BM789 continuity behaviour - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: giosif
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 11:58:53 am
content: Has anyone else noticed this rather annoying behaviour with the BM789 in continuity mode where, when connecting the probes to a part of a circuit where there is no continuity (or low resistance), it gives a short beep, but then stops.If you then move one of the probes away from the part of the circuit to which it was connected, wait for a second or two, the connect back the probe, you get the short beep again.To be clear, I'm not talking about parts of circuit which have capacitors connected.This is annoying because, when trying to trace connections on a board, you get distracted by all these false positives and you end up having to keep the probes in a given location for longer, to make sure the meter beeps because of actual continuity.In other words, the meter's fast response in continuity mode is being defeated by these (brief, but often) false positives.Also, it is interesting that a BM257s or a 121GW do not exhibit this behaviour on the same board, same connection points, and same probes (i.e. these other meters don't beep at all in those same locations).Could it be that the BM789 in continuity mode is too sensitive to the stray capacitance in the circuit and/or meter probes?

author: giosif
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 12:10:20 pm
content: Just adding another observation I've just made (again, with the BM789 in continuity mode): if I hold one of the probes in my hand (touching the metal part) and I touch the other probe to a piece of metal somewhere in my lab (I've used the boom stand of my microscope for this test), I also get the short beep.

author: LuisBe
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 12:46:35 pm
content: Sorry for my level of English, everything I write is done with a translator. I have just checked that my BM789 does the same as yours, both in the circuit and against the chassis of a remote and unconnected equipment. I have measured the resistance between the short beep points in the circuit and there is 1.35 Kohms.

author: BILLPOD
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 01:31:56 pm
content: I have a similar experience with my 121GW in 'reverse' continuity mode.Actually it's called cable testing mode, but it's supposed to beep when continuity is broken. I get these short beeps when I test a suspected open in a DMM test lead

author: siealex
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 02:46:46 pm
content: Is the continuity mode combined with the diode test mode? A short beep in this mode means a forward voltage drop between 0.1 V and 2.0 V for a normally functioning diode.

author: giosif
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 04:08:41 pm
content: Quote from: LuisBe on September 03, 2023, 12:46:35 pmThanks for confirming!Quote from: BILLPOD on September 03, 2023, 01:31:56 pmHmmm... I don't think this is the same problem, even assuming the DMM test leads you are testing are good (although, it sounds to me the issue you are seeing is caused by those leads).Quote from: siealex on September 03, 2023, 02:46:46 pmNo, this is continuity/low resistance mode only.Diode test mode is a separate function with this meter.

author: LuisBe
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 04:49:53 pm
content: I just made a home video and uploaded it to youtube in hidden. I have no idea how to upload videos, nor how to edit videos so I hope you can forgive me if I did something wrong.I compare the same actions with a BM235 and with a BM789 on a chinese arduino board.I have deleted the video in this post because I had an error in my installation. There are two videos further down the thread where it is explained.

author: giosif
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 05:27:12 pm
content: Quote from: LuisBe on September 03, 2023, 04:49:53 pmThanks for the video!That's exactly the behaviour I am talking about.

author: LuisBe
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 05:38:19 pm
content: Thank you for informing us of the anomaly.

author: mwb1100
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 05:52:02 pm
content: FWIW (probably not much), I cannot reproduce this behavior with a BM786 that I bought from welectron 1 year ago.

author: giosif
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 06:55:01 pm
content: Quote from: mwb1100 on September 03, 2023, 05:52:02 pmThanks for checking!That's good to know, since the BM786 is part of the same series as the BM789.I have contacted Brymen about this issue; let's see what they say.In the meantime, anyone else owning a BM789, could you please test and report here, so we understand how widespread this problem is?

