What's the latest in Desoldering gadgets?

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
Back in the 70s, I used a red bulb with a special plastic tip that did
not melt. They were cheap and did a fair job. Then there was solder
wick. That worked well on PC boards, but not real well on terminal
strips and tube sockets. Plus is was fairly costly.  

So, what's the latest in desoldering gadgets?  
I need to get something for recapping, and am not sure what to buy. I
see both of the (above) are still sold.

One other thing, I should pick up some pot and switch cleaner. I know
this has greatly changed due to clean air laws. Where do I even begin
getting something that works well, and is not overly priced? (Brand
name)? I hope they have not made useless cleaners, like they have done
with auto products. (I remember when carb cleaner actually cleaned!!! )

Since it appears that most online stores have a rather large minimum
order as well as high shipping fees, I am limited to Radio Shack, unless
there is some smaller online source that sells in small quanties, or
maybe ebay. But buying online I need to know what I am ordering ahead of
time.

I'll be using this almost entirely on 40 to 60 year old tube type
electronics.  


Re: What's the latest in Desoldering gadgets?
On 2/20/2017 6:37 AM, snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

One of these.
<http://www.ebay.com/itm/381865048840

Quoted text here. Click to load it

<https://www.radioshack.com/products/deoxit-d5s-6-spray-contact-cleaner-and-rejuvenator





--  
Jeff-1.0
wa6fwi
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: What's the latest in Desoldering gadgets?
On 2017/02/20 5:46 AM, Foxs Mercantile wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

If you are going to recommend a desoldering pump I suggest you stick  
with the Solda-Pullet (made in USA). I have used the no-name knockoffs  
and they don't last a month in our shop, whereas I have three  
Solda-pullets that I bought over ten years ago that see daily duty and  
other than replacing the tip from time to time just last and last. We  
bought a fourth one recently and it too is running fine.

The knockoffs are just a waste of money.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

De-Oxit is pretty good for what it does I hear.

We use Nu-trol from MG Chemicals and it gives long term repair to pots  
and contacts.

John :-#)#

--  
(Please post followups or tech inquiries to the USENET newsgroup)
John's  Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: What's the latest in Desoldering gadgets?
On Monday, February 20, 2017 at 7:38:10 AM UTC-5, snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

For through hole type stuff I love my DP-100.  It pays to clean up
the o-ring every now and then.  

George H.  

Re: What's the latest in Desoldering gadgets?
On Monday, February 20, 2017 at 7:38:10 AM UTC-5, snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Well, you are certainly asking a lot of good questions!

I keep a number of things on the bench - and my wife, entirely unsolicited,
 purchased a fancy solder & rework station for me with hot air and such. Ye
s, it is from China, but she even as she is aware of my resistance to thing
s from China, she also a very practical individual, and spending many hundr
eds vs. less than $80 does appeal. The hot air wand does a great job on boa
rds, and the 'tunable' soldering iron can get hot enough for even 50-50 sol
der to liquefy.  

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41DXkDJcNwL._SX342_.jpgI
s an excellent tool for fine work.  

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0746/4805/products/15SDS002-IHA852-06.jpe
g?v14%31988566   What my wife got me.

A bulb is fine in most cases, but manipulating it can be awkward.  

Soldering braid is critical for board work.  

Note that for years, I got away with a simple 38-watt pencil, a bulb, denta
l picks and patience. But when I became more seriously involved with audio  
and boards, I got fancy.  

As to pot and switch cleaner - there are several schools of thought on this
 - and Jeff is a purist. Rather than start a dead debate all over again, De
Oxit in the quantities you will use (with care) is just fine.  

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

Holy Crap, this is one huge speaker.....
http://www.ohgizmo.com/2006/03/06/the-biggest-subwoofer-ever-made



Re: Holy Crap, this is one huge speaker.....
On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 13:20:55 -0600, oldschool wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Didn't ElectroVoice sell a 30 inch speaker?  It wasn't as big but you  
could actually buy one.

--  
Jim Mueller snipped-for-privacy@nospam.com

To get my real email address, replace wrongname with dadoheadman.
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Holy Crap, this is one huge speaker.....
On Monday, February 20, 2017 at 4:18:03 PM UTC-5, Jim Mueller wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Our church has a pipe organ that uses electronics for the lowest notes as they don't have room for the length required for a pure pipe bass.  That sub would be perfect..

Re: Holy Crap, this is one huge speaker.....

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I do recall hearing about such a speaker.....

I recall in the early 70's when 15" was the biggest speaker sold, that
some company came out with an 18". Of course I wanted a pair of them
until I saw the price....  


Re: Holy Crap, this is one huge speaker.....

