I've started to trace the Mutron Flanger for cloning. Here's a demo video to kick start things.
I want to start by redrawing the schematic, since the one on the net is really not that clear. I'll be in the shop tracing, if anyone is looking for me. :icon_mrgreen:
YES!!!! :o
Nice! Thank you Dino! 8)
Why is Youtube telling me "This video is private"?
Quote from: Mark Hammer on July 16, 2013, 11:10:59 AM
Why is Youtube telling me "This video is private"?
Same for me.
I guess were not part of the "cool kids" club. :icon_wink:
Quote from: armdnrdy on July 16, 2013, 11:20:23 AM
Quote from: Mark Hammer on July 16, 2013, 11:10:59 AM
Why is Youtube telling me "This video is private"?
Same for me.
I guess were not part of the "cool kids" club. :icon_wink:
Sorry folks, it's the new (ultra annoying) Youtube layout. Every time I upload, it's automatically sets to "Private", until I tell it otherwise after the upload. I keep forgetting to set it to "Public". I've even tried setting it to "Public" during the upload, but to no avail. :icon_mad:
Works now.
Works for me too. And it sounds one heckuva lot more inspiring than it did on Sunday! Nice tweaking. :icon_lol: Worth the reputed $1k-$1.5k they supposedly sell for? Nah. But a damn fine-sounding flanger nonetheless.
The Stop and Start thing is essentially all about the min and max delays that it sweeps between. There are probably trimpots inside to set the clock freq range, such that you may be able to get something much closer to thru-zero than you can at present. Not QUITE thru-zero, but short enough to compare favourably with an A/DA. I mean, after all, it's packing an SAD1024.
Of course, even if you can't, you'll still be able to play the return-from-solo on "And the Cradle Will Rock"...properly.
This one's a keeper!
Musitronics really designed great sounding effects!
I also like the start /stop thang! I'll have to take a look at how that was implemented.
OK. I didn't feel like redrawing the entire schematic, so I used the original hi-rez one that I had, and tidied it up. I know it's huge, but it's best for clarity. Download it onto you computer, and then play with it.
I traced everything to my unit, and corrected what needed correcting. I've made my own notes on it, but if you have questions, fire away.
(http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc196/digi2t/MutronFlanger_unit_zpsd84690c7.jpg~original)
OK, Greg... how can we work around the SAD1024 now?
This SAD1024 to MN3007 conversion should be easy. The 2 sections of the SAD are in series. Won't have to tamper with the clock f. Have a look/see at the SAD to MN conversions done with the A/DA and EM...
Great job!
Gut shots when you get the time?? And you know what would be very useful.....I don't believe I've ever seen any documentation of the foot pedal shutter and surrounding mechanics. A drawing with dimensions would be great!
I like things that go woosh! ;D
Please digi2t,
I asked this on the other site also...
Please check the min and max. VCO frequencies...
If anyone would try and clone or just align the unit will need this 2 values more than any voltage...
thanks
Quote from: Fender3D on July 17, 2013, 05:12:41 AM
Please digi2t,
I asked this on the other site also...
Please check the min and max. VCO frequencies...
If anyone would try and clone or just align the unit will need this 2 values more than any voltage...
thanks
OK, I'm not that bright when it come to some of this stuff, so if you could tell me where I would have to plug my o-scope in I would appreciate it.
Just want to be sure that I get the right info out.
The demo video sounds great! The Start/Stop controls are an interesting departure from the normal Manual/Width controls.
Quote from: Mark Hammer on July 16, 2013, 12:39:29 PM...There are probably trimpots inside to set the clock freq range, such that you may be able to get something much closer to thru-zero than you can at present. Not QUITE thru-zero, but short enough to compare favourably with an A/DA. I mean, after all, it's packing an SAD1024.
With the SAD1024A wired in series, it is not likely to match the upper sweep of the A/DA. From the sound of the demo, however, it goes up high enough for most purposes.
Quote from: 12Bass on July 17, 2013, 08:07:34 AMWith the SAD1024A wired in series, it is not likely to match the upper sweep of the A/DA. From the sound of the demo, however, it goes up high enough for most purposes.
You'd be surprised. In theory, you
are correct in asserting that a pair of 512-stage devices in parallel will provide a shorter delay than two cascaded 512-stage sections, for the same clock frequency. However, folks have been able to get some pretty impressive sweeps from a humble MN3007 within the A/DA context. using suitably buffered clock signals. Maybe I was just remembering things wrong, but the Mu-tron, both on the bench and in the video, seemed like it could be nudged up juuuusssssttt a little higher.
I see that the SAD1-24, when used in dual-parallel mode inthe PAiA Hyperflange, is spec'd to yield delay times as short as 170usec. Double that and you have 340usec, which is still an octave and a half "higher" than a Boss BF-2.
As mentioned in another recent thread, BBD signal gain decreases as the clock frequency goes up. From the graphs, it would appear that the gain loss is not a linear function. So, that means that even if the series-mode BBD were provided with buffered clock signals at double the frequency (to match parallel-multiplex), there would be a increased loss of BBD signal as the sweep nears the top, resulting in less dramatic signal cancellation.
Quote from: digi2t on July 17, 2013, 06:26:36 AM
...so if you could tell me where I would have to plug my o-scope in I would appreciate it.
Probe should go to SAD's pins 3-14 or 8-10.
Set pedal control and write down the max. and the min. clock frequencies,
if you have 5 more minutes, please, set LFO control, start fully CW and stop fully CCW, rate at minimum and report min. and max.
Thank you so much
Quote from: 12Bass on July 17, 2013, 09:22:48 AM
As mentioned in another recent thread, BBD signal gain decreases as the clock frequency goes up. From the graphs, it would appear that the gain loss is not a linear function. So, that means that even if the series-mode BBD were provided with buffered clock signals at double the frequency (to match parallel-multiplex), there would be a increased loss of BBD signal as the sweep nears the top, resulting in less dramatic signal cancellation.
Yes and no. In truth, many, if not most, of the notches created at the "top" of the sweep (i.e., at shortest delay) are inaudible, largely because they are beyond the range of the guitar and most guitar-amp speakers. So whether they are compromised because the BBD output drops a db or two or even three, once it heads for the <.4msec range, can often be timbrally moot. I suppose one would likely notice it if playing white noise or something with similarly wide bandwidth through a wide bandwidth system (e.g., studio monitors), but not likely with the typical bass or guitar rig.
The expected question here is: so why the heck
aim for delays that short? And the answer is that dramatic slow sweeps have to feel like watchng slow-mo video of a car airbag inflating. One moment there's absolutely no trace, and all of a sudden the car cabin is filling right up. The transition from no audible notches to notches absolutely
everywhere is a big part of the "drama" of flanging. That nothing-to-everywhere traisition is a result of the overall sweep ratio (max delay divided by min), so both "start" and "stop" frequencies/delays play a role. But the more critical one seems to be the minimum delay. All other things being equal, a flanger that seeeps from .5msec to 10msec will seem more "dramatic" than one that sweeps from 1msec to 20msec.
Just want to add this for thought....
IMHO; a big part of the "drama" in the upper part of the sweep of the A/DA; aside from all the points that have been mentioned; is due to it's bare bones minimal post BBD low pass filtering. You can go up, up, up; but if you filter out too much sonic information those short delays are just not going to sound the way one would want them to.
Just my 2 cents from a hack with a soldering iron and a 'scope....
Absolutely. If the onboard LPF kills everything above, say 8khz, then there's not much point sweeping up to those ultra-short delays.
You need dirt for a great sounding flanger - thus the Electric Mistress and ADA sound so good!
Quote from: armdnrdy on July 17, 2013, 01:27:34 AM
Great job!
Gut shots when you get the time?? And you know what would be very useful.....I don't believe I've ever seen any documentation of the foot pedal shutter and surrounding mechanics. A drawing with dimensions would be great!
I like things that go woosh! ;D
If you look on the "other" site in the vintage effects section, there's a whole dissection of the optical pedal that goes with the Mutron Bi-Phase
It's got to be very similar to what's going on in this flanger's pedal.
Quote from: Derringer on July 17, 2013, 05:16:18 PM
If you look on the "other" site in the vintage effects section, there's a whole dissection of the optical pedal that goes with the Mutron Bi-Phase
It's got to be very similar to what's going on in this flanger's pedal.
Yeah...I have those files on my PC. I took a look at them last night and compared the info to the flanger pedal. It is similar but....one thing that's missing is the measurements of the shutter. I think that it would not have the same effect with a modified shutter and with different tolerances between the LDRs.
Alright guys, more measurements.
SAD1024 frequencies from pins 3-14 (8-10 are identical);
MIN: 63kHz
MAX: 537kHz
LFO frequency
MIN: 0Hz (or pretty damn close to it)
MAX: 11.1Hz
I tested the LDR resistances, and I found them to be in the same range for both LDR's. Mind you, my testing was rather unscientific. In a dark room, I shone a bright white LED flashlight into each LDR, and recorded the light and dark resistances. Both LDR's gave me the same ranges, with the same rates of end to end resistance speed. What I got was;
MIN (light): 18K, but could be lower because I could not shine the light directly into the tube. It was at an angle.
MAX (dark): over 40M, my DMM doesn't go higher than this.
Like I said, but LDR's gave me the same readings.
Here's a quick sketch of the tubes, and the arrangement of the LED and LDR's;
(http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc196/digi2t/Mutron%20Flanger/LED_LDRARRANGEMENT_zpsd4a345c0.jpg) (http://s214.photobucket.com/user/digi2t/media/Mutron%20Flanger/LED_LDRARRANGEMENT_zpsd4a345c0.jpg.html)
I'm thinking that the LDR's that we used for the EH Talking pedal conversion (Waitrony KE-10720) might be suitable for the job. I fooled around with one, and although it gives a lower light resistance, about 5K in similar conditions, the speed up to 40M dark is pretty similar to the originals. Besides, this could be fine tuned with resistors, LED selection, LRD angle, and there is a range trimmer as well. Nothing insurmountable here.
There's a lot of room to play with; higher and lower; with the clock f's....
Thanx for all this work Dino! :icon_cool:
Quote from: Dave W on July 17, 2013, 11:13:53 PM
There's a lot of room to play with; higher and lower; with the clock f's....
Thanx for all this work Dino! :icon_cool:
Looking at it now, and looking at the ADA flanger docs, I realize that. As I mentioned before, when Mark and I fired it up, it was poo, and what you hear in the video is my tuning by ear. I know now that two of the trimmers adjust the high and low end, and I have it adjusted to what my ears were telling me was "decent flanging". Of course, with Fender3D's direction, I can now scope it, and tune it even better. Up until now, I was only using the scope to check waveforms and voltages, this is my first frequency probe. Thanks for helping me bust my cherry on that one. :icon_mrgreen:
Quote from: Mark Hammer on July 17, 2013, 11:04:01 AMYes and no. In truth, many, if not most, of the notches created at the "top" of the sweep (i.e., at shortest delay) are inaudible, largely because they are beyond the range of the guitar and most guitar-amp speakers. So whether they are compromised because the BBD output drops a db or two or even three, once it heads for the <.4msec range, can often be timbrally moot. I suppose one would likely notice it if playing white noise or something with similarly wide bandwidth through a wide bandwidth system (e.g., studio monitors), but not likely with the typical bass or guitar rig.
The expected question here is: so why the heck aim for delays that short? And the answer is that dramatic slow sweeps have to feel like watchng slow-mo video of a car airbag inflating. One moment there's absolutely no trace, and all of a sudden the car cabin is filling right up. The transition from no audible notches to notches absolutely everywhere is a big part of the "drama" of flanging. That nothing-to-everywhere traisition is a result of the overall sweep ratio (max delay divided by min), so both "start" and "stop" frequencies/delays play a role. But the more critical one seems to be the minimum delay. All other things being equal, a flanger that seeeps from .5msec to 10msec will seem more "dramatic" than one that sweeps from 1msec to 20msec.
Sure... the 0.5 to 10 millisecond range covers the "sweet" zone of the sweep, IMO. Flangers that cannot produce delays shorter than 1 millisecond don't seem to get up high enough and really lack that dramatic swoosh when they start sweeping back down. Around 0.3 ms seems short enough in my experience.
My point was more about how the decrease in BBD gain with increased clock frequency affects the comb filtering. The most profound (deepest) flanging effect occurs with an exact 1:1 mix of delayed and straight signals. When the BBD gain drops off at higher clock frequencies, this alters the mix ratio from the ideal and makes the upper part of the sweep less exciting. I've found this gain decrease to be a bit of an issue even when running the SAD1024A in parallel-multiplex. Right when the flanger starts sweeping up into the upper midrange, the BBD gain starts to drop noticeably and the effect loses impact. This is an area of the sweep that I happen to like a lot, so I've tuned my A/DA so that the delay/straight mix is 1:1 in this range. Running the SAD1024A in series would only exacerbate the problem at higher clock rates, leading to a weaker sounding flange in the upper range.
Quote from: Dave W on July 17, 2013, 11:39:02 AMJust want to add this for thought....
IMHO; a big part of the "drama" in the upper part of the sweep of the A/DA; aside from all the points that have been mentioned; is due to it's bare bones minimal post BBD low pass filtering. You can go up, up, up; but if you filter out too much sonic information those short delays are just not going to sound the way one would want them to.
Just my 2 cents from a hack with a soldering iron and a 'scope....
Agree on the minimal low pass filtering. I've gone even further with my build, allowing practically full 20 kHz bandwidth in the delay path. I tend to use my A/DA through a custom full-range 3-way fEARful bass enclosure. The intensity of the A/DA's high frequency comb filtering is not lost through this monitoring system. Looking forward to an MN3007 version of the Mu-Tron in the future!
I'd have to read through all those articles to be accurate about it, but in the various scanned issues of DEVICE on my site (hammer.ampage.org, pages 10 and 11), I think it is the late Steven St. Croix who proposes that a decent flanger needs to have at least a 40:1 sweep; something which Craig Anderton reiterates in the Hyperflange article.