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 08:24:23 pm
content: Quote from: giosif on September 03, 2023, 12:10:20 pmI haven't read this whole thread but my 789 doesn't do that.

author: Caliaxy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 08:41:16 pm
content: My 789 does something similar, too: random very short beeps when touching metal parts of various equipment with only one probe (the other probe in the air). Looks like some static charge pick-up - touching repeatedly the same metal part does not result in multiple beeps; you have to wait a bit or touch something else before being rewarded with a new beep. Not sure what to make of it...Haven't noticed it (and it never bothered me) until reading this post. Thank you, Mr. giosifBought from Welectron in 2001.

author: giosif
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 09:10:21 pm
content: Quote from: Caliaxy on September 03, 2023, 08:41:16 pmTo be clear, the behaviour on its own doesn't bother me; what does, though, is its impact on being able to use the meter's continuity function to trace connections in a circuit.In other words, because of all these beeps I get when placing the probes on points which are not actually directly connected, I have to keep the probes in a given location long enough until the beep stops, before I can determine there is no connectivity and can move on to the next location.And this is no better than having a multimeter with a slow response time in continuity mode.Have you used your BM789 for this purpose?

author: Caliaxy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 09:43:28 pm
content: Quote from: giosif on September 03, 2023, 09:10:21 pmTrue.Quote from: giosif on September 03, 2023, 09:10:21 pmNot that much, it's not my primary meter. I actually tend to avoid it, for reasons other than this one (now I have one more reason...)

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 10:17:09 pm
content: Quote from: Caliaxy on September 03, 2023, 08:41:16 pmOK, this thread has me testing more. Mine does the same as Caliaxy describes:random very short beeps when touching metal parts of various equipment with only one probe (the other probe in the air). Looks like some static charge pick-up - touching repeatedly the same metal part does not result in multiple beeps; you have to wait a bit or touch something else before being rewarded with a new beep.I can reproduce this ^ . Not sure what the interval is between no random beep and a random beep but sometimes it seems less than a minute. I have tried various combinations (meter off/on, replugging leads, etc) to find the pattern and interval but so far it just seems like a random beep and a random discharge. In one instance I found that just plugging in the red lead caused a beep.In typing this for about 2 minutes I had the meter off. When I turned it on and touched just the black lead to an Arduino component I got a beep; within a couple seconds I pulled the black lead off and touched it with my fingers and got another beep. 2 minutes later after more typing I just touched the black lead with my finger and got a beep. Half a minute more typing and no beep from touching either lead. Another half a minute of typing and a beep touching the black lead with a finger. Another half minute of typing and no beep from touching either lead with a finger. Another 30 seconds and no beep from a finger touch, but a beep from just touching the black lead to an Arduino circuit. Red lead doesn't seem to be beep happy.In exploring this rabbit hole I tested the leads for resistance with a 4 wire meter and didn't find anything surprising. However, in an effort compare the leads to other leads I found that while most pairs show the same resistance on the black and red leads, one of my Fluke 175 pairs shows that one lead has about twice the resistance of the other. If it isn't one rabbit hole it's another.(After some more typing the black lead touched to an Arduino component gives a beep, followed by silence for about a minute, followed by another beep when touched to the Arduino circuit. Then silence from any type of touch for about a minute.)Edit: After owning the 789 for couple years or so and using it along side various other meters, I'd say that for anything other than continuity I think it is an accurate and robust meter - but it seems that in continuity mode it's a tad overly sensitive and and sometimes goes into "listen to me and look at me" mode.- After sitting here for several minutes and getting no beep I turned it off and on. Then touched an Arduino component with the red lead and got no beep, but within a couple seconds touched the black lead to the same component and got a beep.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 10:44:36 pm
content: As per the attached images, these behaviors seem pretty consistent. Maybe this can help someone better diagnose what's happening.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2023, 11:51:15 pm
content: Maybe grasping further at straws but when checking continuity with the Fluke 179 you can get a beep between the VOUT and the INPUT to repeat after about 10 seconds (or sometimes less). With the Brymen 789 you can get a beep to repeat in about 3-4 seconds.Edit: Or maybe not; my theory was that the Brymen is more sensitive to something but I can't confirm it - test results are too random.

