hen's tooth cafe contestant, micmix dynaflanger

[pinkjimiphoton]

 

[armdnrdy]

I really wish I could find something that uses all these Reticon R510(x) chips that I have!  I have several 256, 512, and 1024-stage devices.

Breezing through the R5106/7 data sheet....it shouldn't be too difficult to retrofit or make a daughter board for any circuit.
The main difference with this series of BBD is that it inputs one clock signal and produces the other clock signal internally.

It would be more of a challenge to retrofit a "standard" BBD (SAD1024, MN3007, etc.) that inputs two clock signals into an existing pedal that utilizes a R5106/7.

Even that wouldn't be too difficult....a clock is going to have two opposite signals and should be located fairly close to the BBD....so
a jumper connecting the second clock signal could be soldered in place.

[armdnrdy]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8k20p8bwjttvxnj/DSCF2776.jpg

This is a hand held shot of the component side of the PCB, not as sharp as I would get using a tripod unfortunately. For those scratching their heads, I put the LM13600 marking in the picture!

You will post other photos of this??? PCB side; components values and wethever to make a lay for this wow!!!!!!!!!! Thanks man; it a pleasure to see wath you have!!!!!

Stephen has been gracious enough to gather up and send me all of the information he has on the Hyperflanger.
I'm currently working through everything...finding inconsistencies between the schematics, the factory component overlay, and the actual board images. It looks as if there were some changes after the fact.
This is not an small project. This is a rack mount flanger that would have to be housed in a larger enclosure.

[Fender3D]

Breezing through the R5106/7 data sheet....it shouldn't be too difficult to retrofit or make a daughter board for any circuit.
The main difference with this series of BBD is that it inputs one clock signal and produces the other clock signal internally.
...

R510x BBDs halve the feeded clock signal to produce the "other clock signal".
If you have a circuit made for MNs or SADs you should double the clock frequency if you want the same delay time with Rs.

[armdnrdy]

Thanks for the clarification Federico, I didn't catch that point while breezing through the data sheet.

I see it now: R5106/7 data sheet Figure 4 timing relations

[Tonemonger]

Found it ! - H+SR July '89.

Disappointingly the review barely touches upon the Hyperflanger ( I kinda wonder if the guy had more than the manual to work with ).
There's half a page of totally trashing the flimsy enclosures and how they look ,  a little bit of praise for the Copicat and Activator , Before laying the boot into the enclosures again.
To quote -  " It is no exaggeration to say that I've seen mushrooms packed in nicer material than this " !


Hey Larry , No I haven't fixed the phaser - I keep forgetting to add the required components onto My parts orders !!

[armdnrdy]

I've been talking with one of the designers of the Dynaflanger and as it turns out the SAD1024 is being used in the parallel multiplex configuration but clocked double speed to produce 512 stages instead of 1024. (for lower THD and higher DR)

So....I was pondering the thought of using a MN3007 and doubling the clock speed to achieve the same delay as a 512 stage device and at higher clock speeds (from what I've read) the clock glitches and THD should be lowered.

I know that I've run across threads dealing with double clocking the 3007, but can anyone point me in the right direction?

ADA thread? Electric Mistress thread?  

I believe that the John Hollis Ultraflanger uses a buffered double clocked 1024 stage device.

Any other input or thoughts on double clocking the 3007?

[Govmnt_Lacky]

@Larry

I think the A/DA is a good place to look. I believe the original configuration was with the SAD1024 running in a parallel configuration and it has since been adapted to run with the 3007 chip.

[Fender3D]

[armdnrdy]

Thanks Greg and Federico for the replies.

I know I had read these threads before....I just didn't know where to find them!

@ Greg
If I recall correctly, bajaman chimed in, waived his hands, and said STOP what you're doing! It's all wrong!
And then preceded to explain how the MN3007 has to be clocked at twice the frequency to match the SAD1024.

@Federico
So...what I gather from these posts is: the MN3007 loses attenuation at higher frequencies. (which can be compensated with a transistor at the BBDs output)

If you clock the 3007 too high....the signal blows through it unaffected.

I'll have to check with the Dynaflanger designer, Wayne, to see what the clock frequency is calibrated at.

I just had a tangent thought. 

One could actually use two MN3009s (256 stage) in parallel to achieve 512 stage device results.