Again, two ways to get that: extending the maximum delay time, or decreasing the minimum delay time. The former gets you into the challenges of a) requiring a slow enough clock frequency that the clock becomes more audible, and b) moving into the delay range where pitch deviations become more obvious. The latter imposes the burden of buffering the clock signal, but that is much less of a problem with the SAD1024 than it is with the Panasonic chips. That caveat aside, every little bit one can dip below 1msec delay has a much greater impact on the sweep ratio, than adding a msec or two at the other end.
Very useful info!
Thanks Dino!
Looking at the schematic I noted some things
The Z2B and Q1 and Z2A based circuit fragments look to be some kind of noise gate. Z2B is a full wave rectifier to a R10, C8 attack, C8, R11 decay Q1 fet switch. Z2A is a lowpass filter.
The 4046 is being controlled via pin 9 look at the VCO part
http://www.ti.com/lit/an/scha003b/scha003b.pdf (http://www.ti.com/lit/an/scha003b/scha003b.pdf)
The foot pedal is a buffered voltage divider Note R72 and R62 are the same value and R61 and R71 are the same value
The buffered voltage divider output of Z6A is not set at 1/2 +7.5VDC and -7.5VDC but more to +7.5VDC
Now the tricky thing is what is ground in the schematic?
Is ground the same set by the output of Z11B or is it a mix of grounding?
The 15VDC supply is split by the Z11B and passive parts circuit fragment and the ground looks to be the voltage divider output that is buffered by Z11B. Not sure what C50 is about.
Alright, I have a couple of questions....
1) I noodled around with it last night, and I found that the best sounding frequency range is between 50kHz to 800kHz. I can't get it to go higher than about 800 and change, and in any case, I can't hear any flanging higher than that (though my dog probably can). Below 50kHz, the sound starts to warp too much, giving me an almost "boing" sound, which really isn't useful. Looking at some tuning procedures/video of other flangers, I can't get into the MHz zone with this unit. I'm close, and my ears are telling me it's pointless, but does it matter?
2) Is this unit capable of thru-zero, or, do you need to be running in parallel to achieve thru-zero? Looking at the schematic, I see that the SAD-1024 is running in series... I think. I'm trying to be as educated with my guess as a hack can possibly be. :icon_mrgreen:
Bonus question) Why don't I have +/-15vdc in this circuit, like the schematic implies? The whole thing is running at +/-7.5vdc. Bad caps?
Quote from: digi2t on July 19, 2013, 07:34:36 AM1) I noodled around with it last night, and I found that the best sounding frequency range is between 50kHz to 800kHz. I can't get it to go higher than about 800 and change, and in any case, I can't hear any flanging higher than that (though my dog probably can). Below 50kHz, the sound starts to warp too much, giving me an almost "boing" sound, which really isn't useful. Looking at some tuning procedures/video of other flangers, I can't get into the MHz zone with this unit. I'm close, and my ears are telling me it's pointless, but does it matter?
Does it matter? Probably not. If it sounds good, it is good, IMO. Clock much higher and the BBD signal will drop off rapidly anyway, making the comb filtering less intense. There's not a lot of spectral content to flange up there anyway. For me, the best sounding range is between around 0.5 ms to 5 ms.
Quote from: digi2t on July 19, 2013, 07:34:36 AM2) Is this unit capable of thru-zero, or, do you need to be running in parallel to achieve thru-zero? Looking at the schematic, I see that the SAD-1024 is running in series... I think. I'm trying to be as educated with my guess as a hack can possibly be. :icon_mrgreen:
Not capable of through-zero flanging (TZF), at least not without adding another short delay line in parallel and sweeping against that. To go through zero, the delayed signal would have to sweep
ahead of the straight signal, then behind it again.
I agree whole heartedly on the "sounds good = is good" front. I mean even at 800kHz, it seems a bit high/weak to my ears, but I can always trim that back with the pot, so that's fine. Besides, if I use it with keyboards, pumping lower frequencies (than guitar) through it might be fine at 800kHz. I prefer to have the maximum usable range available, and then cut back from there.
That's what I thought concerning the TZF. Like I said, this is brand new territory for me, but I kind of figured that it would require parallel signals, not series. Since the whole concept was derived from parallel reel to reels, it only made sense in my noggin.
Thanks! :icon_cool:
Quote from: digi2t on July 19, 2013, 07:34:36 AM
Bonus question) Why don't I have +/-15vdc in this circuit, like the schematic implies? The whole thing is running at +/-7.5vdc. Bad caps?
'cause designer made a mistake :icon_mrgreen:
you have just one 15V regulator, then you have 15V from positive to negative
Z11b will provide half supply (GND).
BTW
you did invert labels @ power supply... :icon_wink:
@Gus
Z6a simply set LFO reference, not circuit GND.
Quote from: Gus on July 19, 2013, 07:24:28 AM
The Z2B and Q1 and Z2A based circuit fragments look to be some kind of noise gate. Z2B is a full wave rectifier to a R10, C8 attack, C8, R11 decay Q1 fet switch. Z2A is a lowpass filter.
ADA docet...
@12Bass
I wouldn't matter so much for BBD signal dimming...
Every analog flanger ever built suffers (well, TCE aside :icon_wink: ) from this...
We're used to, aren't we?
Quote'cause designer made a mistake icon_mrgreen
you have just one 15V regulator, then you have 15V from positive to negative
Z11b will provide half supply (GND).
OK, makes sense.
QuoteBTW
you did invert labels @ power supply... icon_wink
Do you mean, why I flipped the arrows for the +/- 7.5vdc? It's because the schematic convention states arrow up = +, and arrow down = -. Yet, taking my readings from the board, the power section did not reflect the original schematic. Pin 2 gives -, and the original schematic showed arrow up, and vice versa. I found this confusing, so I amended the schematic.
Now...
Can anyone point me in the right direction as to how to graft an MN3007 in place of the SAD1024? Will it work with the 4011 providing the clock signals? As Jimi would say, I'm outta my pay grade here. :icon_mrgreen:
EDIT: Actually, is it possible to use the Moosapotamus 3007 daughter board here? Take the clock signals from the 4011, and plug the in/out between C17 and C19?
Quote from: digi2t on July 19, 2013, 10:12:03 AM
Do you mean, why I flipped the arrows for the +/- 7.5vdc? It's because the schematic convention states arrow up = +, and arrow down = -. Yet, taking my readings from the board, the power section did not reflect the original schematic. Pin 2 gives -, and the original schematic showed arrow up, and vice versa. I found this confusing, so I amended the schematic.
My bad, I just stared regulator pins...
Yep, another designer mistake...
Quote from: digi2t on July 19, 2013, 10:12:03 AM
Now...
Can anyone point me in the right direction as to how to graft an MN3007 in place of the SAD1024? Will it work with the 4011 providing the clock signals? As Jimi would say, I'm outta my pay grade here. :icon_mrgreen:
Check this http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=79154.msg652910#msg652910 (http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=79154.msg652910#msg652910)
Pay attention:
MN30xx needs an output pull-up resistor instead of SAD's pull-down.
You'll need Vgg (SAD hasn't it) @ pin4
Dissect my schematic and you should be done...
OK, thanks, I hadn't seen that one yet.
Do I still retain the original 4011 for the clock signals?
Is the pull up resistor R8 on your schematic? Can I use a trimmer like R80 on the Mutron, but to positive?
So is this circuit working from 0 to +15V with a +7.5V reference?
Or... Is it working from +7.5V to -7.5V with 0V as reference?
This power supply isn't making much sense to me.
Something's rotten in Denmark!
I don't know how one would go about getting a negative voltage from the output of a positive voltage regulator, (MC7815CT)
or 7.5 volts out of a 15 volt regulator, or positive 7.5 volts from the center tap. What am I missing?
By looking at this power supply schematic the output voltage should be +15 volts and ground. Then there is the schematic section to the left of the PS that looks like a virtual ground reference. ???
Quote from: digi2t on July 19, 2013, 11:03:04 AM
Do I still retain the original 4011 for the clock signals?
Is the pull up resistor R8 on your schematic? Can I use a trimmer like R80 on the Mutron, but to positive?
1)Yes
2)Yes
3)Yes, but be prepared to add a tranny (my Q1) if level is not high enough...
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on July 19, 2013, 11:15:56 AM
So is this circuit working from 0 to +15V with a +7.5V reference?
Or... Is it working from +7.5V to -7.5V with 0V as reference?
Well, to be picky, it is working from +7.5V to -7.5V with 0V as reference.
Actually, you have 15V total, period.
If then anyone divides this voltage by 2 .... :icon_rolleyes:
We can say our beloved pedals work @ 4.5V+4.5V...
Vbias may be GND, if GND is -V ! (better do not try this if you have just 2 resistors as voltage divider....)
Keep in mind, Dino, that 800khz, with the SAD1024 run in dual-parallel mode, is equivalent to an MN3007 run at 1.6mhz. Nothing to sneeze at.
OK guys. clarification...
(http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc196/digi2t/Mutron%20Flanger/MutronFlanger_unit_zps8ab07b95.jpg) (http://s214.photobucket.com/user/digi2t/media/Mutron%20Flanger/MutronFlanger_unit_zps8ab07b95.jpg.html)
Sorry for the confusion. I'm learning too. :icon_rolleyes:
@Fender3D - thanks for the prompt reply. I'm going away soon for the weekend, but when I get back, I'll rework the drawing to reflect the MN3007 set up. Unless you've got some time to spare Greg. ;D
@Mark - You'll have to educate me (again!) on that one. Is that a good or a bad thing? Moosapotamus states that the MN3007 ADA Flanger is maxing at 2.6MHz. Ouff!! My noob a$$ is taking a shit-kickin' here. :icon_lol:
Quote from: digi2t on July 19, 2013, 01:29:11 PM
Is that a good or a bad thing?
It might be a bad thing, since higher frequency also means shorter tracks, good soldering and shorter parts pins to avoid issues...
It is of no concern here, 'cause SAD runs in series mode; then SAD's clock = MN3007's clock
Quote from: Fender3D on July 19, 2013, 09:23:48 AM
Quote from: digi2t on July 19, 2013, 07:34:36 AM
Bonus question) Why don't I have +/-15vdc in this circuit, like the schematic implies? The whole thing is running at +/-7.5vdc. Bad caps?
'cause designer made a mistake :icon_mrgreen:
you have just one 15V regulator, then you have 15V from positive to negative
Z11b will provide half supply (GND).
BTW
you did invert labels @ power supply... :icon_wink:
@Gus
Z6a simply set LFO reference, not circuit GND.
Quote from: Gus on July 19, 2013, 07:24:28 AM
The Z2B and Q1 and Z2A based circuit fragments look to be some kind of noise gate. Z2B is a full wave rectifier to a R10, C8 attack, C8, R11 decay Q1 fet switch. Z2A is a lowpass filter.
ADA docet...
@12Bass
I wouldn't matter so much for BBD signal dimming...
Every analog flanger ever built suffers (well, TCE aside :icon_wink: ) from this...
We're used to, aren't we?
Read my post again I did not post Z6A is the ground ref it is ref voltage for the offset for the LFO
note I did post about Z11b
Do people every read my posts I mean read? Don't add to what I did not post.
I also posted about splitting the 15VDC with the opamp buffer after using a resistor divider before the buffer Z11B
Quote from: Gus on July 19, 2013, 07:24:28 AM
...The buffered voltage divider output of Z6A is not set at 1/2 +7.5VDC and -7.5VDC but more to +7.5VDC
Now the tricky thing is what is ground in the schematic?
Is ground the same set by the output of Z11B or is it a mix of grounding?
Sorry Gus,
I misunderstood...
I thought it was part of the following ground question...
Quote from: Mark Hammer on July 19, 2013, 01:16:54 PM
Keep in mind, Dino, that 800khz, with the SAD1024 run in dual-parallel mode, is equivalent to an MN3007 run at 1.6mhz. Nothing to sneeze at.
The schematic appears to show the two BBD sections wired in series. So, shouldn't that make it basically equivalent to an MN3007 at the same clock rate?
I should have written a nicer last post
Looking at the schematic I see there is no protection for the input differential pair in IC Z11B. I would have expected a series input resistor to pin 5 but maybe the 22Ks(R73,R74) is all that is needed.
digi2t
What voltages do you measure?
What do we know about the schematic is a Mutron one or is one that someone drew?
Those are the voltages that I recorded on my unit. It's just that I screwed the pooch on putting together how the bipolar voltages were created. I had never seen that set up before. The x-fo puts out 18vdc, which is then regulated down to 15vdc. The op amp then creates the +/- voltage with a virtual (?) ground in the middle.
The schematic is one that was posted on the other forum, in a Mutron Flanger thread. It's origin is from ARP, titled "SCHEMATIC, FLANGER", drawing number 77208. You can download it from over there.
Since it's hi-rez, I could blow it up to 11 x 17, and then trace the unit to it. There were some minor corrections, and some of the writing needed to be clarified, but in the end I decided that it would be easier to just Paint Shop all the writing, and just keep/correct the diagram. That's me being lazy :icon_mrgreen:
Quote from: 12Bass on July 19, 2013, 10:59:54 PM
Quote from: Mark Hammer on July 19, 2013, 01:16:54 PM
Keep in mind, Dino, that 800khz, with the SAD1024 run in dual-parallel mode, is equivalent to an MN3007 run at 1.6mhz. Nothing to sneeze at.
The schematic appears to show the two BBD sections wired in series. So, shouldn't that make it basically equivalent to an MN3007 at the same clock rate?
Yes. I think I was looking at the wrong schem when I suggested that. I stand corrected.
