CGS31: sub BC549 for the BC547?
2009-10-04 by loop
Yahoo Groups archive
Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:16 UTC
Thread
2009-10-04 by loop
2009-10-04 by sasami@hotkey.net.au
>would it be a bad idea to substitute the BC549 for the BC547 called for inthe digital noise circuit? thanks!
>_______________________________________________________________________
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>The CGS Modular Synth home page: http://www.cgs.synth.net/
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
2009-10-05 by Andrew Scheidler
>would it be a bad idea to substitute the BC549 for the BC547 called for inthe digital noise circuit? thanks!
>__________________________________________________________
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>The CGS Modular Synth home page: http://www.cgs.synth.net/
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
2009-10-05 by Dave Kendall
> I was told (years ago) that I could just use 3904 transistors and putSame here.
> them in backwards. The 3904 is easy to find and I've had no problems
> with this substitution...
> Drew
>
>
> To: cgs_synth@yahoogroups.com
> From: sasami@...
> Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 18:35:56 +1100
> Subject: Re: [cgs_synth] CGS31: sub BC549 for the BC547?
>
> BC547 is "generic". I've used all sorts of NPN transistors in
> locations that
> I label as BC547. So, short answer, the substitution is fine.
> Ken
>
> >would it be a bad idea to substitute the BC549 for the BC547 called
> for in
> the digital noise circuit? thanks!
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------
> >
> >The CGS Modular Synth home page: http://www.cgs.synth.net/
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________
> Ken Stone sasami@... otherunicorn@...
> Modular Synth PCBs for sale <http://www.cgs.synth.net/>
> Australian Miniature Horses & Ponies
> <http://www.blaze.net.au/~sasami/>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________
> Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>