author: sonpul
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 04, 2023, 07:33:17 am
content: It seems to us that everything is allowed to us with a multimeter and we can demand everything. Despite the length of the wires and the huge interference when touching anything.I can also call a short beep to something massive or a component on a PCB. I call a lot and often during the repair of devices, but this behavior has never interfered strongly. I perceive it as the behavior of a living organism or a feature of the character of a work partner.

author: giosif
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2023, 05:58:35 pm
content: Quote from: sonpul on September 04, 2023, 07:33:17 amDo you own a BM789?If yes, how often have you used it in continuity mode to trace circuits?

author: sonpul
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2023, 07:40:31 pm
content: Quote from: giosif on September 05, 2023, 05:58:35 pmI use two BM789 in my work.QuoteOften and a lot.

author: giosif
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2023, 08:39:39 pm
content: Quote from: sonpul on September 05, 2023, 07:40:31 pmAnd, from your perspective, don't the spurious beeps significantly slow down your tracing process (i.e. making the experience similar to using a slow continuity response meter)?Or it does, and you just learned to accept it?

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2023, 01:39:06 am
content: I tried to reproduce with my 789, firmware 78911 but no luck. I tried with a single lead to various equipment, a large plate and sheet of foil. Then tried both leads with foil, plate and other metal equipment. I never had it trigger. Foil sheets and plate were about 2' sq and floating. Equipment I was touching off on is all grounded to earth. Meter sitting on grounded ESD mat.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2023, 03:39:34 am
content: 78905 produces random continuity beeps.

author: NoisyBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2023, 03:57:08 am
content: No issue with 786.I wonder if it is firmware version related.Not that it matters since Bremen will not provide end user firmware upgrade. But at least it may help for those who are shopping for a used 789 if it is firmware related.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2023, 04:37:13 am
content: Quote from: NoisyBoy on September 06, 2023, 03:57:08 am78905 versions should command a higher price in the resale market for users seeking occasionally extra high sensitivity.

author: mwb1100
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2023, 04:57:53 am
content: BM786 firmware 78608 doesn't show this issue.

author: sonpul
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2023, 06:57:12 am
content: QuoteI usually focus, start work and finish. The call is used for troubleshooting, partial reverse engineering, checking your work, etc. It doesn't seem to interfere at all. Otherwise, I would not have bought a second exactly the same.On my devices 78911 firmware. I can observe such a feature on them. As a rule, if I pay attention to this, then the very first touch to the board of one of the probes, for the whole day or the ringing cycle, may be.Or the devices do their job immediately without a short beep.

author: Veteran68
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2023, 02:15:36 pm
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on September 03, 2023, 10:17:09 pmI can reproduce this as well with my eevBlog BM786 (FW 78607). I just touched the red probe to a metal shelving unit while holding the black probe in the air, and it beeped once. Touched it again and nothing. Then touched it to a heatsink on a PCB on my bench maybe 2 seconds later, and it beeped once again.Pretty sure I've seen this before with other meters besides the Brymen. In fact I watch a LOT of YouTube repair videos and am sure I've seen meters beep once like that on first contact, and they weren't Brymen meters either. However I just tried with a couple of my other meters at hand -- a Fluke 117 and a Brymen BM869s -- and couldn't reproduce it. I have a lot of other meters that I may try here and there.I hadn't really thought of it as a problem and it's never caused me any concerns. I chalked it up as some kind of capacitance behavior or something but never noticed before that it would also happen with one probe in the air.EDIT: Added firmware version

author: LuisBe
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: September 06, 2023, 05:34:01 pm
content: Hello everybody again, sorry for the delay but my holidays are over and I can't play with multimeters for so long.I would like to say that I really like the BM789, its size, its construction, its functions and simply in this thread we talk about small details and let the community know about them without bad faith.About the short beep when touching the chassis of my equipment, I have seen that my installation must not be right and some of my equipment must introduce some kind of noise in my ground and I think that makes my multimeter behave like that.https://youtube.com/shorts/v3YMqNoi91U?feature=sharedAbout the short continuity beep on a Chinese Arduino board, it strikes me that my BM235 doesn't behave like that. Maybe it is because the BM789 is much more sensitive so the continuity function is better on bigger boards than a small Arduino board.My firmware version is 78912, you will see in the video after displaying it, it turns off (I don't know if it's normal operation but I think it's not a problem).https://youtube.com/shorts/BC1WUbZbf5E?feature=sharedGreetings to all. LuisB

author: tomwilkinson
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2023, 06:40:07 pm
content: My BM789 Firmware 78910 exhibits this problem intermittently.

