• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Help me understand this schematic

Vlad Soare

Politically incorrect since 1976
Subscriber
Hi everyone,

I have lately been building a number of small, cheap DIY devices meant as soldering practise for beginners. But now that I've built them and have seen them work, I'd also like to understand how they work. And just as I was a complete noob with a soldering iron when I started on this journey, I am a complete noob when it comes to electronics. I am familiar with physics and electricity in general, having received a technical education, but my specialty is software, not hardware. I do have a basic understanding of what various components do, and how they're supposed to work in isolation, but my ability to read a circuit (let alone to design one myself) is extremely basic. One might say I'm at that level where I know just enough to be dangerous. :biggrin:
I'm now doing my best to learn what I should have learned a long time ago.

So, here's the device I'm currently trying to figure out. I chose to start with the one that seemed the simplest of them all.
It has a microphone and a row of five LEDs. Whenever the microphone detects a sound, any sound, the LEDs light up.


It works perfectly. But I also want to know how it works, and why. And for this reason I tried to draw a schematic in KiCad, based on the tracks that I could see on the PCB.

Screenshot 2026-07-19 at 12.50.31.png

There is a caveat, though. I only drew the connections that I could see. I have no idea if the PCB has a second layer that I can't see. Given the apparent simplicity of the design and the very low price of the thing, I think this is unlikely. But I guess it's not impossible.

The problem is, the schematic doesn't make sense to me. Looking at it, it seems to me the thing cannot possibly work. And yet, we know it does. :dunno:

First, I don't get why the LEDs are off when there's no sound and the microphone isn't doing anything.
The anodes of the LEDs are permanently connected to 5V through the direct connection on the right-hand side of the schematic. The only thing that keeps them from lighting up (and blowing for that matter, since there's no resistor in series with them on that side) is the Q2 transistor being off. But why should it be off? Its base is connected to the positive rail through a 10kΩ resistor. The base-emitter "on" voltage of an S9014 transistor is around 0.6V, reaching saturation at around 1V. So, if the transistor draws 1V from the 5V supply, then the 10kΩ resistor is left with 4V. This means the current through the resistor (and consequently through the base of Q2) is 4/10.000 = 0.4mA. The gain of an S9014 is at least 60, with a typical value of 260. Even with a gain of 60, that would mean a collector-emitter current of 0.4*60 = 24mA, which should cause the LEDs to glow at full brightness.
But they don't. So I'm clearly missing something. The above reasoning must be wrong. But how?

Maybe it has something to do with the C2 capacitor? That looks like a smoothing capacitor to me, though I fail to see why such a high capacitance should be needed for this purpose. If smoothing were the only reason for the existence of that capacitor, then I would expect it to be a small ceramic one. So maybe it serves a different purpose?

Now, let's take a look at the left side of the circuit.
The base of Q1 is connected to power via a 1MΩ resistor, which is too big to allow any meaningful current to pass through the base. So, Q1 is off.
When the microphone detects a sound, it will generate a small current, whose DC component will be filtered out by C1, so that only the sound signal will reach the base of Q1. That signal, albeit small, may be enough to cause Q1 to turn on. But what happens when it turns on? A current will start to flow from its collector to its base, "stealing" from the current that currently goes from the 10kΩ resistor to the base of Q2. In other words, the more Q1 conducts, the less Q2 will conduct. That should cause the LEDs to turn dimmer, not brighter.
So again I am missing something, and again I can't figure out what.

My third dilemma is that C1 is a polarized capacitor, but its cathode is connected to a positive voltage supply. Sure, with a 1MΩ resistor in series the current is very low, but still... Won't this be a problem? Electrolytics don't like to be fed backwards.

And my fourth dilemma is how the LEDs are protected. An LED must always be powered through a series resistor, but in this case they aren't. R1 isn't properly in series with the LEDs, because the LEDs receive 5V directly from the source, on the right-hand side of the circuit. R1 only limits the current delivered by the microphone, which I imagine is only a tiny part of what the LEDs are receiving. Besides, isn't 4.7kΩ too much? For LEDs at 5V I would expect something in the vicinity of 220 - 330Ω. That is, unless the microphone delivered a much higher voltage than 5V. But I don't think that's the case. Is it?

What am I missing? A lot of things, I'm guessing. Or maybe a tiny one that just happens to turn everything around? :dunno:

Thank you. :beerchug:
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
Just to make sure I didn't make a mistake when drawing the schematic, here's a detailed view of the PCB:

PICT0004.jpg

PICT0007.jpg

Maybe you can spot something wrong. I can't. I checked all connections, tested them with a multimeter, and they all seem correct to me. But I could be missing something.
 