I've had more time to look at the circuit, and I've realized that the schematic is very confusing insofar as the voltages are concerned. Specifically the arrow up/down convention. Some of the arrows up may mean either 15vdc, or 7.5vdc, while the arrow down may mean -15vdc, -7.5vdc, or 0vdc. The only symbol that seems to hold true is the ground symbol, which is the virtual ground created by the op amp. A good example of the confusion regarding the down arrow is the LED's. The negative side shows a down arrow, which the original legend shows as -15vdc. Again, since we don't have -15vdc anywhere, one could assume that it's -7.5vdc. In reality, it's 0vdc (x-fo center tap, pin 2 of the regulator). There's just too much chaos here, and it needs to be sorted out.
Also, the voltage regulator numbering is wrong. The output pin is 3, while the ground pin is 2. It's backwards on the schematic.
I'm going to go over it again this weekend, and redo the legend to clear up what power is going where. Disregard the schematic I've posted. I'll post an update soon.
No Dino, its all fine. Just connect the +15VDC arrow to the +7.5VDC arrow of the +/-7.5VDC circuit and call all points from there on +7.5VDC. Connect the 0VDC to the -7.5VDC of the +/-7.5VDC circuit and call all points from there on -7.5VDC. The 15V and 0V points from there on are irrelevant because they have been converted to +7.5VDC, ground, and -7.5VDC (which equals a total of 15VDC).
Some will argue that the regulator pinout is correct since the pins are not numbered in a straight line, as I discovered recently. I would have lost money if a bet was made :) So just pin it out whichever way works for you.
Edit: If the 15V arrow was marked +7.5VDC, and the 0V arrow was marked -7.5VDC, the confusion would have been avoided. Hope that makes sense...
I would mark the regulator IN, GND, and OUT. That way you don't have to worry about it's orientation.
Quote from: armdnrdy on July 26, 2013, 12:55:03 AM
I would mark the regulator IN, GND, and OUT. That way you don't have to worry about it's orientation.
Excellent idea. Duly noted for the update.
All right folks, I've got it sorted out. The second half of Z11 is only there to produce a virtual ground. The unit is running on 15vdc / 0vdc. There is no -15vdc, or +/-7.5vdc requirement. I've updated the schematic, and this is the final version;
(http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc196/digi2t/Mutron%20Flanger/MutronFlanger_unit_zps409a35df.jpg) (http://s214.photobucket.com/user/digi2t/media/Mutron%20Flanger/MutronFlanger_unit_zps409a35df.jpg.html)
Now... could someone design a PCB. With a MN3007 retrofit. That fits into a Morley enclosure. Anyone? :icon_rolleyes:
Don't ask for much, do I. :icon_lol:
Here is the drawing of the LDR's - LED arrangement too. For some reason, I accidentally deleted it from Photobucket.
(http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc196/digi2t/Mutron%20Flanger/LED_LDRARRANGEMENT_zps5645d7b8.jpg) (http://s214.photobucket.com/user/digi2t/media/Mutron%20Flanger/LED_LDRARRANGEMENT_zps5645d7b8.jpg.html)
Quote from: digi2t on July 29, 2013, 08:42:42 PM
The second half of Z11 is only there to produce a virtual ground. The unit is running on 15vdc / 0vdc. There is no -15vdc, or +/-7.5vdc requirement.
See Reply #39
@Dino,
The schematic could be easily updated for an MN3007 retrofit BUT....
I think that the actual PCB will need to be re-designed for a Morley-style enclosure :-\
There is not a lot of "vertical" room in those and I doubt you will be able to stack a mod board on top of an original OR a cloned board for that matter.
The only solution I see is to either do a vero -OR- a new PCB with he 3007 retrofit already incorporated. I absolutely SUCK at PCB design or I would do it but, if someone were to take this on and work out a plug-n-play PCB for the Morley shells..... you will definitely see the prices of those old Morleys go through the roof on eBay :o
I would be MORE THAN HAPPY to provide measurements of a Morley shell or anything else to support the effort though ;D
Quote from: armdnrdy on July 29, 2013, 09:41:18 PM
Quote from: digi2t on July 29, 2013, 08:42:42 PM
The second half of Z11 is only there to produce a virtual ground. The unit is running on 15vdc / 0vdc. There is no -15vdc, or +/-7.5vdc requirement.
See Reply #39
You were absolutely right Larry. I'm simply confirming what is in the box. I hate loose ends, especially when they're in my head. :icon_lol:
@G_L - I PM'd Ronan about it. He did the Talking Pedal drop-in PCB for Morley enclosures, and he says that he could use that as a template. We just need someone to replace the SAD1024 with a MN3007, and test it to be sure it works. If it does, we could send the modified schematic to him, and see what he can do with it.
Unfortunately, I'm swamped right now, and I won't be able to breadboard something this big for a while.
I just wanted so desperately to be right for once! ;D
It almost looks like Musitronics used a template to draw their schematics. The +/- voltage symbols and placement look very much like the Bi Phase schematic.
OK, I hacked in the MN3007 chip. Does this look right? (You're not the only one who's desperate Larry. :icon_lol:)
(http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc196/digi2t/Mutron%20Flanger/MutronFlanger_unit_MOD_zps37baef86.jpg) (http://s214.photobucket.com/user/digi2t/media/Mutron%20Flanger/MutronFlanger_unit_MOD_zps37baef86.jpg.html)
The transistor Q4 might not be needed, but until someone tests this, I stuck it in there. The original R79 trimmer is 10K, but I put in the 100K from the other drawing. This too will have to be tested.
Aw hell.... this whole thing needs to be tested. :icon_confused:
Let's not test this version so we can keep the smoke in our 3007s.
The MN3007's pin connections aren't correct for positive voltage.
I'll redraw it in eagle with the 3007 retrofit when I get a moment.
I'm working on a ADA STD-1 redraw right now.....it's a monster!
Sorry Dino and Larry, I know nothing about the BBD chips so can't help with a schematic (without doing possibly days of research and regurgitating the work that has already been done on this forum). The conversions have been done before, here's a couple:
http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=72329.0
http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=78270.0
If a schematic is decided on, I can have a go at a pcb layout. I agree with GL, just do a layout for MN3007, not SAD1024. Will need some pointers on how to lay clock traces, minimize noise, or whatever issues come up with flanger layouts.
I also think the LED/LDR tubes are unnecessary, and the 2nd LDR is not needed. Better off just doing it the Morley way, one LED, one LDR and a shutter - it works fine and will make for an easier build.
On a technical note, the ground symbol of a schematic pretty well must be 0V, since there should not be any DC offset on a ground or output signal. The IC power supply pins must go to + and - supplies (as specified in their datasheets) and ground is 0V. This is the convention, not the rule however, so just my 2c. In this circuit, the virtual ground is created with an IC, and this is an acceptable way of doing this, just as Vref in many 9V pedals is created with an IC in exactly the same way. But note how Vref does not use a ground symbol, it is usually labelled Vref or similar, to distinguish it from ground (0V). In these circuits, a capacitor is then used to take out the DC component from the output signals.
QuoteThe MN3007's pin connections aren't correct for positive voltage.
Crap!... I just looked at the datasheet. :icon_evil:
QuoteBetter off just doing it the Morley way, one LED, one LDR and a shutter - it works fine and will make for an easier build.
I'm not quite sure how the second LDR works in concert with the LED. I know that section and trimmer is for setting up the pedal range, but it seems awfully elaborate. Can someone dumb it down for me? :icon_rolleyes: Will we need something similar/simpler for adjusting the range otherwise?
Quote from: digi2t on July 29, 2013, 11:06:29 PM
OK, I hacked in the MN3007 chip. Does this look right? (You're not the only one who's desperate Larry. :icon_lol:)
It looks ok!
You may sub the 100k trimmer on BBD output with a 100k or 47k resistor and connect a 20k trimmer from Q4 emitter to -7.5V (down arrow), wiper to C19 and you're done!
Quote from: Ronan on July 30, 2013, 06:22:05 AM
Better off just doing it the Morley way, one LED, one LDR and a shutter - it works fine and will make for an easier build.
There are some Morley pedals that have 2 LED/LDRs and 2 cut outs on the treadle piece.
I am pretty sure the Bad Horsie Wah has 2 LED/LDRs.
Can you confirm that Dino? Ill have a look at my Alligator pedal as well.
Quote from: Fender3D on July 30, 2013, 07:29:07 AM
It looks ok!
Federico,
I think you missed the point where Dino stated that there is no negative voltage in this build. The supply is +15 / power ground with a virtual signal ground being created by Z11B.
Dino has the 3007's gnd pin going to ground and the VCC pin going to +15 volts. It should be the other way around
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on July 30, 2013, 07:52:24 AM
Quote from: Ronan on July 30, 2013, 06:22:05 AM
Better off just doing it the Morley way, one LED, one LDR and a shutter - it works fine and will make for an easier build.
There are some Morley pedals that have 2 LED/LDRs and 2 cut outs on the treadle piece.
I am pretty sure the Bad Horsie Wah has 2 LED/LDRs.
Can you confirm that Dino? Ill have a look at my Alligator pedal as well.
I haven't opened it up yet, but the Bad Horsie schematic shows 2 led's and 2 ldr's.
Would be nice to try and stick to the original design, just for posterity. I can understand that replacing the SAD is pretty much required, considering cost, but I don't think an extra led/ldr would hurt the pocket book. Besides, the op amp is already there.
What say you all?
Quote from: armdnrdy on July 30, 2013, 11:54:02 AM
Federico,
I think you missed the point where Dino stated that there is no negative voltage in this build. The supply is +15 / power ground with a virtual signal ground being created by Z11B.
Dino has the 3007's gnd pin going to ground and the VCC pin going to +15 volts. It should be the other way around
??? ...
Oh ok, we built up a confusing thread...
Let's put it this way...
3007's pin 1 is @+ 15V and pin 5 @0V, then it's ok...
BTW the 20k trimmer I was talking above, then goes from Q4 emitter to 0V (down arrow), wiper to C19
Quote from: digi2t on July 30, 2013, 12:36:57 PM
I haven't opened it up yet, but the Bad Horsie schematic shows 2 led's and 2 ldr's.
Would be nice to try and stick to the original design, just for posterity. I can understand that replacing the SAD is pretty much required, considering cost, but I don't think an extra led/ldr would hurt the pocket book. Besides, the op amp is already there.
What say you all?
I would just like to say that the baseline stuff is there already for a 2 LED/2 LDR setup with the Morley shells. There is also a template to follow (somewhat) for those who will attempt a drop-in PCB.
Finally... there is A LOT of space inside those Morley shells. There is PLENTY of open space to work with for the PCB layout PLUS... there is plenty of room to add the potentiometer controls on either side of the foot pedal ;D
Quote from: Fender3D on July 30, 2013, 12:44:05 PM
??? ...
Oh ok, we built up a confusing thread...
Let's put it this way...
3007's pin 1 is @+ 15V and pin 5 @0V, then it's ok...
BTW the 20k trimmer I was talking above, then goes from Q4 emitter to 0V (down arrow), wiper to C19
My mistake...sort of.... the MN3007 symbol pin numbers and pin names for GND and VCC are switched.
Here's my "quick" take on the 3007 retrofit. MN3007 pin names corrected.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/MutronFlanger3007%20-%20Copy.jpg)
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on July 30, 2013, 01:18:05 PM
Quote from: digi2t on July 30, 2013, 12:36:57 PM
I haven't opened it up yet, but the Bad Horsie schematic shows 2 led's and 2 ldr's.
Would be nice to try and stick to the original design, just for posterity. I can understand that replacing the SAD is pretty much required, considering cost, but I don't think an extra led/ldr would hurt the pocket book. Besides, the op amp is already there.
What say you all?
I would just like to say that the baseline stuff is there already for a 2 LED/2 LDR setup with the Morley shells. There is also a template to follow (somewhat) for those who will attempt a drop-in PCB.
Finally... there is A LOT of space inside those Morley shells. There is PLENTY of open space to work with for the PCB layout PLUS... there is plenty of room to add the potentiometer controls on either side of the foot pedal ;D
The Morley Pro Flanger has two LDRs and one bulb.
Quote from: armdnrdy on July 30, 2013, 02:17:42 PM
Here's my "quick" take on the 3007 retrofit. MN3007 pin names corrected.
Ok.
I'd add a 100k resistor from bias trim's wiper to pin 3 otherways you might attenuate signal a bit too much, or feed too much current...
Again I'd buffer MN's output with a transistors, better have more signal than less... (it may always be regulated later)
Quote from: Fender3D on July 30, 2013, 03:16:38 PM
Quote from: armdnrdy on July 30, 2013, 02:17:42 PM
Here's my "quick" take on the 3007 retrofit. MN3007 pin names corrected.
Ok.
I'd add a 100k resistor from bias trim's wiper to pin 3 otherways you might attenuate signal a bit too much, or feed too much current...
Again I'd buffer MN's output with a transistors, better have more signal than less... (it may always be regulated later)
Hey Federico,
Schematic updated with 100K and buffer.
Yeah....I missed the 100K.
Without dragging up the data sheets....the SAD has a higher output than the MN yes? no?
I'll redraw this in Eagle later today.
I would just like to inject a quick, but very sincere, "Thank you" to all lending their brain power to this.
There. Everyone, carry on please. :icon_biggrin:
Larry,
SAD has a positive gain, while MN is more towards 0dB/-2dB, usually. So, yes SAD has a higher output than MN
BTW gain depends on output load resistor(s).
Looks like the power for the MN3007 is 7.5V instead of 15V in the above schematic, because "ground" is actually sitting at +7.5V. There's an emitter resistor missing on the buffer after the MN3007.
Quote from: digi2t on July 29, 2013, 08:42:42 PM
Here is the drawing of the LDR's - LED arrangement too. For some reason, I accidentally deleted it from Photobucket.
(http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc196/digi2t/Mutron%20Flanger/LED_LDRARRANGEMENT_zps5645d7b8.jpg) (http://s214.photobucket.com/user/digi2t/media/Mutron%20Flanger/LED_LDRARRANGEMENT_zps5645d7b8.jpg.html)
Look at the LED setup and the schematic what photo cell goes to Z10a and Z10b?