author: giosif
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2023, 08:02:21 pm
content: Thanks to all of you who tested and reported here!For reference, my unit is running FW 78911.So, I don't believe the issue is firmware related.Could they be different HW revisions maybe?

author: s_n
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: September 07, 2023, 11:39:44 am
content: I don’t have a 789, but I’ve seen similar behaviour on other meters related to charging capacitors. I can reliably reproduce it by shorting a capacitor to discharge it, then measuring continuity across the capacitor. Measuring repeatedly will not trigger continuity again until the capacitor is discharged. I would assume that this behaviour is related to the continuity open circuit voltage and the speed of the continuity mode.

author: LuisBe
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: September 07, 2023, 12:50:35 pm
content: Quote from: LuisBe on September 06, 2023, 05:34:01 pmHere is what Brymen told me about the behaviour of BM235 and BM789:"BM235 or BM789 Continuity function outputs around 1.7V and 2.3V respectively to test. [...] BM235 continuity response time is around 15ms and can not catch its SHORT CIRCUIT moment. BM789 continuity response time is very fast and is less than 100μs. It can catch its SHORT CIRCUIT moment and truly reacts what it measures.BM789 is a professional meter. Its Continuity design is with much faster response than most of other meters to target for the professional applications of needing very short-time Continuity tests. If this user would like to have slower Continuity response, maybe he could try to use BM789 Diode function to test"

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2023, 02:32:41 pm
content: - Just as I was about to hit upload on this post, I saw LuisBe’s post – thanks for following up with Brymen, LuisBe. We can certainly add Brymen’s response to the mix – but per some thoughts below it might be interesting to confirm via further testing what is happening with respect to the “one probe continuity beep”.----FWIW, I think it’s too early to draw a firm conclusion about the test results being reported in this thread.Perhaps there is unit to unit variation caused by hardware or firmware among 789 units and/or other Bymen models and/or other non-Brymen DMM models. (And maybe what we are seeing is partially explained by differences in designed-in model to model response times.)But another theory (hypothesis?) is that what we are seeing in terms of differing test results from users is not necessarily unit to unit variation or model to model variation among the test equipment but something more like “DUT to DUT” variation in the sense that each “DUT” is really not just a different “Device” but a different “Environment.”To rewind, what users are reporting is that the 789 sometimes emits a beep when only one probe physically touches something – sometimes it’s a conductor in a circuit and sometimes it’s just a finger touch from a user. The interesting thing is that these seemingly random beeps happen with just one observed physical touch to one of the probes rather than both probes. Normally we expect continuity to be signaled to the user with a beep when a circuit is confirmed to have some current detected between the probes.Next, per s_n’s comment (s_n, welcome to the EEV forums btw), it does appear that the Brymen DMMs are behaving in a way that is generally associated with capacitors. So then the question becomes: what capacitor(s)? An external “DUT” capacitor or maybe an external “DUT environment”, ie a capacitive environment, or an internal capacitor or capacitive circuit within the DMM? Or possibly some combination of capacitance change is being detected by the probe(s) along with some capacitive behavior occurring within the DMM?At this point, the most interesting thing, IMO, is not even whether the change in capacitance is occurring due to an external condition (in the DUT or in the testing environment), or internally within the DMM but the fact that the change occurs when only one probe is physically touching something (at least in the sense of a normal DMM continuity test with 2 probes where a user applies both probes to a potential circuit).This is just a guess but it seems that the amount of charge we are seeing build up and dissipate is relatively small. Perhaps what we are seeing is test equipment (a DMM with two probes) that has a sensitivity that is on the threshold of detecting and reporting (via the “random beeps") some change that is lower than the change that normally occurs with a physical touch to both probes; instead what we are seeing is a change that is occurring with some amount of electrostatic charge such that when one probe is physically touched the physical touch is just enough to create a circuit when in fact the other probe is also participating in the circuit via an electrostatic charge or discharge. This would indicate some relatively small amount of capacitor-like activity is occurring somewhere.So, now we are back to what small change is occurring? It seems it’s a bit too early to say what is changing but it also seems that there should be some way to measure and observe the change. In the same way that we can charge and discharge a capacitor and see the results on an oscilloscope it seems that we should be able to observe and measure what is happening with the DMM “random beeps.” It might require more of a metrology level test setup in terms of both more sensitive (more resolved and more accurate) test equipment than we normally associate with DMM continuity tests but it doesn’t seem that such test equipment and testing technique/know-how is beyond the resources and know-how of at least some EEV members. In my limited experience I have come to appreciate for example how relatively subtle changes in temperature can change resistance measurements in a simple resistive test. Such changes are not noticeable (or generally even of interest) when measuring DUT resistance around 1 ohm but as resistance measurements reach levels on the order of 10 milliohms or less temperature changes of a few degrees C result in different resistance measurements. My guess is that something similarly subtle is happening in users’ test environments and therefore it is perhaps different environments that Brymen 789 users are detecting and reporting.Or maybe it really is differences in DMM’s (ie, unit to unit variation) that we are seeing – but it seems that we should be able to devise a test with enough resolution and accuracy that we can explain what is happening. This last point is sort of important for readers here as what this thread is about, I think, is not complaining but rather explaining (and learning).Net, net: My guess is that the “random” nature of the beeps should be explainable through better testing. We might be literally in the “noise” and this might not be a good use of some people’s time and energy but for anyone who wants to look further I think this might be a fun and educational project - to see if we can more definitively test and observe what is causing a seemingly one probe continuity beep (but is in fact a normal two probe beep). I’m guessing it’s something low level but something that can be tested, observed, measured and explained with better test equipment and better test technique/know-how.