The only way I can see it working is with Q1 shunting away base current from Q2 keeping Q2 off.
Will one meg provide sufficient base current in to Q1?
 
The only way I can see it working is with Q1 shunting away base current from Q2 keeping Q2 off.
Will one meg provide sufficient base current in to Q1?
I think that's possible. If Q1 draws 1V leaving 4V across R3, then the current through its base should be 4/10^6 = 4μA. Assuming a gain of 260 (which is the 'typical' one indicated in the datasheet), that would mean a maximum of 1.04mA, which is more than the 0.4mA that Q2 is receiving at its base.
So, I guess Q1 could be on just enough to steal the base current from Q2, keeping it off.
Yes, that looks like a reasonable explanation. :thumbsup:

Good idea about the breadboard. On the PCB I can check continuity and voltages, but I can't check currents. On the breadboard I could measure the currents, too. But I don't have all the components. I need to source them first, or to desolder these ones.
 
Last edited:
There are informal rules for how to draw schematics. Generally, signals going to the right and power from the top down. Unless you're a ham; they tend to do things differently. Anyway, here's a schematic that's easier to follow:

SoundDetect.jpg

Now you can see that the mic (I didn't have a proper symbol) gets its bias voltage through R1. The signal is produced between R1 and the mic and is coupled to the first transistor through C1. You need C1 because the mic signal is riding on DC. R3 keeps the base of Q1 pulled down unless signal is applied. Since there's no bias on Q1, it's sort of a rectifier- the base can only be pulled up. It's not a great circuit. So, if you turn on Q1 with a signal, it turns off Q2 and the LEDs remain dark. With no signal, Q1 is off and Q2 is on (from the 10 k pullup resistor) and the LEDs are connected to ground, so they're normally on. I didn't watch the video so assume this is the circuit from what you drew.

Now, this is opposite of how you said the circuit works and the video seems to show. Perhaps Q1 is a PNP (S9013 perhaps) or there is some other difference to what's really there. Anyway, I did not trace out the PCB, but you get the idea.
 
Last edited:
There are informal rules for how to draw schematics. Generally, signals going to the right and power from the top down.
Thanks, I will keep this in mind. Your version is indeed much easier to read.

R3 keeps the base of Q1 pulled down unless signal is applied.
No, actually R3 is connected to +5V. It keeps the base of Q1 pulled up. It's like this:

SoundDetect.jpg

I guess this explains why the LEDs are normally off. Normally Q1 is on, which causes current from R2 to flow through it rather than through the base of Q2, which keeps Q2 off. So far, so good.
But now, when a signal from the microphone is received, it should cause Q1 to conduct even more, giving Q2 even less reason to turn on. And actually the opposite is happening. A signal from the microphone causes Q2 to turn on. How come? :dunno:

Both transistors are S9014.

PICT0008.jpg

PICT0009.jpg
 
Last edited:
The signal from the mic is capacitively coupled, so it can pull the transistor base both slightly up and slightly down. It can't turn the LEDs any more off, but half the signal can turn them on. The fancy deluxe version of the circuit might rectify the signal so both halves could contribute. Good catch on the connection of the resistor, my bad- notice how it's much easier to sus this stuff out when the schematic separates the functions so you can see them!
 
There are informal rules for how to draw schematics. Generally, signals going to the right and power from the top down. Unless you're a ham; they tend to do things differently. Anyway, here's a schematic that's easier to follow:

View attachment 3804056

Now you can see that the mic (I didn't have a proper symbol) gets its bias voltage through R1. The signal is produced between R1 and the mic and is coupled to the first transistor through C1. You need C1 because the mic signal is riding on DC. R3 keeps the base of Q1 pulled down unless signal is applied. Since there's no bias on Q1, it's sort of a rectifier- the base can only be pulled up. It's not a great circuit. So, if you turn on Q1 with a signal, it turns off Q2 and the LEDs remain dark. With no signal, Q1 is off and Q2 is on (from the 10 k pullup resistor) and the LEDs are connected to ground, so they're normally on. I didn't watch the video so assume this is the circuit from what you drew.

Now, this is opposite of how you said the circuit works and the video seems to show. Perhaps Q1 is a PNP (S9013 perhaps) or there is some other difference to what's really there. Anyway, I did not trace out the PCB, but you get the idea.
Not the same circuit. The one meg is connected to positive in the original drawing.
 
Thanks, I will keep this in mind. Your version is indeed much easier to read.


No, actually R3 is connected to +5V. It keeps the base of Q1 pulled up. It's like this:

View attachment 3804082

I guess this explains why the LEDs are normally off. Normally Q1 is on, which causes current from R2 to flow through it rather than through the base of Q2, which keeps Q2 off. So far, so good.
But now, when a signal from the microphone is received, it should cause Q1 to conduct even more, giving Q2 even less reason to turn on. And actually the opposite is happening. A signal from the microphone causes Q2 to turn on. How come? :dunno:

Both transistors are S9014.