Note when more light hits PC1 it resistance drops moving pin 2 the inverting input of Z10A more positive this reduces the drive to Q5 so this looks like a feedback loop to control the output of the LED. C51 is part of the damping of the servo network so I would guess PC1 is the one next to the led. Adjusting R78 looks to adjust the brightness.
Yes it is a +- supply like some of us posted about
I would check C50s connections again the 470uf in the power supply
Looking at the schematic what makes this a little different?
The start and stop caused by adjusting DC levels
The foot control supplies a changing DC voltage to the 4046
one can build a different +- 7.5VDC supply
Quote from: Gus on July 31, 2013, 06:54:40 AMNote when more light hits PC1 it resistance drops moving pin 2 the inverting input of Z10A more positive this reduces the drive to Q5 so this looks like a feedback loop to control the output of the LED. C51 is part of the damping of the servo network so I would guess PC1 is the one next to the led. Adjusting R78 looks to adjust the brightness.
I agree with that. Also, in a Morley enclosure the tubes are not needed, (its dark in there) and the 2nd LDR (PC1) is a bit overkill these days, but its proly best to reproduce the original circuit and people who don't want to go to the trouble of putting PC1 in the tube with the LED can replace it with a fixed resistor on the pcb. Just thinking out loud. I was thinking an easier build in a Morley shell could use no tubes and function very well.
Quote from: Gus on July 31, 2013, 06:54:40 AMI would check C50s connections again the 470uf in the power supply.
The original ARP schematic has C50 in the correct position, but there was confusion over the regulator pinouts. Well spotted.
Quote from: Gus on July 31, 2013, 06:54:40 AMone can build a different +- 7.5VDC supply.
All it needs is 15VDC regulated, or 18VDC unregulated, or around 14VAC, these options could be incorporated into the pcb. If the original circuit is to be kept reasonably intact I think the virtual ground system should also be kept intact, which it can be with the above options. There's many ways to do it, but I'd rather see it kept fairly original vs charge pumps etc
Quote from: Ronan on July 31, 2013, 05:12:17 AM
Looks like the power for the MN3007 is 7.5V instead of 15V in the above schematic, because "ground" is actually sitting at +7.5V. There's an emitter resistor missing on the buffer after the MN3007.
I thought we settled this. Doesn't the circuit run off of +15VDC and 0VDC?
Quote
There's many ways to do it, but I'd rather see it kept fairly original vs charge pumps etc
The only problem is that the proposed Morley wah enclosures do not have enough internal OR external room for a power transformer :-\
I am thinking that this is either going to have to be built with a charge pump circuit OR it will need to be directly fed with REGULATED 15VDC-18VDC depending on the build.
Also, with respects to biasing and incorporating the MN3007.... can we use some of the A/DA mod to leverage? :icon_idea:
QuoteI am thinking that this is either going to have to be built with a charge pump circuit OR it will need to be directly fed with REGULATED 15VDC-18VDC depending on the build.
Personally, I don`t mind running it with an 18v DC or AC power supply (wall wart), and regulating down. I know some folks are not really keen on the wall wart, but like G_L says, there`s no room for a step down transformer.
If it`s good enough for the Tau Pipe Phaser, it`ll be good here.
Okay guys still working on the redraw and I have a question about the switching and indicator LEDs.
From the schematic I've identified S1 (A&B) as the effect in/out switch, and S2 (A&B) as the pedal in/out switch.
Watching Dino's video: the effect switch has to be on for the pedal function to work. The rate LED only works when the "pedal" switch (S2) is not engaged.
LEDs: CR17 = power indicator
CR16 = rate indicator
CR14 = effect engaged indicator
CR15 = pedal engaged indicator
Can someone take a look at the schematics to verify this?
Now the question: I'm looking to make this true bypass. Delete S1A, C33, R36, and R37 at the output.
Looking at S1B: When the effect is engaged the LED is lighted. When the switch is in the "other" position it is sending +V through R40 to pin 2 (non inverting input) of Z5A of the LFO.
What exactly is that voltage doing to the LFO?
If this needs to be configured in this fashion I can add a 3PDT switch on the input and output with the third pole of the switch switching +V between the indicator and the LFO.
Quote from: armdnrdy on July 31, 2013, 10:30:50 AM
Looking at S1B: When the effect is engaged the LED is lighted. When the switch is in the "other" position it is sending +V through R40 to pin 2 (non inverting input) of Z5A of the LFO.
Wouldn't this be indicative of the switching between sweeping the filter with the Speed pot as opposed to using the Pedal?
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on July 31, 2013, 11:06:36 AM
Quote from: armdnrdy on July 31, 2013, 10:30:50 AM
Looking at S1B: When the effect is engaged the LED is lighted. When the switch is in the "other" position it is sending +V through R40 to pin 2 (non inverting input) of Z5A of the LFO.
Wouldn't this be indicative of the switching between sweeping the filter with the Speed pot as opposed to using the Pedal?
If you look at the schematic the LFO is disengaged via S2A when the pedal function is engaged.
S1B (effect in/out) sends +V to the LFO when the effect is disengaged. In that position neither the auto sweep (LFO) or the pedal sweep will work.
So I'm wondering what the +V is doing to the LFO when the effect/pedal is disengaged.
QuoteWatching Dino's video: the effect switch has to be on for the pedal function to work. The rate LED only works when the "pedal" switch (S2) is not engaged.
That is correct. «Effect» is the bypass, «Pedal» switches between LFO or pedal control. The Rate LED is only operational when the effect is on, and in LFO mode.
Quote from: digi2t on July 31, 2013, 12:14:39 PM
QuoteWatching Dino's video: the effect switch has to be on for the pedal function to work. The rate LED only works when the "pedal" switch (S2) is not engaged.
That is correct. «Effect» is the bypass, «Pedal» switches between LFO or pedal control. The Rate LED is only operational when the effect is on, and in LFO mode.
This is a little bit how the Morley Pro Flanger operates, except that the effect light with pulse with the lfo (there is no rate light)... no pulsing when in manual sweep mode though. I wish that I could find a schematic so we could compare. The difference with the Morley is that there are 2 SAD chips.
Another thing,
Dino can you provide dimensions of the foot pedal shutter and any useful information about it's travel?
There's been conversation of fitting this in a Morley enclosure......I have an idea to fit it in a Dunlop style enclosure such as the type sold by Small Bear, Mammoth, etc.
Toe stomp switch = effect In/out
Side kick switch (like the type on the crybaby 535Q, or the Snarling Dog's mold spore) for pedal / LFO
Board mounted IN/OUT jacks
Side mounted control pots like the crybaby 535Q, or the Snarling Dog's mold spore.
There is a lot of unused space in a crybaby style enclosure.
QuoteDino can you provide dimensions of the foot pedal shutter and any useful information about it's travel?
I can, but it might not be available until tomorrow. I won`t be home till late tonight. Quite honestly, the shutter is not exactly a thing of precision. Mechanically, it goes from fully blocking, to fully allowing the light to pass. The trimmer adjusts the range. Wether it be a Morley, or a Crybaby shell, the shutter can be easily fabricated to accomodate the sweep available of that particular pedal. A bit like the trimming we had to do for the Talking Pedal.
If you can fit it into a Crybaby, that would be great as well, though personally I would appreciate a Morley layout more. I have a Mold Spore, and a 535, and I find the side buttons a PITA. Although, I wonder if we could cut out a corner at the top of a Crybaby, like the Korg Mr. Multi, and stick the other switch there? The Mold Spore has this arrangement as well for the ring mod feature.
Quote from: digi2t on July 31, 2013, 03:53:10 PM
Although, I wonder if we could cut out a corner at the top of a Crybaby, like the Korg Mr. Multi, and stick the other switch there? The Mold Spore has this arrangement as well for the ring mod feature.
The Mold Spore button is in a bad place as well!
I was looking at a crybaby shell for another build and had the thought to add another foot switch in the heel position. I'll take a look again to see if it can be done.
That would be kind of cool!
I can do a layout for the Morley enclosure as well, just get me the dimensions.
Redrawn and retrofitted for the MN3007 as promised.
Link to PDF
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Mutron%20Flanger%203007.pdf (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Mutron%20Flanger%203007.pdf)
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Mutron%20Flanger%203007.bmp)
Quote from: armdnrdy on July 31, 2013, 04:10:55 PM
I can do a layout for the Morley enclosure as well, just get me the dimensions.
Larry, the link below is the outline and hole positions of the pcb I did for the EH Talking Pedal, printed to pdf from the actual pcb software. I added in the dimensions. The important bits are the dimensions between the four mounting holes and their relationship with the cutout for the shutter. It wouldn't hurt to take the cutout for the shutter another 1/8" further as I found some shutters resting or hitting up against the slot because it wasn't quite deep enough. The four mounting holes are centered across the top-to-bottom centreline of the housing. I can measure up the internal dimensions of a Morley housing if you want. The idea with the EH Talking Pedal pcb is you removed the existing pcb and fitted this one in place. The Morley housing has lots of room for top-mounted footswitches (one each side), pots and LED's. I would be very happy for you to do a Morley housing layout as I am pretty strapped for time, any questions please ask! I also appreciate that some prefer the slimmer crybaby housing, I have some dimensions for some wah shells I bought too.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/61170900/Morley%20pedal%20pcb%20outline.pdf
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/61170900/EH%20TP%20pcb%20in%20housing.JPG
Very nice schematic drawing!
I might have it all wrong but shouldn't pin 5 of the MN3007 go to power ground vs signal ground in order to get the full 15V? (this is what I was trying to say in post 76)
Regarding power supplies, it might be possible to accommodate external wallwarts whether they be AC or DC; and also a standard 9V DC input running with a charge pump, but those voltages will also need regulating to limit them to the 16V max of the MN3007. If all those options are on the pcb, the builder could choose their power supply option.
Just to throw a wrench at the monkey... ::)
Will the 4046/4011 combination provide the umph to drive the MN3007's clock correctly? Will the default clock path for the SAD chip work just as well for the 3007? ???
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on August 01, 2013, 09:16:12 AM
Just to throw a wrench at the monkey... ::)
Will the 4046/4011 combination provide the umph to drive the MN3007's clock correctly? Will the default clock path for the SAD chip work just as well for the 3007? ???
I don't see why it wouldn't. I believe that Dino posted the SAD's min/max frequencies and the 3007 will be able to cover it without a hitch.
As far as the clock path.....I'll route the boards with the best design rules in mind. There shouldn't be a problem with clock noise......I believe that the ADA designers already worked through this......how often do you see a virtual signal ground path in an older stompbox?
I think they had issues and this was their solution!.......It's a good one though!~
Quote from: Ronan on August 01, 2013, 06:38:48 AM
I might have it all wrong but shouldn't pin 5 of the MN3007 go to power ground vs signal ground in order to get the full 15V? (this is what I was trying to say in post 76)
Regarding power supplies, it might be possible to accommodate external wallwarts whether they be AC or DC; and also a standard 9V DC input running with a charge pump, but those voltages will also need regulating to limit them to the 16V max of the MN3007. If all those options are on the pcb, the builder could choose their power supply option.
Ian,
Good catch!
Yes...the 3007 needs power ground, not signal ground for it's supply! Drawings revised and posted.
I like the option of power supply options. :icon_wink: I'll work it in!
Also, Thanks for the above links. I'll have a look when I get home this evening.
Quote from: armdnrdy on August 01, 2013, 09:39:05 AM
I don't see why it wouldn't. I believe that Dino posted the SAD's min/max frequencies and the 3007 will be able to cover it without a hitch.
I always thought that the reasoning for the flip-flops and the gated buffers was to match the MN3007's capacitance in order to drive the delay times below the threshold of the chip to match the functionality of the SAD.
I will try to dig up the thread which explains it better :-\
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on August 01, 2013, 10:34:57 AM
I always thought that the reasoning for the flip-flops and the gated buffers was to match the MN3007's capacitance in order to drive the delay times below the threshold of the chip to match the functionality of the SAD.
I will try to dig up the thread which explains it better :-\
I believe that I've come across that thread before.....see if you can find it!
My impression of adding a 4049 buffer in the ADA Flanger build was to achieve a higher clock rate. I've read that the spec'd limitations of the MN series are derived by assuming that you are using the MN3101 clock. The MN series BBDs can be clocked higher.....the MN clock has the limitations.
I built a MXR M117 clone where Federico (Fender3D) implemented a 3007 in place of the SAD......it works great.
Remember that the SAD in the Mutron Flanger is connected in series producing 1024 stages.....so basically...we're replacing a 1024 BBD IC with another model that takes a slightly different pin/supply configuration.
I think that Mark Hammer and someone else? discussed this issue in this thread a couple of pages ago.
Quote from: armdnrdy on August 01, 2013, 11:00:39 AM
I believe that I've come across that thread before.....see if you can find it!
Been searching but... nothing so far. :icon_cry:
I believe the question came about due to my not understanding why the MN3007 couldn't be dropped into the standard M117 circuit. The SAD is used in series in that pedal as well.
The only thing I remember is that it was explained that it had to do with the differences in the clock capacitance between the SAD1024 and the MN3007 :-\
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on August 01, 2013, 11:06:14 AM
Quote from: armdnrdy on August 01, 2013, 11:00:39 AM
I believe that I've come across that thread before.....see if you can find it!
Been searching but... nothing so far. :icon_cry:
I believe the question came about due to my not understanding why the MN3007 couldn't be dropped into the standard M117 circuit. The SAD is used in series in that pedal as well.
The only thing I remember is that it was explained that it had to do with the differences in the clock capacitance between the SAD1024 and the MN3007 :-\
I'll do some research to see what I can find. I like when things work correctly the first time with no surprises!
As far as the MN3007 not being a "drop in" for the M-117.....When other members were working on a daughter board with a buffer, I was in communication with Federico about his retrofit. I asked him more than once, "are you sure this thing doesn't need a buffer?"........ "the other guys say it needs a buffer." He was very adamant that it didn't.
With my 3007 build I was able to achieve the factory set points for the BBD clocking and hear no audible issues whatsoever.