author: giosif
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 13, 2023, 08:01:09 pm
content: @Electro Fan: That was a (long, but) interesting read. :-)And I agree that, without more in-depth investigation, it is hard to tell what the main contributing factor(s) to this behaviour is/are.This said, mine is more of a layman's perspective on the matter: in practice, the continuity mode on the BM789 is less useful than that on most decently-fast meters (e.g. 121GW, BM257s, Fluke 87V, Fluke 187/189, etc.).And just to prove what I mean (and what actually compelled me to start this thread in the first place), I made a recording of me using the BM789 in continuity mode on a given board (the video also shows me using the BM257s, with no spurious beeps present):https://youtu.be/ZibMm3JXq7II suggest paying particular attention to the 0:30 mark in the video, when I am probing a denser area on the board.As you can see, the amount of spurious beeps in quick succession makes one unable to determine if there is continuity or not, unless one keeps the probe in a location for longer.Also, based on the response I received from Brymen (basically, the same as LuisBe's), I am to believe this is intentional for "professional applications" where sub-100μs response time for continuity is needed.I wonder what real-life usage scenarios for a handheld multimeter would require such crazy-fast response time (as opposed to, say, the 15ms for the BM235).Is a human even able to tell the difference between the two response times in any given scenario?Also, if the spurious beeps are a consequence of this fast response time, don't they actually negate the value of this feature?In my latest response to Brymen, I queried if it may be possible to implement (through a FW update) an option for the user to switch between "crazy fast" and "decent fast" response times.I will report any response I get.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 13, 2023, 11:35:53 pm
content: I tried with a 150pF then a 300pF and could not get mine to trigger. From my spreadsheet, the short circuit detection resistance was as high as 270 ohms. The BM235 measured 152 ohms. The BM839, 110 ohms. 869s, 94 ohms. From the meters I have looked at, in general Brymen seems to set this resistance higher than other brands. I suspect this is why you are seeing the blips. Agree that this would slow you down when tracing out a board.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2023, 12:28:27 am
content: They can't all play Van Halen.Joe you have a standardized continuity test using an AWG to sense both min pulse width and max frequency which I have used too testing bench meters.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2023, 12:48:58 am
content: I just didn't see the whole touching the leads thing as being very useful. Now if we could get some sort of standards for low frequency magnetic interference, low energy transient, chemical compatibility and switch life, maybe we would have something.

