rca line level to heaphone mod?

Steve Leverich · November 29th, 2006, 02:21 PM

Brendon, I don't know about "everybody", but I've been in electronics in one form or another since 1960 or so - I've taught electronics in the military, worked as an engineering tech in audio and video for several years, been a service manager for several audio and video companies both in California and Hawaii, designed and built audio, video and digital circuitry both for myself and as part of various jobs (did I mention I'm just a wee bit older than dirt??!?), run sound/lights for bands, played in same, and for the last 25+ years have been working as an industrial instrumentation tech in heavy manufacturing, all of which has taught me that it's NOT a good idea to ask more of an electronic circuit than it was designed to do...

Your cam's output is designed to run a relatively high impedance input, NOT a set of headphones - the fact that you "got away with it" briefly only shows that your cam is "beefier" than it needs to be in its output stage. Depending on just HOW much beefier it is, it MIGHT (key word, "might") continue to work that way without failure - but the ODDS are, it will (if run that way for longer periods of time) warm up enough to "toast" the output stage, at which time you'll have a non-functional camera (or at least, one that doesn't output sound when you use it for playback)

I only mentioned some of my experiences so you'll know what my qualifications/reasons are for saying what I did about your chances of getting away with NOT using a separate amplifier, NOT because I'm trying to "show off" or anything - I'd be really lax in my attempt to help if I let you do this to yourself without knowing the likelihood of ending up without a functional camera. That could really SUCK, compared to having to spend a few more $$ on something that will NOT cause you to lose a piece of gear.

Hope this helps you decide... Steve

Brendan Sundry · November 29th, 2006, 07:46 PM

Steve,

Didnt mean to undermine your authority there. I was not aware of your expertise in the field. I was just looking for other people who might have the qualifications youve mentioned in this post, to comment. Seeing though this is you, thanks again.

Sometimes its hard to know, you know?

I owe ya a beer, if you ever over this side of the world

B. Sundry

Steve Leverich · November 30th, 2006, 11:35 AM

No prob, mate; actually, I have a partner in crime (designing recording studios) who lives in your neck of the woods (or at least on the same island) so might one day take you up on that beer :=) And I wouldn't exactly use the term "authority", more just experience. Hopefully SOME of that experience actually TAUGHT me a little :=))... Steve

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

November 29th, 2006, 02:21 PM	#16
Steve Leverich Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Albany Oregon Posts: 173	Brendon, I don't know about "everybody", but I've been in electronics in one form or another since 1960 or so - I've taught electronics in the military, worked as an engineering tech in audio and video for several years, been a service manager for several audio and video companies both in California and Hawaii, designed and built audio, video and digital circuitry both for myself and as part of various jobs (did I mention I'm just a wee bit older than dirt??!?), run sound/lights for bands, played in same, and for the last 25+ years have been working as an industrial instrumentation tech in heavy manufacturing, all of which has taught me that it's NOT a good idea to ask more of an electronic circuit than it was designed to do... Your cam's output is designed to run a relatively high impedance input, NOT a set of headphones - the fact that you "got away with it" briefly only shows that your cam is "beefier" than it needs to be in its output stage. Depending on just HOW much beefier it is, it MIGHT (key word, "might") continue to work that way without failure - but the ODDS are, it will (if run that way for longer periods of time) warm up enough to "toast" the output stage, at which time you'll have a non-functional camera (or at least, one that doesn't output sound when you use it for playback) I only mentioned some of my experiences so you'll know what my qualifications/reasons are for saying what I did about your chances of getting away with NOT using a separate amplifier, NOT because I'm trying to "show off" or anything - I'd be really lax in my attempt to help if I let you do this to yourself without knowing the likelihood of ending up without a functional camera. That could really SUCK, compared to having to spend a few more $$ on something that will NOT cause you to lose a piece of gear. Hope this helps you decide... Steve

November 29th, 2006, 07:46 PM	#17
Brendan Sundry Regular Crew Join Date: May 2004 Location: Australia Posts: 112	Steve, Didnt mean to undermine your authority there. I was not aware of your expertise in the field. I was just looking for other people who might have the qualifications youve mentioned in this post, to comment. Seeing though this is you, thanks again. Sometimes its hard to know, you know? I owe ya a beer, if you ever over this side of the world B. Sundry

November 30th, 2006, 11:35 AM	#18
Steve Leverich Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Albany Oregon Posts: 173	No prob, mate; actually, I have a partner in crime (designing recording studios) who lives in your neck of the woods (or at least on the same island) so might one day take you up on that beer :=) And I wouldn't exactly use the term "authority", more just experience. Hopefully SOME of that experience actually TAUGHT me a little :=))... Steve