View attachment 3804088

View attachment 3804089
The mike will modulate Q1's base drive.
 
Oh, I see. Yeah, that's what I didn't consider, that the sound signal is AC. So it alternately pulls the base of Q1 up and down. When up, nothing happens. When down, it turns Q1 off, which allows Q2 to turn on.
Yes, it makes sense now. Thank you. :thumbsup:

My next question was how come the LEDs don't burn out without a series resistor. But I think I know the answer to that. I think the value of R2 and the number of LEDs were precisely chosen so that the current through them is never high enough for that to happen.
If the voltage drop on Q2 is 1V give or take, then R2 will feed approximately 0.4mA into the base of Q2 (4V/10kΩ). A gain of 260 means a collector current of 0.4*260 = 104mA. Which divides between the five LEDs, so each one gets 20.8mA. A tiny bit on the high side, but still acceptable, especially as the LEDs are only on for a fraction of a second at a time (though perhaps using six LEDs would have been a bit safer).
Right?
 
Last edited:
My next question was how come the LEDs don't burn out without a series resistor. But I think I know the answer to that. I think the value of R2 and the number of LEDs were precisely chosen so that the current through them is never high enough for that to happen.
If the voltage drop on Q2 is 1V give or take, then R2 will feed approximately 0.4mV into the base of Q2 (4V/10kΩ). A gain of 260 means a collector current of 0.4*260 = 104mV. Which divides between the five LEDs, so each one gets 20.8mV. A tiny bit on the high side, but still acceptable, especially as the LEDs are only on for a fraction of a second at a time (though perhaps using six LEDs would have been a bit safer).
Right?
yes, except all your mV's should be mA's...
 
Yes, it's mA, of course. Sometimes I type faster than I think. :biggrin:
I've corrected it. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Any circuit that relies on transistor beta is a bad circuit! That value can be all over the map. An emitter resistor could stabilize the current, or there are other ways.
 
Well, it's a cheap toy, meant only to help newbies learn how to solder. As long as it does something, anything, just to confirm that you've done a good job, it has served its purpose. I paid the equivalent of two dollars for it, including shipping. :)

On another note, I took your hints in regard to schematic drawing best practices and made some adjustments to a couple of schematics that I had done earlier, for two simple projects that I had built on the breadboard.
The first is a basic example of a 555 chip in astable mode that flashes an LED, and the second piggybacks on the first and displays a number on a 7-digit display, which increases each time it receives a pulse from the 555 chip. A push button resets the counter.
Do these look OK to you? Anything else you think I could improve?


Screenshot 2026-07-20 at 21.09.18.png

Screenshot 2026-07-20 at 20.43.51.png
 
Those look great. Sometimes you can get hints from the data sheet applications for a chip, like the 555. FWIW, I've also been known to redraw parts of receiver and other schematics so I can troubleshoot them better. There are probably writings on the topic, or even standards, but most of us have just absorbed it over the years. Sometimes I redraw parts of factory schematics to make things clearer. I've also been known to photograph the back/copper side of a board, reverse it in an editing program, and then print it out so I can refer to it while looking at the top of the board. Or do the opposite to look at the bottom. Electronics is hard enough without having to figure out what's connected to what or how the signal makes it from one end to the other!
 
Boards that have no component markings are the ultimate in evil as far as troubleshooting goes. Currently working on such an evil device, and its a double sided board for extra fun.
 
I think the schematics look good. Of course, due to the way you drew the battery connections, the ground symbol and connection is redundant. (I use KiCad and the stand-alone eeschema quite a bit and like it.)
 
True, the ground connections are redundant. I thought I'd keep them just to make it more obvious that that entire rail is grounded, but indeed, come to think of it, I could lose them.
I like KiCad a lot. I've only had it and played with it for a couple of days. I still have a lot to learn, but at first glance the user interface looks really easy to use and intuitive. I also like that you can create new components out of existing ones, and even edit the existing ones to suit your circuit. For instance, in the two schematics above I changed the position of some of the pins in the 555 and 4026 chips, to avoid having links that crossed each other without an actual connection (apart from pin 1 in the 4026; maybe I'll try to make it shorter and fit it inside the circuit). This won't always be possible, but it's nice when it is.
 
Last edited:
Maybe the situation has changed, as I haven't done a board in a long while, but in the past every single error I made was due to a bad library part. At one point I deleted every part and made my own as I went. Things just have to be better now, but I still double check parts before I use them.
 
Back
Top Bottom