem.

    Martin
    Attached Files

    Comment


    • #17
      Martin,
      Yes U3 pin 11 is indeed -3.5v (not +3.5v). I compared a few things with channel 1 which is functioning properly.

      First, U3 voltages

      3: 1v
      6: 1.2v
      11: -3.5v
      14: 1.3v

      Here's a question. On channel 1 U1A pin2 (inverting input) has 5.7v on it. The output pin1 is +1.2v. Why no inversion of the voltage?

      Finally U3 pins 3,6,11,14 are all the control voltage right? And this is derived from U68A (channel 3) comparator output?

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by lowell View Post
        First, U3 voltages

        3: 1v
        6: 1.2v
        11: -3.5v
        14: 1.3v
        This clearly shows that Pin 11, the CV for ch3 is different to the others. This is because U81-1 has +14V on it so the comparator thinks there is a REALLY LOUD signal and has swung negative. It is trying to turn the volume down.

        Originally posted by lowell View Post
        Here's a question. On channel 1 U1A pin2 (inverting input) has 5.7v on it. The output pin1 is +1.2v. Why no inversion of the voltage?
        Whether the output swings positive or negative depends on difference between the voltages on the inverting and non-inverting inputs. How far it swings depends on how much negative feedback has been applied. A simple comparator has no negative feedback and so swings fully pos or neg. U1-A has got R9 as negative feedback so it will just amplify the difference by about 50%. The non-inverting input is derived from the Threshold pot. The threshold pot also affects the voltage on the inverting input but, when there is no audio present, this will always be lower as R12 pulls it to negative rail. Compare that to R13 which is pulling the non-inverting input to ground (half rail). As pin 3 is higher than pin 2, we will get a positive output like the 1.2V you measured. When there is signal loud enough to exceed the threshold voltage, pin 2 will go more positive thereby reducing the voltage on pin 1.

        Click image for larger version

Name:	Ch3 Voltages.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	91.9 KB
ID:	824654

        Back to looking at Ch3. I have added your measured voltages in red and my calculated correct voltages in green. You may want to check I have got them right on a good channel (especially the inverting input one as feedback affects it.)

        Yesterday, you said:
        Originally posted by lowell View Post
        U68A
        1: -3.5v
        2: 6.4v
        3: 0v with compressor pot down/400mv with compressor pot maxed up
        This doesn't look right. Even if we had faulty chips, the voltage on the non-inverting input should have the range I show in green. 0.4 to 6V.

        I am not sure if they have made a mistake in the schematic. They show R628 as being in parallel with R631. Similarly for the other channels eg. R10 & R13. Is this actually the case?

        Even if they have, I can't understand the range being the 0 to 0.4V you measured. This needs checking and comparing with a good channel. It could be a clue. I am fairly sure that U68 is OK. So why are you only getting maximum 0.4V on pin 3? Follow it through swinging the pot from end to end and check the voltage swing on the wiper, on D41, on both sides of R623 and then on U68-3.

        Originally posted by lowell View Post
        Finally U3 pins 3,6,11,14 are all the control voltage right? And this is derived from U68A (channel 3) comparator output?
        Yes, U68-A-1 feeds U3-11. The control voltages can swing positive or negative depending on the threshold setting and how loud the audio is at the time. When comparing channels, ensure that all the threshold pots are in the same positions.

        I still think it is U3 that is faulty and, after doing the other tests from yesterday and today, just removing the chip will prove that.

        There are still a number of questions unanswered from yesterday's post and the one before. Re-read them when your parts come so we don't miss anything.

        Martin

        Comment


        • #19
          Yesterday, you said:
          Originally Posted by lowell
          U68A
          1: -3.5v
          2: 6.4v
          3: 0v with compressor pot down/400mv with compressor pot maxed up
          This doesn't look right. Even if we had faulty chips, the voltage on the non-inverting input should have the range I show in green. 0.4 to 6V.


          You're right I miss measured/posted. It is 400mv with compression DOWN, and 6.4v with it UP.

          I still think it is U3 that is faulty and, after doing the other tests from yesterday and today, just removing the chip will prove that.


          I removed it and channel 3 noise is gone and seems to be functional.

          Having a tough time finding a replacement ssm2164. ?

          Also channel 2 is still faulty after replacing U71. I'll research your other questions regarding Chnl 2 and report back.
          Last edited by lowell; 04-02-2012, 09:17 PM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Progress! Looks like we are getting there - bit by bit.

            I am going to be away for a week but will be online from time to time, so I will post when I can.

            There are lots of SSM2164 on eBay if you can't find them elsewhere.

            Martin

            Comment


            • #21
              Ok sounds good.

              So I disconnected the input board and Q30 still has 8.4v on its base.

              Comment


              • #22
                Okay I replaced Q30 and there's still the hum HOWEVER, there is now 4.9v on Q30's base vs the previous 8.4v. I then replaced D36 suspecting it was leaky. No change from that. I took out C398, then C391, and still same voltages and hum. There is still 13.7v on pin7 of U71B. I'm at a loss at this point. I suppose it is possible that U7B pin5 is leaking DC back to U71B...?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Ooooh okay... I was probing around and U71 was lighting the peak light when I touched pin 5. other channels were not doing this. I resoldered pin5 and bang, it's fixed. It now makes sense that U71's output was at the positive rail as it didn't have the -12v to "compare" to. So maybe replacing Q30 wasn't necessary, will never know I guess. I'm thinking that U71 WAS the culprit, but I did a bad job soldering in the replacement.

                  Now, the gain switch isn't working. The channel is stuck on low gain. On to fixing that now. I'll report back.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    aight... R563 was reading 30k. Replaced it with new 10ohm and it works! Now just waiting on the quad compressor. All channels work well and are identical now.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Hi, I am back, so will read all your latest messages carefully later on. It sounds like you have made great progress.

                      Martin

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Thanks to you!

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X