Quoted text here. Click to load it

ElectroVoice did briefly offer a 30" woofer. It didn't sound very good  
and didn't last very long on the market.

Here's the backstory:

Paul Klipsch (father of the Klipschorn) had cut a deal with EV where EV  
provided 15" woofers with special characteristics to Paul to use in the  
'Horns, and in exchange Klipsch licensed EV to produce both kits and  
ready-built versions of a modified K-Horn. (It was the EV "Georgian" in  
case you're interested).

The mods EV had made offended Klipsch, so he was already pissed at them  
(picky, he was), and then when the woofers they were sending started  
showing up with cracked magnets Paul cancelled the agreement and found  
another source for his woofers.

EV, no longer able to offer an enclosure with the bottom end provided by  
a horn woofer, tried to replace it with that 30" behemoth in a more  
"standard" enclosure. Didn't work out.

Later, EV tried a scaled-up version of the horn, using an 18" woofer  
(the "Patrician IV"). Paul told them that wouldn't sound right but they  
didn't listen. As usual, he was right.

Isaac

Re: Holy Crap, this is one huge speaker.....
Quoted text here. Click to load it

https://playingintheworldgame.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/diatone-2.jpg

Re: Holy Crap, this is one huge speaker.....

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I did not find that one on the web, but I did find THIS:
http://alex-audio.com/en/prod/world-biggest-speaker/

The Woofers are 80 inches each....
Handle 5000 watts per channel.

Heck, that would involve a power amp with around 200 6L6 or 807 tubes in
Push-Pull Parallel-Parallel-Parallel-Parallel etc...   For EACH
channel...... (And an output transformer about 3 foot big, weighing
close to the weight of a Harley motor cycle, and costing 10X the price
for a brand new Harley).....  



Re: Holy Crap, this is one huge speaker.....
snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

No, certainly not!  You use the modulator from an old AM broadcast  
transmitter.  I was at a Grateful Dead concert in 1969 and they wheeled out  
this THING on the stage with big glass globes, and when they lit up I  
realized they were TUBES (valves to the British)!  Not sure of the type, but  
at least several thousand Watts.  I borrowed a set of ear muffs and sat back  
for a show!

Jon

Re: Holy Crap, this is one huge speaker.....

Quoted text here. Click to load it


I was at several Grateful Dead concerts in the late 60's and afterwards.
I never saw any such thing. Are you sure you were not "tripping"? That
may have just been a common 6L6 tube in a guitar amp, and your
hallucinations made it look really BIG....   :)

Who ever heard of wearing earmuffs at a Grateful Dead concert.....

And since you mentioned it. What the hell is wrong with them British?  
Valves are plumbing parts. Tubes are electronic parts!!!

Seriously, I have heard of using AM transmitter tubes for audio amps. I
dont know what those tubes are numbered, or how much power they output,
but I know that many AM radio stations have power output in the
thousands of watts range. But to use that kind of tube would require
custom output transformers that would likely mimic the pole transformers
used to feed our homes....

And just for historic value, the original 1969 Woodstock concert ran  
Somewhere between 3500 watts to 12,000 watts, using Mcintosh mi350
monoblock tube amps for their PA system. The article below seems to
conflict whether it was 3,500W or 12,000W.  
Either way, that PA system had to cover a very large area, and
apparently it did the job.

http://www.mylespaul.com/forums/showthread.php?t10%0811

These Mcintosh MC3500 power amps have EIGHT power output tubes
6LQ6/6JE6B. These amps had an output of 350W. (mono).



Re: Holy Crap, this is one huge speaker.....
On Sat, 25 Feb 2017, snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it
They went through various iterations, and sound people.  SOmeone got  
hooked in at one point, maybe it was Bob Heil but maybe it was the  
soundman for Quicksilver Messenger Service (who was also a ham), there was  
s story of someone having an Electrovoice "Voice of the Theatre" or  
whatever it was adapting that.  Owsley was involved, leading to the Wall  
of SOund, which almost as soon as they finally got it going right, they  
abandoned.  They were using McIntosh amplifiers for a while, there's a  
story, maybe about Woodstock, where they blew them out and had to hurry to  
find replacements, finding a "close" dealership and getting them to open  
up on a Sunday or something.

Things were evolving, and bands like the Dead helped that developemnt.  So  
they went to that Wall of SOund to adapt to the much bigger venues, then  
dropped it because it was too much trouble to move, but I thought the work  
helped other things to develop.  So they may have been using just about  
anything at some point, including home built equipment.

If you paralleled enough tubes, the output impedance would go down, so no  
matching transformer for 8ohm speakers.  I'm not sure if that was ever  
done with audio, but I have seen it done with radio amplifiers, a bunch of  
tubes in parallel so the output impedance is 50 ohms to match the coax.