author: giosif
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2023, 10:46:49 pm
content: Hi,Just to provide an update that Brymen did eventually get back to me with an update on changing the response time of the BM789 for continuity mode.And the change is a hardware modification (which Brymen called a "hack") - using the attached picture as reference:R17 & C9 on the factory BM789 are:R17: soldered with a 0Ω resistorC9: spare (without any capacitor soldered)The modification consists of:R17: replace the 0Ω resistor with a 25kΩ oneC9: install a 0.1μF capacitorI have implemented the above modification on my meter and I can confirm the continuity behaviour is now similar to that of other meters mentioned here (e.g. BM257s, 121GW).I have asked Brymen and they confirmed this change impacts only the continuity measurements on the meter and no other function.Hats off to Brymen for looking into this and coming up with a resolution.

author: mwb1100
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2023, 04:41:37 am
content: Quote from: giosif on October 11, 2023, 10:46:49 pmIndeed - major kudos to Brymen! I don’t think many vendors would take that kind of effort.I just have to ask: is the expected continuity response still fast?

author: giosif
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2023, 11:56:29 am
content: Quote from: mwb1100 on October 12, 2023, 04:41:37 amFrom my observation, it is indistinguishable from before the modification, in terms of response time.Some people with better hearing (or faster neurons) might notice a difference, though.

author: NoisyBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2023, 02:37:24 pm
content: Wow, their response surprised me, in a good way.The only odd thing is if they provide hack to change hardware components, why the insistence to not allow user firmware upgrade? It has less risk than swapping out SMD components.I like their DMMs, and I would love them even more if they allow user firmware updates.

author: Antrus
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2023, 01:25:46 pm
content: The lower the resistance R17, the higher the speed. Right? The multimeter controller is very similar to the MSP430F.

author: Neutrion
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2023, 11:59:34 am
content: So FW 08 here and can't replicate the touching anything and it beeps stuff. Metall non metall etc. tried.Although I am not living in front of some big radar dome or having a big Tesla coil in the flat so might our circumstances differ a bit as others have pointed out. Watching politics sometimes, also doesn't seems to charge things up around me enough to have it detected by the meter.But the behaviour with some capacitance in circuit sometimes gives false positives that is true, so I am curious how this recomended mod changes that. I hope someone does the mod to test it before me.Also not sure if one can access the parts properly because of the can on the 789 what the 786 doesn't have. Don't have picture in front of me of its guts.

author: SanFable
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: October 19, 2023, 09:13:10 am
content: Quote from: giosif on October 11, 2023, 10:46:49 pmGreat news,You mention R17 and C9, in the picture we can see marked R12, any idea why it got marked too?Did you miss something?

author: Neutrion
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2023, 12:01:12 pm
content: That is a good question. I hope giosif will get back to them.

author: giosif
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2023, 10:36:06 pm
content: Quote from: Neutrion on October 17, 2023, 11:59:34 amAs I mentioned in my previous post, I have already implemented this mod and it is working "as advertised".Quote from: Neutrion on October 17, 2023, 11:59:34 amYes, I had to desolder the metal shield covering the part of the circuit where this mod needs to be applied.However, the shield is soldered to the board only in a couple of locations, so it's not that painful to remove.Quote from: SanFable on October 19, 2023, 09:13:10 amThe picture I attached came directly from Brymen, so don't know why R12 is marked as well.In any case, this modification doesn't touch R12.

author: tor47h
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: December 05, 2023, 10:20:24 pm
content: BM786 - I had the same problem.R17 25k + C9 100nF = excellent and correct solutionThanks for sharing.