Quote from: armdnrdy on August 01, 2013, 11:08:38 AM
With my 3007 build I was able to achieve the factory set points for the BBD clocking and hear no audible issues whatsoever.
So you are saying that you believe the MN3007 can be a direct drop in replacement for the SAD1024 chip when it is run with both halves in series? No buffering needed?
And no adjustments to clocking?
^^
Yes and ny
when you're dealing with BBDs you have just one very important detail: BBD stages.
You have Td=BBDstages/fclock/2
this is the yes part...
Then you must face the chip gain:
Typ SAD's 1.2
Typ MN3007 0
This means you should recover the loss. Remember this value depends on load resistor also (and clock freq too)...
Then there's the clock input capacitance.
Your clock must supply the current needed with the given capacitive load:
110pF (per 512 section) with SAD and 700pF with MN.
Capacitive load may increase if tracks from VCO to BBD are long and/or near GND track(s)
This "ny" part may be easily overcome with a proper layout and adding a clock buffer if you're going to go over 2~2.3MHz
You know guys, I'm havin' a brain wave here... :icon_idea:
I wonder if with a piece of thru-pad perf, and some header pins, if I could make an adapter board. Sort of like what I did with the XP-ALL+ (27C256 / 27C1001 conversion). Stick an MN3007 on the board, with the accompanying parts, and plug it into the Mutron SAD socket. That would give us a pretty good indication of whether it would work, no?
Quote from: digi2t on August 01, 2013, 04:52:06 PM
I wonder if with a piece of thru-pad perf, and some header pins, if I could make an adapter board.
You can,
just use SAD pin 15 to MN pin 3 as input,
SAD's clock pins to MN's 2 and 6
on perf, place 2 resistors and a cap for Vgg
R out + transistor on MN's output pins to SAD's pins 5 and 6
power supply pins as needed...
Edit:
Just realized...
Sorry Dino I meant:
R out + transistor on MN's output pins,
transistor's emitter to SAD's pins 5 and 6
Quote from: Fender3D on August 01, 2013, 05:17:25 PM
Quote from: digi2t on August 01, 2013, 04:52:06 PM
I wonder if with a piece of thru-pad perf, and some header pins, if I could make an adapter board.
You can,
just use SAD pin 15 to MN pin 3 as input,
SAD's clock pins to MN's 2 and 6
on perf, place 2 resistors and a cap for Vgg
R out + transistor on MN's output pins to SAD's pins 5 and 6
power supply pins as needed...
OK. MN3007 has been ordered. Probably take a couple of weeks to get here, unless someone wants to lend me one ( ;)) in the meantime. There's none available locally.
I don't mind yanking the SAD out of the Mutron for the test (he says, as a bead of sweat rolls down his temple :icon_lol:)
Quote from: digi2t on August 01, 2013, 05:45:08 PM
I don't mind yanking the SAD out of the Mutron for the test (he says, as a bead of sweat rolls down his temple :icon_lol:)
You can safely handle your SAD after you've wrapped it in aluminum foil, shorting its pins :icon_wink:
To ease everyone's mind....I dug into the data sheets and took to the net. This is what I found.
The Ccp (clock input capacitance) that Federico is referring to is listed as (typical) 110pf for the SAD and (max) 700pf for the MN3007. So we still don't know what we're looking at as far as a comparison. Kind of apples and oranges!
I looked at the original ADA Flanger schematics for some insight. The first version used the SAD1024 and a 4007/4047 combo for the VCO/clock. The second version used the MN3010 (CCP max 350pf) and the same 4007/4047 combo. :icon_idea:
I have also studied the ADA flanger reissue. The first version used the MN3010, then switched to two MN3004's, the series ended with a modified (traces cut, VGG resistors reconfigured, and a 78LXX regulator added on the trace side) circuit board and two MN3204's........all with the same clock configuration.
Some time ago I studied the original ADA flanger drawings and I was unsure why the 4049 buffer was added to the SAD1024 moosapotamus version. The production ADA didn't incorporate the buffer and yet possesses a sound and sweep range that is revered!
I found this little snippet from our one and only Mark Hammer that explains why and when a clock buffer is needed:
Reply #7
http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=67967.0
Now for the good news!
I really didn't know what that pesky little CD4011 was doing between the 4047 and the BBD clock inputs. I do now!
In that configuration it is a (not) inverter........a buffer!!
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/4011%20buffer.jpg)
So...I think we're good to go! ;D
Here's another explanation of what the 4011 buffer is doing.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Buffer%20gate.jpg)
Quote from: armdnrdy on August 01, 2013, 11:11:24 PM
Here's another explanation of what the 4011 buffer is doing.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Buffer%20gate.jpg)
A bit off topic here, but just a question;
Could the 4011 (or other 40** chip) be used as an op amp is used in a buffer? If so, would there be any advantage/disadvantage?
@Dino
I see where you are going with this but, is this just for information or do you want to implement it here?
I ask because the NEW question would be whether or not it would be worth it to reinvent the wheel? It might save a little space but is that space crucial here?
Don't have the links at the moment, but I recall that a number of experimenters tried circuits both with and without a 4049 buffer and noticed a definite improvement in sound quality with the added buffer. The clock pin capacitance of the BBD rounds the (square) clock signal as frequency increases and this smears the sound at higher clock rates. My buffered SAD1024A sounds surprisingly hi-fi at 1 MHz!
QuoteProbably take a couple of weeks to get here, unless someone wants to lend me one in the meantime.
Hey Dino, if you still need, I have some 3007s and would be willing to loan one for the cause... :)
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on August 02, 2013, 12:32:26 PM
@Dino
I see where you are going with this but, is this just for information or do you want to implement it here?
I ask because the NEW question would be whether or not it would be worth it to reinvent the wheel? It might save a little space but is that space crucial here?
Just for my own enlightenment bro. Nothing more. Just doing my best to go to bed a bit less stoopid. :icon_mrgreen:
Quote from: jdub on August 02, 2013, 01:51:08 PM
QuoteProbably take a couple of weeks to get here, unless someone wants to lend me one in the meantime.
Hey Dino, if you still need, I have some 3007s and would be willing to loan one for the cause... :)
PM sent.
Quote from: digi2t on August 02, 2013, 12:09:15 PM
A bit off topic here, but just a question;
Could the 4011 (or other 40** chip) be used as an op amp is used in a buffer? If so, would there be any advantage/disadvantage?
The answer is no.
This type of "buffer" carries digital logic, it doesn't pass audio.
The CMOS family includes many different types of gates. When a high or low logic signal is applied at the input, you get varied results at the output depending on the type of gate it is.
There are logic truth tables that are a "legend" of sorts to keep track of the whole thing!
There are tutorials on the net that can explain CMOS logic much better than I can!
The 4011 in the Mutron Flanger serves two purposes. It inputs the single signal from the 4046 and produces a two phase clock as well as serving as a buffer.
IC9 A & D are opposite phase from the 4046 output and IC9 B & C are in phase with the 4046 output.
To keep everyone updated, Ian (ronan) sent some useful information including dimensions of his Talking pedal board which includes the PCB mounting layout for the Morley enclosure as well as the Morley enclosure dimensions.
You may notice that in the schematic, I made some changes in the power supply section. I added additional filtering (always helps) and positioned C50 correctly. (After reviewing images of the component and trace side I discovered that the factory drawing was incorrect. I also noticed that the compander is missing power pins and power designations. (easy enough)
With that being said....
I'm going to work on a component overlay by adding components from the component side images to a flipped image of the trace side in a cad program.
When I'm finished, I'll verify the schematic circuit to the components and the board routing.
Larry, thanks a bunch for the explanation of the buffer. I had the "DUH!" moment as soon as you said "digital logic". I was thinking apples, when we're dealing with oranges here. Thanks for setting me straight.
New question; I'm working on my adapter board, and I was wondering if I could use the R21 resistor/R80 trimmer arrangement on the Mutron, instead of the 10K BBD OUTPUT trimmer that you drew on the modded schematic? That way I would only require a jumper on the adapter board, rather than having to jump to the original board. I see that your trimmer goes to signal ground, rather than power ground, but if it works for the original, wouldn't it work here as well? I could jumper over R21 (750R) in a pinch.
This is what I whipped up;
(http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc196/digi2t/Mutron%20Flanger/MN3007adapter_zps5ea7a52d.jpg) (http://s214.photobucket.com/user/digi2t/media/Mutron%20Flanger/MN3007adapter_zps5ea7a52d.jpg.html)
Hey Dino,
The original trimmer should work fine. I wouldn't worry about jumping the 750R. (the 750Ω is such a low value it won't make or break anything)
And I see you caught my mistake...good eye! The BBD output trimmer should go to power ground. I noticed that mistake last night when I picked out the lack of compander power. I'll post an updated schematic when I'm finished with the component layout and schematic confirmation.
I have some pretty good pictures I pulled from the "other" site about a year ago, but if I come across anything I'm unsure of....
I'll come calling.
No problem Larry. Me and the Mutron are on standby.
As for the power ground catch, it really wasn't me trying to be smart. I just figured that if power ground was good enough for the original, than why not here. Like they taught us in the Navy, if it works....
jdub has been kind enough to offer a 3007 for testing, I should be getting it this week. I'll be building the adapter board in the meantime.
I don't understand the cloning of this model
I would take the best of the different flangers and make one with all the cool controls.
This one has two things the foot control and the start stop otherwise how is it different than other flangers?
Quote from: digi2t on August 02, 2013, 11:14:45 PM
Larry, thanks a bunch for the explanation of the buffer. I had the "DUH!" moment as soon as you said "digital logic". I was thinking apples, when we're dealing with oranges here. Thanks for setting me straight.
New question; I'm working on my adapter board, and I was wondering if I could use the R21 resistor/R80 trimmer arrangement on the Mutron, instead of the 10K BBD OUTPUT trimmer that you drew on the modded schematic? That way I would only require a jumper on the adapter board, rather than having to jump to the original board. I see that your trimmer goes to signal ground, rather than power ground, but if it works for the original, wouldn't it work here as well? I could jumper over R21 (750R) in a pinch.
This is what I whipped up;
(http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc196/digi2t/Mutron%20Flanger/MN3007adapter_zps5ea7a52d.jpg) (http://s214.photobucket.com/user/digi2t/media/Mutron%20Flanger/MN3007adapter_zps5ea7a52d.jpg.html)
You may take out R2 and VR1, shorting MN's pins 7 and 8.
Since you have Q1, you can use the cell R21/R80
Here are a few other BBD output configurations.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/BBD%20Config..jpg)
Quote from: armdnrdy on August 03, 2013, 11:48:41 AM
Here are a few other BBD output configurations.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/MN3007%20config.jpg)
Larry,
this is ok until everybody just looks at MN functioning.
For completness sake, if you must sub this schematic with a SAD1024, you should add the output transistor, or, at least a capacitor, since @ OUTPUT pad you have a positive DC voltage
Federico,
Updated for completeness. :icon_wink:
:icon_biggrin:
call me pickyrico....
but to sub it for a SAD you can avoid trimmer and capacitor....
I swear this is my last nuts breaking about this... :icon_frown:
Which trimmer? The emitter trimmer or the balance trimmer?
Isn't the .47µf cap (C19) and R22 to signal ground/ref constructing a R/C filter?
Quote from: armdnrdy on August 03, 2013, 01:40:40 PM
Which trimmer? The emitter trimmer or the balance trimmer?
The emitter one, so you can use R21/R80 instead
Quote from: armdnrdy on August 03, 2013, 01:40:40 PM
Isn't the .47µf cap (C19) and R22 to signal ground/ref constructing a R/C filter?
Yes, R22 provides Z2a bias also. But those parts are on MuTron board already...
Hey Frederico.
I'm not designing the daughter board for Dino.....I just drew a few options for the output. I showed that for MN3007 testing purposes you don't really have to add the balance trimmer...there's a simpler way to do it.
I thought you meant to take the .47µf cap and trimmer out of the schematic altogether! ;)
Updated the original schematic. I forgot to correct C50. Thanks to Larry for the pointer. :icon_mrgreen:
(http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc196/digi2t/Mutron%20Flanger/MutronFlanger_unit_zps5273a5f6.jpg) (http://s214.photobucket.com/user/digi2t/media/Mutron%20Flanger/MutronFlanger_unit_zps5273a5f6.jpg.html)
Although I'm confident that it's kosher, Larry will be validating my trace.
@Dino
Wondering if you could post your adapter board work here as well to keep everything in one place. Nice and tidy for dumb searchers like myself! :icon_redface:
Looks like the daughter/adapter board (MN3007) is worked out! Now, its only a matter of finding a way around the LED/LDR arrangement and generating a good PCB (possibly to fit and work in a Morley wah-type enclosure ;))
Damn, sorry... I was in the process of doing so last night, and I got side tracked. I posted it on the other forum, and then some unexpected company showed before I could get the info up here.
I need to aquire some hounds that I can release. :icon_twisted:
It`ll be up here tonight.
Quote from: digi2t on August 20, 2013, 11:51:13 AM
Damn, sorry... I was in the process of doing so last night, and I got side tracked. I posted it on the other forum, and then some unexpected company showed before I could get the info up here.
I need to aquire some hounds that I can release. :icon_twisted:
It`ll be up here tonight.
No worries Dino!
I know you are on top of it. This was more for MY purposes since I get lazy :-\
As a complement to Dino's perf SAD1024 to MN3007 daughter board, here is another version for those who have an itch to etch.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Mutron%203007%20board.jpg)
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/MN3007%20board%20layout.jpg)
Now could someone please give me a clue how to post a printable board for etching. (which format for best quality and actual size printing)
Here's a link to a JPEG that can be printed actual size with Windows based programs.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/MN3007%20board%20print.jpg
Don't use scaling or "fit picture to frame."