   Michael

Re: Holy Crap, this is one huge speaker.....

Quoted text here. Click to load it



This is a good article about the "Wall of Sound".
It was (and probably still is) the greatest sound system ever built, but
it nearly bankrupt the Dead, and moving all that equipmnt from show to
show does seem very impractical. Those mcintosh MC3500 amps are still
the best anps ever built. More powerful solid state amps have been
built, but none can match that tube sound.

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/the-wall-of-sound

I dont doubt that there were fried amps, blown speakers and so on at
those concerts. Everything was being run at Max power and much of this
was still in development stages.

Paralleled tubes like you said, dont seem real practical for audio amps.
Having that high DC voltage on the speaker leads seems very dangerous.


Re: Holy Crap, this is one huge speaker.....
snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it


    A pole pig would wave been useless, since they weren't designed to  
pass DC, and they aren't center tapped on the primary. On top of that,  
they would have a horrible frequency response, because they were  
designed to operate at 60Hz.

    A 25KW, plate modulated AM transmitter would produce 12.5 KW of  
audio but you would have needed to a hundred amps of three phase 480VAC  
to power it. Something I doubt that was available on that farm, or from  
portable generators. You could move the modulator from a 5KW AM  
transmitter, but the modulation transformer weighed over a ton. We had  
to abandon one from a Gates transmitter that was bought from WQBQ for  
spate parts. Sadly, it was only a couple years old, and one of the  
premium replacements from Peter Dahl.

Quoted text here. Click to load it


    Those Mcintosh amps were not designed for that type of service.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

    The RCA TTU-1/TTU-25 UHF TV transmitters used 16 6146 tubes in  
parallel for a video amp with a response from DC to over five MHz. It  
was a 'Distributed Amplifier'.


--  
Never piss off an Engineer!

They don't get mad.

We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Holy Crap, this is one huge speaker.....
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 22:17:57 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"

Quoted text here. Click to load it
Thats right, no center tap.... Back to the drawing board :)


Quoted text here. Click to load it
Too bad you abandoned that transformer. You should have rented a skid
loader or farm tractor with a loader. My 1959 farm tractor, which is
small compared to modern ones, lifts round bales of hay all the time.
They weight anywhere from 650 lbs to 1800 lbs. It struggles on those
1800 lb ones, but a larger tractor could easily handle a ton or more. (I
dont buy or make bales larger than 1500 lbs).  

Quoted text here. Click to load it
I thought that same thing, but they apparently can and did handle that
abuse, The Greatful Dead,"Wall of Sound". Was entirely run from Mcintosh
MC3500, Tube amps, and the MC2300 solid state amps, having a total of
around 28,000 watts. Not the intended use, but they held up....  

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Im not real familiar with transmitters, but I know that tube is used in
Ham transmitters and is similar to a 6L6 (or am I thinking 6LQ6?).



Re: Holy Crap, this is one huge speaker.....
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017, snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it
The 6L6 was seen in ham transmitters quite a bit.

But I think you're thinking of the 807 (and there was also the 1629, I  
think I got that number right) which was similar, and there was a long  
supply of them in the surplus market well after WWII.

   Michael


Re: Holy Crap, this is one huge speaker.....
snipped-for-privacy@ncf.ca says...
Quoted text here. Click to load it

The 807 and 1625 were very similar.  The  807 had a 6.3 volt filiment  
and the 1625 had a 12.6. They were cheap on the war suplus market after  
WW2.  Still plenty of then around up to atleast 1975 or so.  Many home  
built ham transmitters used them. They were also used in some high power  
audio equipment.

Many of the commercial built transmitters of ham and public service  
started using the 6146 series of tubes as they were not that expensive  
and would go to about 200 MHz with no big problem.  

When color TV sets started using the 6LQ6, 6JE6 and a few other sweep  
tubes they were very inexpensive compaired to other power tubes  and  
could put out a lot of power for the cost in SSB usage that was  
becomming popular on the ham bands.

During that time many ham transceivers put out about 100 watts and it  
took a pair of the 6146 or 6xx6 series of tubes.  As the TV sets started  
going all solid state and the 6xx6 series quit being  made in large  
quanties the price started going up.  About that time transistors that  
could put out the same power were comming down and would work off 12  
volts DC were comming down in price.  That killed off the market for  
those tubes in new equipment.

Now transistors and othe solid state devices that can handle 500 and  
1000 watts at RF are comming out, it is starting to kill off the market  
for tubes in that power range.  Very few tubes are being made in the US  
now,and lots of replacements for the older tubes  are comming from  
Russia, and China.  



Site Timeline