Does the surface mounted version of the MXL990 have the same circuit as the through-hole version?

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Resonite

Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2023
Messages
13
Location
Sarasota
Hello, I've stumbled across an SMT version of the MXL990 microphone and was wondering if the PCB still used the same circuit as the older THT version.
 
I apologize for not sending any photos, attached are a couple. I can take more if you'd like.
 

Attachments

  • 20231004_184217.png
    20231004_184217.png
    6.1 MB · Views: 5
  • IMG_20231005_051621_Tempest-LMC8.4-F3-v5.1.jpg
    IMG_20231005_051621_Tempest-LMC8.4-F3-v5.1.jpg
    7.2 MB · Views: 6
  • IMG_20231005_051551_Tempest-LMC8.4-F3-v5.1.jpg
    IMG_20231005_051551_Tempest-LMC8.4-F3-v5.1.jpg
    7.5 MB · Views: 2
  • IMG_20231005_051533_Tempest-LMC8.4-F3-v5.1.jpg
    IMG_20231005_051533_Tempest-LMC8.4-F3-v5.1.jpg
    8.2 MB · Views: 2
  • IMG_20231005_051434_Tempest-LMC8.4-F3-v5.1.jpg
    IMG_20231005_051434_Tempest-LMC8.4-F3-v5.1.jpg
    7.8 MB · Views: 3
Possibly / likely..? Posting some photos might help.
Sorry, I didn't reply to this reply, rather, my own post. The reply above has pictures of the PCB and also attached is the reference circuit.
 

Attachments

  • MXL990_simple_sch.jpg
    MXL990_simple_sch.jpg
    51.3 KB · Views: 7
The original 990 had a 16mm(?) electret capsule - have they switched to an externally-polarized one?
 
The original 990 had a 16mm(?) electret capsule - have they switched to an externally-polarized one?
I'm not sure, although here's a picture of the capsule.
 

Attachments

  • 16965001952082244985837571010849.jpg
    16965001952082244985837571010849.jpg
    3.6 MB · Views: 0
  • 16965002395372619761038845265940.jpg
    16965002395372619761038845265940.jpg
    3.7 MB · Views: 0
Thanks for all the information from everyone, I'll probably try to modify the circuit a little bit later tonight (EST).
(I was thinking of replacing C3 and C4 and bridging them with a 10K resistor, although this circuit seems to be a little different)
 
Then my issue is one of semantics. "Bridging them with a 10k resistor" sounded to me like you intend(ed) to just place a 10k resistor between the bases of the two PNP output transistors.

If you only want a low-pass effect, you could consider adding a 1-10nF capacitor in parallel with R7 (referring to the schematic in post #4 here). No need for cutting any traces, and capacitors in that value range can be found in NPO/C0G flavors (no voltage or temperature coefficient) - sticking with SMD packages should make it easy to just piggyback it on top of the resistor.
 
consider adding a 1-10nF capacitor in parallel with R7

Wouldn't that then leave the signal at R6 as just an unfiltered source follower output? It looks like you would get an unfiltered signal on the hot pin and a filtered signal on the return pin that way.
 
Wouldn't that then leave the signal at R6 as just an unfiltered source follower output? It looks like you would get an unfiltered signal on the hot pin and a filtered signal on the return pin that way.

Yeah, and..? That's only relevant in case you're planning on plugging the mic into some form of single-ended-input preamp.

Keep in mind, differential receivers amplify the difference between the "hot" and "cold" inputs.
 
It would cut the slope of the LPF in half. That may not matter, or may even be preferred, just pointing it out as something to be aware of.

So it would (somehow) end up as 3dB/octave (as opposed to 6dB/oct, 1st-order filter slope)? How?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top