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on August 20, 2013, 11:47:04 AM
@Dino
Wondering if you could post your adapter board work here as well to keep everything in one place. Nice and tidy for dumb searchers like myself! :icon_redface:
Looks like the daughter/adapter board (MN3007) is worked out! Now, its only a matter of finding a way around the LED/LDR arrangement and generating a good PCB (possibly to fit and work in a Morley wah-type enclosure ;))
Instead of reposting everything again, I'll just put the link here for the daughterboard work;
http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=103879.msg929707#msg929707 (http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=103879.msg929707#msg929707)
I finished a few projects and cleared my work table off (again) and am ready to start experimenting with a LED/LDR mock up board in the Morley enclosure.
Something occurred to me while searching for a LDR with similar specs. The "light" toe up voltage reading we have (2.23 volts) is always going to be a constant. The "dark" toe down reading (11.89 volts) will vary depending on when the reading was taken.
If the voltage reading was taken the second the pedal was moved to the toe down position...than the reading is accurate. The preferred resistance similar to the original could be calculated from this immediate voltage measurement.
Let me explain.
Light dependent resistors are generally "dark" rated by listing their resistance at 10 seconds after the light has been taken away.
The Mutron Flanger's LDR "dark" resistance is most essential right at toe down, not 10 seconds after toe down. We all know that many LDRs "dark" resistance runs off into the extreme high meg ohms region. That resistance reading is not what we are interested in either.
I am aware that a LDR's resistance parameters can be adjusted using resistors or trimpots but...I would rather do a little "leg" work and get as close as possible to the original specs and experiment with things like distance between the LED and the LDR.
Dino,
When you took the toe down reading, was the voltage a constant 11.89 volts? It seems as if the voltage should gradually move higher as the parallel resistance between the LDR (PC2) and the lower half of the voltage divider (R70 1M) increases.
Larry, pdf is pretty common for etchable designs, seems to do the job, I believe it is vector-based similar to cad programs whatever that means, very good resolution I think. Are you sure the footprint for TR1 is correct? it looks very compact.
Quote from: digi2t on July 17, 2013, 11:05:27 PM
I'm thinking that the LDR's that we used for the EH Talking pedal conversion (Waitrony KE-10720) might be suitable for the job. I fooled around with one, and although it gives a lower light resistance, about 5K in similar conditions, the speed up to 40M dark is pretty similar to the originals. Besides, this could be fine tuned with resistors, LED selection, LRD angle, and there is a range trimmer as well. Nothing insurmountable here.
+1 the Waitrony LDR has been a gift to pedal builders, pretty hard to go wrong with it IMO. If you delve into the depths of testing response times, yes, it will take time to settle, like most other LDR's, but it sure works well in treadle fx pedals and has a fast initial response. 24c ea plus 99c shipping last time I ordered, that was a while back though.
Hey Ian,
Eagle has the option to save the file as a PDF which I tried...the print wasn't to scale. ???
The T-1 trimmer is the standard 3362P device file in Eagle which I've used countless times with no fit problems.
The Waitrony LDR is definitely not off the table by any means. We should gather as much info as we can so we can have a starting point of what to shoot for.
Last night I listened to the sound sample again and got completely reenergized! This is a very cool sounding beast! I'm excited about this project! ;D
Yep TR1 footprint is correct, I've never used 3362P before, now I know...
I usually put a scale on the drawing so you can measure the printed result, then scale it accordingly, pdf certainly has the resolution though.
QuoteDino,
When you took the toe down reading, was the voltage a constant 11.89 volts? It seems as if the voltage should gradually move higher as the parallel resistance between the LDR (PC2) and the lower half of the voltage divider (R70 1M) increases.
You bring up an important point here. When I took the readings, the were withing 2 or 3 seconds, but more importantly, the readings are wide open / fully shut. The board is out of the unit, and the shutter is part of the enclosure, so I had to resort to using a machinists ruler as a shutter. Not ideal, but it gives us the absolute extremes. If you wish, I can remount the board, and measure again using the actual travel. And, if it`s important, I can take initial readings, and 10 second readings.
Luckily, my DMM display has a backlight, and I did take the readings in complete darkness, so I`m sure that my readings aren`t being faux`d by any external light.
Would this help validate things?
Quote from: digi2t on August 21, 2013, 12:13:57 PM
If you wish, I can remount the board, and measure again using the actual travel. And, if it`s important, I can take initial readings, and 10 second readings.
Would this help validate things?
Hey Dino,
Yes, when you get the time that would be the best for measurements...under actual working conditions.
A measurement from when the toe is up, to the first voltage your DMM registers right after the toe is dropped down.
The second measurement, 10 seconds after the first measurement.
I think this info will definitely help the cause in choosing a close LDR.
I'm working on a test board that will fit the mounting holes and shutter/slot configuration of the Morley. It will be the complete Mutron pedal circuit with multiple socketed pads for varying the distance of the LED/LDR.
Dino,
I just thought of something.
when your taking measurements of the flanger, I need one other voltage measurement. The voltage at Z10A pin 3.
That's the voltage that the voltage divider is supplying to pin 3 after you adjusted the trimmer (R78) for the pedal sweep adjustment.
From what I gathered, this voltage controls the brightness of the LED, so I should try to match the output voltage (high and low) of Z10B with the trimmer (R78) adjusted to produce a similar voltage/brightness.
Make sense?
I'm going to get the unit together tonight. Overtime till 10PM last night, so it was "Welcome to Zombieland".
I'll get the requested voltages, though I don't see Z10B voltage/brightness thing being completely truthful, unless we have the identical LED/LDR combo, which we won't. Quite honestly, I think the range will be somewhat of a "adjust to taste" deal. Some folks like it a bit higher, and some a bit lower. I'll record it nonetheless, since it will maybe provide a decent jumping off point.
Quote from: digi2t on August 22, 2013, 06:41:20 AM
it will maybe provide a decent jumping off point.
That's exactly why I requested this voltage. If I'm shooting for the high/low voltage measurements taken from your unit....I might as well set up the trimmer for a similar output voltage. I can try different LEDs, LDRs, and distances until I get close to the actual unit.
I gave the trimmer adjustment some thought and as you would imagine, Mutron wouldn't set this trimmer to "taste".
Mutron would have a calibration set point....but what would they be looking for?
One practical answer would be to set the pedal to emulate the frequency/sweep of the LFO.
I'm making good progress with the LED/LDR test board. It was my girlfriend's B-day last night so....I didn't get a chance to work on it. Tonight I should be finished with the routing layout.
QuoteOne practical answer would be to set the pedal to emulate the frequency/sweep of the LFO.
That's basically where I have mine set at. I figured it only made sense that the pedal should emulate the LFO sweep.
And a very Happy Birthday wish to your girlfriend, and many, many more. :icon_cool:
OK, finally got to repackage the unit, and get the voltages. There is no drift in the voltages within a 10 second period. They stay rock steady. Here are the voltages;
Z10 pin3 - 5.50v
PC1 - 5.50v
PC2 - toe down (LDR shuttered from LED) - 11.60v
PC2 - toe up (LDR open to LED) - 2.29v
My girlfriend thanks you for the B-day wishes.
Okay, so no voltage change from LDR dark to 10 seconds dark! I did not expect that....but that's actually good....no slight automatic change in frequency at toe down. I'll have to take another look at the pedal circuit....something in there is keeping things stable.
Speaking of pedal circuit, here's the LED/LDR test board layout:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Pedal%20circuit%20test%20board%20resize.jpg)
I decided to leave the LED in a set position and give the LDR four position options for test purposes.
You'll notice the two switches on either side. Those are close approximate positions solely for lower board size reference.
Starting this board has caused a lot of ideas about the full board and layout to "fly" around. :icon_idea: :icon_idea:
I finished the LED/LDR test board yesterday, and today is all about trying different LDRs, LEDs, and positions.
If I don't achieve satisfactory results with the LDRs I have, then I'll have to order more varieties and the testing will continue.
Here's a shot of the test board mounted in the Morley enclosure:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/LED-LDR%20board.jpg)
:o
Wow. Like someone once said, "That's how Skynet started!".
Kudos on the test bed. Keep us posted on the results. If you want, I also have some LDR's that I picked up from Goldmine a while back. Are there any tests that I can do here to see if they might be good for the circuit?
Quote from: digi2t on August 25, 2013, 06:36:28 PM
:o
Wow. Like someone once said, "That's how Skynet started!".
Kudos on the test bed. Keep us posted on the results. If you want, I also have some LDR's that I picked up from Goldmine a while back. Are there any tests that I can do here to see if they might be good for the circuit?
I had to google Skynet. :icon_lol:
So far I've had mixed results with the components I have at hand.
The Waitronys are....not usable. I tried LDRs I picked up from Ebay....closer but with issues. I have a Radio Shack LDR pack with five different varieties....shows some promise. I'm able to get the lower range (low two volt range) but I discovered that I'm having a problem achieving the higher range.
I believe that I'm getting light leakage from outside of the enclosure and slight illumination from inside from the LED.
I think I know what the tubes are all about!
Since the tube I fabbed won't fit comfortably inside the Morley enclosure, I'm going to try to isolate the LDR in a piece of black Papermate ballpoint pen tube.
I'll report back.
I don't know how you can help short of ripping the tubes out of your Flanger :icon_eek: and trying the different LDRs that you have.....but if you did that.....I for one would be very upset with you!!! :icon_wink: You've already been more than gracious with your time and using that awesome flanger as a guinea pig for the cause!! Let's leave it intact!!
I would replace R69 with a trimpot to get the higher voltage range.
I can get 20M under a Morley pedal from a Waitrony, but that does not include light spill from an internal LED. Try putting some black tape over the shutter to see what max dark resistance (higher voltage range) you can get with the existing values for R69 and R70.
If you can't get enough range (range not voltage) you could add 2 resistors to Z10B to get some gain, but I don't think that will be necessary.
Larry, here`s a trick that might help.
I had similar concerns about light leakage from the adjacent LED on the Talking pedal. My solution was to wrap the LED with a piece of heatshrink, and with a razor, carefully trim around the tip of the LED leaving a small porthole for the light to shine through. This prevents most of the light from radiating out from the sides.
Instead of the led LDR and opamp why not try a potentiometer and a few resistors?
The circuit fragment is an adjustable voltage divider that is buffered and conditioned to get a control voltage
Find the voltage range the real unit uses.
Use ohms law and the available travel of a wha body volume control etc to select resistors to give you the voltage sweep
Connect the wiper to the input of the buffer/signal conditioner.
Quote from: Gus on August 26, 2013, 10:46:56 AM
Instead of the led LDR and opamp why not try a potentiometer and a few resistors?
The circuit fragment is an adjustable voltage divider that is buffered and conditioned to get a control voltage
Find the voltage range the real unit uses.
Use ohms law and the available travel of a wha body volume control etc to select resistors to give you the voltage sweep
Connect the wiper to the input of the buffer/signal conditioner.
We are way beyond that idea! I've already committed to the purchase of a Morley optical volume pedal and the rerouting of the Mutron flanger circuit to fit inside the Morley enclosure.
When this build is finished and verified, I might try fitting this circuit in a Dunlop sized enclosure.
Quote from: Ronan on August 26, 2013, 04:26:55 AM
I would replace R69 with a trimpot to get the higher voltage range.
I can get 20M under a Morley pedal from a Waitrony, but that does not include light spill from an internal LED. Try putting some black tape over the shutter to see what max dark resistance (higher voltage range) you can get with the existing values for R69 and R70.
If you can't get enough range (range not voltage) you could add 2 resistors to Z10B to get some gain, but I don't think that will be necessary.
I'll try these ideas when I get home from work.
Quote from: digi2t on August 26, 2013, 09:38:04 AM
Larry, here`s a trick that might help.
I had similar concerns about light leakage from the adjacent LED on the Talking pedal. My solution was to wrap the LED with a piece of heatshrink, and with a razor, carefully trim around the tip of the LED leaving a small porthole for the light to shine through. This prevents most of the light from radiating out from the sides.
Hey Dino,
I tried this today and it helped a little. The pen tube enclosure on the LDR helped too but still not where it should be.
I have seven different LDRs on the way.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/GL%20LDRs%20specs.jpg)
I think these are the ones I have from Goldmine;
http://www.goldmine-elec-products.com/prodinfo.asp?number=G15177 (http://www.goldmine-elec-products.com/prodinfo.asp?number=G15177)
I`ll have to check to be sure. Light resistance less than 1K, and dark resistance over 4M. Now that I think about it, they sound like they would work wel on a Trem Lune too, but I digress.
I am assuming we do not have the measurements of light/dark on the REAL LDRs as to not damage the Mutron right?
Is there any way around it to get the true measurments? Has this been done already and I am going to be exposed for my laziness? :icon_redface:
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on August 26, 2013, 12:36:45 PM
I am assuming we do not have the measurements of light/dark on the REAL LDRs as to not damage the Mutron right?
Is there any way around it to get the true measurments? Has this been done already and I am going to be exposed for my laziness? :icon_redface:
I calculated the LDR on/off resistance from the toe up and toe down voltages that Dino suppied, the known voltage divider resistances and the voltage.
But....those resistances are only good for the Mutron "tube" configuration. We're adapting this whole optical voltage divider circuit using the Morley enclosure with it's foot pedal shutter.
What we're really shooting for now is the up and down voltages.
Measure voltages at pin 7 of Z10B at both ends of the foot control travel
Z10B is a buffer
The two resistors 220k and the 1 meg with the LDR in parallel are a voltage divider.
one side of the travel will be the LDR at max darkness(max resistance) the other side max light(lowest resistance)
Knowing this you can solve for the LDR resistance range
the LDR is in parallel with 1meg
so what combined resistance in series with the 220k will give the max and min voltage values?
solve for the LDR resistance in parallel with the 1 meg for the answer
Quote from: Gus on August 26, 2013, 12:56:36 PM
Measure voltages at pin 7 of Z10B at both ends of the foot control travel
Z10B is a buffer
The two resistors 220k and the 1 meg with the LDR in parallel are a voltage divider.
one side of the travel will be the LDR at max darkness(max resistance) the other side max light(lowest resistance)
Knowing this you can solve for the LDR resistance range
the LDR is in parallel with 1meg
so what combined resistance in series with the 220k will give the max and min voltage values?
solve for the LDR resistance in parallel with the 1 meg for the answer
You mean like this?
