Telecaster Guitar Forum - View Single Post - How Much is REALLY Lost in SMT Conversion?

Montana_Dawg · July 3rd, 2009, 01:38 AM

SMT vs PTH

Simple, footprint is smaller, components are cheaper, quality of most SMT parts is on par with the better PTH stuff, and it does cut down on noise issues.

With smaller and shorter traces, and the fact that the components are not standing on end to conserve space (antennae anyone?), the issue of spurious noise is significantly negated, and there is more space in the box.

I am currently working on a layout that is SMT, with Molex connectors that get rid of wire to board soldering. Also, I still prefer 4-layer boards with the power and ground planes internal. Makes for a compact, neat, quiet, and very efficient device.

Summary: If you can do it, then go for it. SMT is every bit as good, if not better than, the PTH stuff. It is a challenge for novices, but a good one!

July 3rd, 2009, 01:38 AM	#17 (permalink)
Montana_Dawg Tele-Holic Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Oregon, but from Montana Posts: 591	SMT vs PTH Simple, footprint is smaller, components are cheaper, quality of most SMT parts is on par with the better PTH stuff, and it does cut down on noise issues. With smaller and shorter traces, and the fact that the components are not standing on end to conserve space (antennae anyone?), the issue of spurious noise is significantly negated, and there is more space in the box. I am currently working on a layout that is SMT, with Molex connectors that get rid of wire to board soldering. Also, I still prefer 4-layer boards with the power and ground planes internal. Makes for a compact, neat, quiet, and very efficient device. Summary: If you can do it, then go for it. SMT is every bit as good, if not better than, the PTH stuff. It is a challenge for novices, but a good one! __________________ I would rather be a jack-of-all-trades and master of none, than be a one trick-pony out of a job.