Freerunner audio channels

David Fokkema dfokkema at
Mon Aug 10 17:14:16 CEST 2009

On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 15:05 +0400, Paul Fertser wrote:
> David Fokkema <dfokkema at> writes:
> > The fact that Freerunners differ in audio quality and settings has been
> > stated on this list and on support. And going by the last paragraph,
> > this is true.
> >
> > So, _why_ are Freerunners different?
> One of the problems is that some freerunner revisions are in fact
> different in hardware. Most devices have 1uF capacitors instead of
> R3004/R3005 (which should be 0R), and that's not a joke. That is

0R's are placeholders for possible future modifications, right? Is the
1uF capacitor deliberately (but mistakenly) inserted or is this a
manufacturing bug?

> earpiece path and not surprisingly that devices that have those
> capacitors have considerably lower sound volume from the earpiece.

Probably mine has the capacitor, then. I have to max out the earpiece
volume but still can hardly understand my wife when I'm outside (in
relative quiet).

> Unfortunately, there's no way to find out which devices are affected
> by this bug judging only by revision and serial number as BOMs were
> lost due to an incorrect file format conversion, one needs to actually
> try and see for himself.

If I open up my phone (have to do it someday, right?) how can I
distinguish a 0R from a 1uF?

> AFAICT A7s are affected while at least some A6s (mine e.g.) not.

Hmmm... that's bad.

Are there many differences like these? Different components in audio
paths? Or does it mainly come down to tolerances? Those are actually
quite good, aren't they? Or could they really influence audio paths?

Thanks for the info!


More information about the community mailing list