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Mutron%20Flanger%20LED%20LDR%20calcs.jpg)
@Larry
Im betting the GL5539 is your winner! ;)
I checked the Goldmine G15177 LDR's under my fluorescent lamp. At 12" distance, I get about 750 ohms, and over 30M in less than 10 seconds dark. They react pretty quickly.
Update:
It turns out that I was taking measurements from a different point than where the voltages Dino supplied were taken from.
I am able to achieve 2.3V & 11.4V compared to Dino's 2.29V & 11.60V measurements.
The pedal sweep has an "issue" at the very end where the voltage changes in a fairly linear fashion until it reaches around 9 volts to the end. The last 1/2" of toe down pedal movement doesn't increase the voltage. Looking at the shutter, I believe this can be fixed by slightly extending the slot in the shutter, reducing the width of the slot to the end. (slim V shape)
Anyway,
I'll move ahead and start work on routing the board. When the LDR assortment arrives, I'll revisit the testing for the best, absolute, LED/LDR combo for this circuit and pedal.
@ Govmnt_Lacky,
Yeah, the GL5539 or the GL5537-2 look pretty good. I'll definitely find the right one out of the bunch. (I ordered 10 of each flavor)
QuoteThe pedal sweep has an "issue" at the very end where the voltage changes in a fairly linear fashion until it reaches around 9 volts to the end. The last 1/2" of toe down pedal movement doesn't increase the voltage. Looking at the shutter, I believe this can be fixed by slightly extending the slot in the shutter, reducing the width of the slot to the end. (slim V shape)
Yup, V shape is what I figured. The fat T shape of the Morley card is probably creating your problem.
Can you try the Waitrony LDR`s again? I`ve got quite a few of them, and if they work, it would be a bonus. If you wish I can mail you a couple of G15177`s as well to try. I have a feeling that they`ll do the job.
Nice to see that the voltages are attainable. I think we`re on our way now. Great work Larry. :icon_cool:
Hey Dino,
I tried the Waitronys again last night just to be sure. I wasn't able to obtain the low voltage point with the trimmer, moving the LDR, or changing to different brightness LEDs. I think that they are too low resistance at light on. We could change the circuit, add trimmers and such, but my thought was to find an easily available LDR that works best.
I was thinking to fab a replica shutter out of something (aluminum, plastic) and get the extended V slot working right before I go hacking on the Morely shutter. When it's good to go, I'll make a template for the modification.
If you want to send a couple of G15177s, I'll try them out. Maybe they're the "magic" component!
I'll PM my address.
Dino/Larry
Certain LDRs respond differently to the wavelengths of LEDs. Maybe a color change is in order? ;)
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on August 27, 2013, 04:23:48 PM
Dino/Larry
Certain LDRs respond differently to the wavelengths of LEDs. Maybe a color change is in order? ;)
Damn... he's right. (forehead slap!) :icon_rolleyes:
I've been trying green as well!
3mm and 5mm LEDs for different spreads of light.
Maybe different brightness levels ???
I know that my Lovetone flanger was very particular about the LED type on the daughter board. It had to be a water clear HIGH BRIGHTNESS type. Not super bright, not ultra bright, it had to be HIGH brightness. I tried different types of brightness and the only one that worked was HIGH brightness.
Food for thought ;D
Hey GL,
I've been experimenting with different brightness LEDs as well. Besides the end of the sweep issue noted earlier, I think I'm pretty close. The end of the sweep thing should be fixed by extending the slot just a bit.
What happens is, the slot on the shutter runs into the "dark" area to the LED before the pedal is all the way toe down. I've watched the shutter/slot location and the meter's readings. I'm sure that's all that needs to be done.
I'm having other issues that need immediate attention before I can start routing the board.
The Morley enclosures board standoffs are approx. 5mm from enclosure. (looking at the enclosure upside down with the bottom cover removed) The board has to be at that level because of the pedal shutter arrangement.
I wanted to use the existing IN/OUT jack holes as well as the power jack hole.
I also planned to use board mounted pots like the original build but......with the board at that low level, pots don't fit between the enclosure and the board.
I thought to make the shutter board separate.so that I can keep it at the existing level. There are only three connections to that board, +V, GND, and the control (pedal) voltage out to a footswitch.
I was thinking to flip board mounted jacks upside down in the enclosure (from their current orientation) and mount all of the components facing inside the enclosure, with the trace side showing when the bottom cover is removed.
I apologize, I know my description doesn't sound very clear! You have to see it. Post a picture?
If I make a main board that stands off much higher than the original....I think that I need PC mount, right angle, long pin pots. Mouser, Smallbear, Mammoth, and a few others sell them.
One problem. I can't seem to find a data sheet for the long pin type. The model # for a 10KB is RV16AF-42-15R1-B10K
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/16mmLongPin.jpg)
QuoteI wanted to use the existing IN/OUT jack holes as well as the power jack hole.
On my Talking Pedal retrofit, I simply cut the Morley board, and retained the upper part.
(http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc196/digi2t/EH%20Talking%20Pedal/DSCF0255.jpg)
That looks like a great idea....for the talking pedal. ;D
Look at the talking pedal next to your flanger. There are a "few" more controls and a "whole dang bunch" (spoken with an American western slang accent) more components.
Because of the angled foot pedal, I'm also entertaining the thought of putting two controls on one side and two on the other.
The four controls plus the rate LED above an LED and a footswitch leading up to the input jack can get kind of cramped.
We'll see....nothing set in stone. Definitely open to suggestions.
What about pots that mount through the PCB and to the enclosure a-la the old RAT pedals? :icon_mrgreen:
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on August 27, 2013, 10:40:21 PM
What about pots that mount through the PCB and to the enclosure a-la the old RAT pedals? :icon_mrgreen:
I took measurements for that kind of arrangement as well, the threaded bushing isn't long enough to make it through the 5mm (board to enclosure) and the approx. 2mm enclosure thickness. The threads end at approx. 6.5mm from the front of the pot.
I thought about not making the board as wide (side to side in the enclosure) but I kind of need room behind the controls to route traces as on the original board.
@Larry
Always trying to find the brighter side... ::)
Dont they have options on most pots to have longer bushing lengths? How much bushing do you think you would need in order to make the through-PCB idea work?
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on August 28, 2013, 08:28:09 AM
Dont they have options on most pots to have longer bushing lengths? How much bushing do you think you would need in order to make the through-PCB idea work?
Standard Alpha pot threaded bushing length is approx. 6.5mm. To make the "rat" style through hole mounting work, we would need about 10mm.
Last night a forum member posted measurements for the right angle, long pin pot RV16AF-42-15R1-B10K. This morning Steve from Small Bear confirmed with a sheet from Alpha.
My idea of flipping the pots and making two boards will work perfectly with these pots. (almost as if these pots were custom made for this build)
I scoured suppliers sights and can't seem to find anything readily available to make this build work with the board at the standard Morley height.
Here's a shot of a jack "flipped" and a piece of circuit board for reference. All of the components will be facing down into the enclosure at this view. Also...there are no clearance issues with the bottom cover.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/jacks%20flipped.jpg)
A little bit of progress to report.
I have the board dimensioned, parts placed, and have started routing. (Eagle)
I fabricated a test shutter out of a piece of .89mm (original is .79mm) electrical flash guard/insulation material. It's some sort of fiber composite, fairly easy to cut and drill.
The original is on the right:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Pedal%20shutter%20fab.jpg)
I received an order from Mammoth today which included the long pin pots (RV16AF-42-15R1-B10K) and a right angle 25KC pot for the rate pot. (It seems nobody stocks a 25KC in the long pin model)
I was planning to switch out the wafer from the 25KC pot to a long pin model.......I must have been suffering from a brain cloud!
The wafer is attached to the pins! I'm not sure what I was thinking....anyway....I fabricated a pot with the proper dimensions using a small piece of perf board and header pins. Problem solved:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/pots%20top.jpg)
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/pots%20pins.jpg)
Wow Larry!
You are like a dog with a bone on this one! :o
Great looking work. Folks are gonna owe you and Dino a huge debt of gratitude after this. Well... At least I know I will :icon_cool:
Cheers and thanks for all the hard work.
Larry.... :icon_eek:
The vero extension on the pot... sheer brilliance. This is why I come here. I'm going to bed less stoopid... AGAIN!
Excellent.
I'm finished with the preliminary routing of the main board. I'll be putting the final touches on it over the next few days. (fresh eyes)
We're getting close to building the prototype!
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Mutron%20Flanger%20main%20board.jpg)
Here's the enclosure layout:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Mutron%20Flanger%20enclosure%20retrofit%20II.jpg)
The power input can accept 18VDC or 12VAC. No jumpers needed.
I am... slackjawed.
Wow. I want one.
I don`t see the slot for the shutter card though, or will that be added later.
I'm not sure how much I actually need one of these considering the love I have for my Morley PFL, but DANG!!!!!!!!!!!
I WANT ONE :o
@Larry
Noticed that the Ground plane is continuous all the way around the PCB. Might want to separate it at an ideal place to avoid a loop.
Thoughts??
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on September 06, 2013, 04:05:48 PM
@Larry
Noticed that the Ground plane is continuous all the way around the PCB. Might want to separate it at an ideal place to avoid a loop.
Thoughts??
Hey GL, thanks for the heads up,
I always make a continuous ground plane and have never had a problem. There are quite a few commercial designs that do this as well. (Off of the top of my head....Ibanez AD-900, ADA Flanger)
If there's an issue with the prototype I'll break out my Exacto knife.
Quote from: digi2t on September 06, 2013, 03:45:59 PM
I don`t see the slot for the shutter card though, or will that be added later.
Dino,
It looks as if you've been a bit immersed in that Guild monster.
There's no slot in this board. There is a slot in the pedal control board.
Due to the arrangement of the shutter assembly, I had to make a pedal control LED/LDR board, and a main board.
Two separate boards.
The Morley board/shutter assembly made it impossible to add pots into the mix. There wasn't enough clearance underneath the board and the board was too far off of the enclosure to use "Rat" style through board pots.
I ended up flipping the input and output jacks upside down in the enclosure from how Morley oriented them.
The trace side of the new board will be visible when you remove the bottom cover of the enclosure. The component side is facing toward the pedal. Does this make sense?
QuoteThere's no slot in this board. There is a slot in the pedal control board.
Due to the arrangement of the shutter assembly, I had to make a pedal control LED/LDR board, and a main board.
Two separate boards.
Ah... I see says the blinded by the Guild man. :icon_mrgreen:
Thanks for the clarification.
Just settled down to this fascinating thead whilst my wife is having her massage at our Spanish hotel - would you believe that it's rainingtoday! A large party of Icelandics are having early lunch, some of whom look at least 7 feet tall!
Quote from: StephenGiles on September 07, 2013, 06:46:26 AM
Just settled down to this fascinating thead whilst my wife is having her massage at our Spanish hotel - would you believe that it's rainingtoday! A large party of Icelandics are having early lunch, some of whom look at least 7 feet tall!
Would any of them happen to know of a suitable replacement LDR for this project?
Well... you know never know, right? :icon_mrgreen:
:o Man, Larry...incredible work, just top notch. Well done, indeed. I salute your ingenuity, not to mention your tenacity! One question: will any Morley pedal enclosure work, like, say, a Little Alligator volume?
Quote from: digi2t on September 07, 2013, 07:21:32 AM
Quote from: StephenGiles on September 07, 2013, 06:46:26 AM
Just settled down to this fascinating thead whilst my wife is having her massage at our Spanish hotel - would you believe that it's rainingtoday! A large party of Icelandics are having early lunch, some of whom look at least 7 feet tall!
Would any of them happen to know of a suitable replacement LDR for this project?
Well... you know never know, right? :icon_mrgreen:
I doubt it very much!
Quote from: jdub on September 07, 2013, 09:24:23 AM
:o Man, Larry...incredible work, just top notch. Well done, indeed. I salute your ingenuity, not to mention your tenacity! One question: will any Morley pedal enclosure work, like, say, a Little Alligator volume?
That's the same enclosure/pedal I have set aside for this project. ;)
I don't see any reason it WON'T work. The basic parts layout is identical (jacks, power plug, etc)
Might have to modify the shutter a bit but the rest should be cut-n-paste ;D
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on September 07, 2013, 09:59:12 AM
That's the same enclosure/pedal I have set aside for this project. ;)
I don't see any reason it WON'T work. The basic parts layout is identical (jacks, power plug, etc)
Might have to modify the shutter a bit but the rest should be cut-n-paste ;D
GL,
Can you verify the width dimension of the Little alligator Volume enclosure?
Morley lists the width as 5.88 (149.35 mm) but I have a measurement of 5.62 (142.75 mm).
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/PLA.jpg)
I have hand drawn outer dimensions of the Optical Volume which I'll transpose to Visio and post.
As promised:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Morley%20Optical%20Volume%20outer%20dimensions.jpg)
QuoteCan you verify the width dimension of the Little alligator Volume enclosure?
Morley lists the width as 5.88 (149.35 mm) but I have a measurement of 5.62 (142.75 mm).
I wonder if they are including the in and out jack nuts in their total width measurement. I can measure mine when I get home from work.
Quote from: jdub on September 07, 2013, 01:59:07 PM
QuoteCan you verify the width dimension of the Little alligator Volume enclosure?
Morley lists the width as 5.88 (149.35 mm) but I have a measurement of 5.62 (142.75 mm).
I wonder if they are including the in and out jack nuts in their total width measurement. I can measure mine when I get home from work.
Ahhh.....Look at the brain on John!
Good observation!
The original board is out of my Morley enclosure....but I'm sure that's what the 5.88 measurement is all about. Jacks!
@Larry
I have the Morley Little Alligator (with the Minimum Volume pot and LED) and my measurements are spot on with your diagram.