[Fender3D]

@Federico
So...what I gather from these posts is: the MN3007 loses attenuation at higher frequencies. (which can be compensated with a transistor at the BBDs output)

If you clock the 3007 too high....the signal blows through it unaffected.

watch out: MN3007 loses attenuation at higher clock frequencies
output transistor increases BBD's output current
it might compensate with a static clock (echo); it won't compensate with sweeping clock...

unless...
(tip1) you rectify clock and obtain a variable voltage directly proportional to frequency, this voltage might drive an OTA...
or
(tip2) slightly different Gate supply voltages (Vgg) or slightly different Bias voltages will slightly modify BBD's output level without appreciable distortion

One could actually use two MN3009s (256 stage) in parallel to achieve 512 stage device results.

This is the easiest way.. if only 3009s wouldn't be that expensive...

[armdnrdy]

One could actually use two MN3009s (256 stage) in parallel to achieve 512 stage device results.

This is the easiest way.. if only 3009s wouldn't be that expensive...

There are sellers on Ebay listing 3009s for $3.66 - $8.00.

I have to finish my BBD tester to find a seller that offers good/real ones.
I can't imagine it being very feasible to re-label MN3009s......There isn't much demand for them since very few effects used them.
If the Chinese are relabeling MN3007s......they are taking something that does sell and turning it into something that will sit because of lack of demand.

But then....people are known to do things that don't make much sense! 

[GodSaveMetal]

One could actually use two MN3009s (256 stage) in parallel to achieve 512 stage device results.

This is the easiest way.. if only 3009s wouldn't be that expensive...

There are sellers on Ebay listing 3009s for $3.66 - $8.00.

I have to finish my BBD tester to find a seller that offers good/real ones.
I can't imagine it being very feasible to re-label MN3009s......There isn't much demand for them since very few effects used them.
If the Chinese are relabeling MN3007s......they are taking something that does sell and turning it into something that will sit because of lack of demand.

But then....people are known to do things that don't make much sense! 

I use CHINESE relabeled MN3007 and there are fine, please man prove then; I have a hundreds of these relabeled CHINESE MN3007; i used in the MISTRESS CLON and I love his tone and sense!!!!

[armdnrdy]

I use CHINESE relabeled MN3007 and there are fine, please man prove then; I have a hundreds of these relabeled CHINESE MN3007; i used in the MISTRESS CLON and I love his tone and sense!!!!

The only problem with relabeled MN3009s is that they might be MN3007s stamped MN3009.
If that's the case....the flanger won't sound like the original.

I'm working on a BBD tester which tells you the amount of stages and by doing that tells you that it passes a delayed signal. (which means that the BBD is good)

If I could get a bit more disciplined and stop taking on new projects...maybe I would finish it! 

[GodSaveMetal]

I use CHINESE relabeled MN3007 and there are fine, please man prove then; I have a hundreds of these relabeled CHINESE MN3007; i used in the MISTRESS CLON and I love his tone and sense!!!!

The only problem with relabeled MN3009s is that they might be MN3007s stamped MN3009.
If that's the case....the flanger won't sound like the original.

I'm working on a BBD tester which tells you the amount of stages and by doing that tells you that it passes a delayed signal. (which means that the BBD is good)

If I could get a bit more disciplined and stop taking on new projects...maybe I would finish it! 

You made a BBD tester?? if yes, great man great! and please post it!

Take your time I be TUNED!!

[pinkjimiphoton]

lest we forget why i posted this...
check out just the beginning. that is some sick, thick-ass flanging!!

[wayne kirkwood]

Happy New Year everyone!

I've posted a complete updated (readable) schematic of the DynaFlanger and a complete circuit description here:

www.proaudiodesignforum.com/forum/php/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=612&p=6951

It's been 36 years since I worked on this and had to repeatedly jog my memory.
Lemme know if you have any questions.

Best;
Wayne

Here's a small version of the schematic...


MicMix Dynaflanger Schematic Designed by Bill Hall and Wayne Kirkwood September 1, 1978.

[pinkjimiphoton]

wayne.... YOU ARE GODLIKE!!!!

[armdnrdy]

Wayne,

I woke up this morning with a surprise in my in box that changed my course for the day.

Thanks for taking the time to repost complete schematics and the detailed circuit description for this beast!

I do have a question regarding the connection of the output of U5B to S4.

There is a fold on the drawing that makes the connection a bit unclear.
I believe that it should be connected to lug 2 of the "EXT" switch. Would this be the correct connection?

[UKToecutter]

Wayne,

You just made my day.........