Assuming that the little circle in the lower right corner is the LED and not the pot :-\
Yeah,
It's the LED.
What is the measurement from center of the pot to the bottom of the enclosure and center of the pot to the side?
That's where the "pedal" footswitch goes on the Mutron retrofit design. There's a bit of wiggle room.....but not much.
Spent the day adding finishing touches to the main board and reworked the pedal LED/LDR board.
We're getting closer!
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Mutron%20Flanger%20main%20board%209-7-13.jpg)
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Mutron%20Flanger%20pedal%20circuit%20board%209-7-13.jpg)
The holes with no traces are where the "effect" and "pedal" LEDs mount. (on the trace side of the board)
The LED leads run across the component side to the LED pads and are soldered on the trace side. (just like on the Morley boards)
@Larry
Is there any way you could incorporate the Stereo style of Neutrik jacks? They are a bit more accessible then a standard mono jack.
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on September 07, 2013, 11:47:47 PM
@Larry
Is there any way you could incorporate the Stereo style of Neutrik jacks? They are a bit more accessible then a standard mono jack.
The mono jack that I'm using is a NMJ4HCD2. The stereo jack that your referring to is the NMJ6HCD2.........Correct?
The stereo jack can be easily modified to a mono jack. They are the same body with the same footprint.
Mono:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/nmj4hcd2.jpg)
Stereo:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/NMJ6HCD2.jpg)
There is a small dimple on the metal part of the ring and ring switch connections. Push the dimple in with a screw driver, take out both the ring and ring switch components (the middle ones) and you now have a mono jack.
You can also simplify things by just clipping off the middle pins. :icon_wink:
I just finished making the Piher N6-L50TOC-103 part in Eagle.
Moved some things around on the board and......we have trace side adjustable trimmers.
This will be much better for set up adjustments!
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Mutron%20Flanger%20main%20board.jpg)
@Larry
Taking another look at your main board layout, the In/Out jack(s) Grounding scheme looks funky. Where exactly do the In and Out jacks find the Ground for the Rings/Sleeves?
I see they are tied to some of the ICs and some resistors but, I do not see where they are tied to the Ground plane ???
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on September 09, 2013, 02:07:23 PM
@Larry
Taking another look at your main board layout, the In/Out jack(s) Grounding scheme looks funky. Where exactly do the In and Out jacks find the Ground for the Rings/Sleeves?
I see they are tied to some of the ICs and some resistors but, I do not see where they are tied to the Ground plane ???
If you take a look at the schematic...the IN/OUT jacks are connected to signal (virtual) ground.
I had Dino verify these physical connections on his flanger.
The ground plane is "power ground."
And now for some good news.
I received the seven different types of LDRs today....so when I get back from work (Yes! I have a job!) I'll run some tests to find the best one for this circuit. These are all readily available on ebay from foreign and domestic (USA) sellers.
Quote from: armdnrdy on September 09, 2013, 02:27:08 PM
If you take a look at the schematic...the IN/OUT jacks are connected to signal (virtual) ground.
I had Dino verify these physical connections on his flanger.
The ground plane is "power ground."
And now for some good news.
I received the seven different types of LDRs today....so when I get back from work (Yes! I have a job!) I'll run some tests to find the best one for this circuit. These are all readily available on ebay from foreign and domestic (USA) sellers.
Gotcha! ;)
Good luck with further testing! Im sure you will find some winners.
Well....
I tried three of the most likely LDR candidates and was anything but impressed.
When the pedal was brought from heel down (lower voltage) to toe down (higher voltage) it would take two to three seconds to reach the target voltage.
The GL55 series of LDR is supposed to have a response time of rise 20ms and fall 30ms. What I was reading was not in this ball park.
So....I took another look at some of the LDRs I had on hand. I gave the Waitrony another try.
I found that with a 5mm, diffused, yellow LED, and extending the shutter slot a bit more, I could match the heal down/toe down voltages of Dino's Flanger. (toe down 11.6V heel down 2.29V)
I took notes of the location of the components on the test board and made the appropriate changes to the LED/LDR board file.
I found that to achieve these voltages, the LED and the LDR have to be adjusted up or down a bit relative to the board plane.
@Larry
Im guessing this is where the whole clunky LED/LDR light tube comes into play. I am confident that there are LDRs that are available to perform the task without it though ;)
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on September 10, 2013, 11:39:47 AM
@Larry
Im guessing this is where the whole clunky LED/LDR light tube comes into play. I am confident that there are LDRs that are available to perform the task without it though ;)
I think one of the main purposes of the "clunky LED/LDR light tube" is to keep out any ambient light and light produced by the onboard indicator LEDs.
I did try putting the main LDR in a small piece of black "Papermate" pen tube which helped when I tested it for ambient light.
Without the tube, the toe down voltage can drop around two volts. (worst case scenario)
This voltage drop will be audible as a change in frequency.
I think the set up in the Morley isn't as critical because it would be a slight volume drop. If the ambient light stayed constant it would most likely go unnoticed.
If who ever want to build this thing doesn't mind sourcing a Papermate fine point pen, then I can make provisions on the board for the inclusion of this "light tube".
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/91297_s7.jpg)
Larry, I had the same worry about ambient light from all the indicator LED`s affecting my LDR`s in my Infinitphase clone. In the end, three or four coats of black nail polish on the backsides solved that problem.
In case you haven`t seen how many indicator LED`s there are on an Infinitphase... check it out. Don`t think we have much to worry about here.
Quote from: digi2t on September 10, 2013, 12:17:23 PM
Larry, I had the same worry about ambient light from all the indicator LED`s affecting my LDR`s in my Infinitphase clone. In the end, three or four coats of black nail polish on the backsides solved that problem.
In case you haven`t seen how many indicator LED`s there are on an Infinitphase... check it out. Don`t think we have much to worry about here.
The Infinitephase may not have been affected by the indicator LEDs but as far as ambient light (bright sun outdoors, stage lights, etc) the Infinitephase is housed in an enclosure without a "shutter" slot.
I have a industrial lighted magnifier mounted on my work bench. When I moved the lighted "head" around the Morley enclosure, the voltage in the dark (toe down) position would drop as much as two volts. The light is entering the slot from certain angles.
When I put the LDR in the rear of a small piece of "pen" tube.....this fixed the problem. The tube shields the LDR from light entering the slot, only allowing the LDR to be affected from light emanating from a source in front of the tube.
Dino,
Question....
You put black nail polish on the backsides of what? The LDRs or the indicator LEDs?
Quote from: armdnrdy on September 10, 2013, 12:44:32 PM
Quote from: digi2t on September 10, 2013, 12:17:23 PM
Larry, I had the same worry about ambient light from all the indicator LED`s affecting my LDR`s in my Infinitphase clone. In the end, three or four coats of black nail polish on the backsides solved that problem.
In case you haven`t seen how many indicator LED`s there are on an Infinitphase... check it out. Don`t think we have much to worry about here.
The Infinitephase may not have been affected by the indicator LEDs but as far as ambient light (bright sun outdoors, stage lights, etc) the Infinitephase is housed in an enclosure without a "shutter" slot.
I have a industrial lighted magnifier mounted on my work bench. When I moved the lighted "head" around the Morley enclosure, the voltage in the dark (toe down) position would drop as much as two volts. The light is entering the slot from certain angles.
When I put the LDR in the rear of a small piece of "pen" tube.....this fixed the problem. The tube shields the LDR from light entering the slot, only allowing the LDR to be affected from light emanating from a source in front of the tube.
Dino,
Question....
You put black nail polish on the backsides of what? The LDRs or the indicator LEDs?
You can minimize ambient light through the slot by using felt like they do on EQ's and mixer faders.
Quote from: wavley on September 10, 2013, 12:56:59 PM
You can minimize ambient light through the slot by using felt like they do on EQ's and mixer faders.
Yeah, good idea!
The thought of something blocking light from entering the slot defiantly crossed my mind.
What was that fiber used for automatic transmission shifters on cars back in the 70s? :icon_wink:
Black felt might not be a bad idea.
Quote from: wavley on September 10, 2013, 12:56:59 PM
You can minimize ambient light through the slot by using felt like they do on EQ's and mixer faders.
Ahhhh... Now i see the light (No pun intended)
So the ambient light that is effecting the test is coming from the slot that the shutter enters and exits from. Is that correct Larry?
I guess this isnt much of a concern for the Morley-style wahs and volume pedals :-\
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on September 10, 2013, 01:06:31 PM
I guess this isnt much of a concern for the Morley-style wahs and volume pedals :-\
Maybe Morley accepts this as a "slight" design flaw.
Musitronics did something about it by encasing the LEDs and LDRs in ambient light suppressing tubes.
Just to satisfy any curiosity....the reason the Waitrony LDRs work in this circuit now is because I changed to a yellow diffused LED.
I tried the original red diffused that was used in the pedal circuit with assorted LDRs and wasn't getting optimum results, so I switched to green....which is the best color light for LDR perception.
The green worked well on some LDRs but with the Waitrony I couldn't get the correct heel down voltage as the LED was too bright. The Waitronys "light on" resistance is fairly low and I had run out of trimmer adjustment to lesson the LED intensity. I tried moving the LDR away from the shutter/LED but still wasn't able to hit the voltage "mark"
Last night after the GL55 series failed miserably... I had the thought to try a yellow LED with some of the previous LDRs I had tested. LDRs are less responsive to the color yellow...so in theory....the LDR shouldn't perceive as much light. Less light equals higher resistance.
Well...this time "theory" worked! I have adjustment left on the trimmer and was able to move the LDR closer to the Shutter/LED.
And everyone lived happily ever after! ;D
QuoteDino,
Question....
You put black nail polish on the backsides of what? The LDRs or the indicator LEDs?
On the front side of the LDR`s.
(Fish on! :icon_mrgreen:)
Backsides of the LED`s. That kept the indicator LED`s light from illuminating into the enclosure. Sorry, should have been more clear.
I just walked in from an exceptionally hard day at work.......and you had me!
Black nail polish on the front of the LDRs. :icon_eek:
I reworked both boards to include Molex KK type right angle wafer connectors for the off board wiring.
I Made up a BOM and have started ordering parts. We're getting closer! ;D
Main board:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Mutron%20Flanger%20main%20board%209-12-13.jpg)
LED/LDR pedal control board:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Mutron%20Flanger%20pedal%20circuit%209-12-13.jpg)
What looks like oversized mounting holes for the LED/LDR board are actually "keepouts" providing a separation from the Morley enclosure and the board's power ground. The enclosure's mounting posts have a 6/32 nut directly under these locations.
The enclosure will be "grounded" with the "signal" ground.
Soooooooo want to build this! 8)
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on September 12, 2013, 11:29:21 AM
Soooooooo want to build this! 8)
I feel ya bro. :icon_mrgreen:
Fantastic work Larry. Top notch. Can't wait to hear this sucker, just so I can compare it to the original.
Quote from: digi2t on September 12, 2013, 12:21:44 PM
Fantastic work Larry. Top notch. Can't wait to hear this sucker, just so I can compare it to the original.
Just so you can compare it to the original??
Just so you can compare it to the original?? :icon_eek:
I wanna hear this baby so I can know what it sounds like when I build one!!! :icon_cool: ::)
Dino and Larry.... you guys are ACES!!! ;D
For those of you that have been involved in or have been following this thread.....here's an update:
Worked through a couple of issues with the gracious help of R.G. There were problems transitioning from the "stand alone" power section of the original Mutron Flanger to the power supply I had in mind.
The thread is here: http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=104370.0
The problems are solved and I'm just waiting on a parts order.
Here is the latest (and I hope the last!) board revision:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Mutron%20Flanger%20main%20board%209-16-13.jpg)
I moved a few things around, moved IC6 and surrounding components to the upper left side of the board, added pads for trace side calibration test points, and changed the power section, (half wave rectifier and 1000µf filter cap)
And here is the reworked LED/LDR board.
You will notice that the large "keep outs" have been changed. We now want the power ground to make contact with the enclosure.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Mutron%20Flanger%20pedal%20circuit%209-16-13.jpg)
Just when I thought I was finished with the R&D of the LED LDR board......
When I performed the original testing for the design of the LED/LRD board, I purchase an assortment pack of different color/size diffused LEDs from Fry's Electronics. (I usually use water clear in my builds)
I purchased 5mm yellow diffused LEDs from Tayda so that we may have a universal "go to" LED for this build.
When I received the parts order from Tayda, I tested the LEDs and found that they were much brighter than the LEDs I had been using.
Back to the drawing board.....or should I say....the LED board!
About a month ago, I built a resistance substitution box which has two modes, (ohms and K ohms) twenty-four selectable resistors in series with potentiometers, capable of 10Ω to 1.25MΩ. This "box" really proved to be a valuable piece of test equipment in getting this circuit dialed in.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/resitance%20box.jpg)
I ended up pulling R68 (330Ω 1/2 watt) and replacing it with a couple of header pins. I attached the resistance box and dialed it in to the resistance needed to reach the proper output voltages of this circuit.
I decided to add a 10K trimmer in series with R68 to make the resistance adjustable to compensate for different brand LEDs. The LED I went with is a 3mm, yellow, diffused.
I made the appropriate changes to the board and reposted it on the previous page.
It's been interesting, following this. (Especially since I don't really know what a Mutron Flanger *looks* like.) I gather it won't be true to the original, but a second version that uses an Expression jack, rather than a mechanical optical wah arrangement, could be something to look at, perhaps?
If you think about it...the pedal is an expression pedal of sorts.
You could build a straight flanger with a CV input to be controlled by an expression pedal but......that feature is already built in.
About the only other function that would be worthwhile controlling with a pedal is the Rate control. There's a bit of a problem with getting that one off of the ground....the rate control is a 25KC pot. It might be kind of a trick emulating a reverse audio pot with an expression pedal.
I've done a bit of exploring in the world of designing a switchable, multi taper, multi value, voltage divider, one size fits all expression pedal.
Let's put it this way.....I haven't reached my destination......I'm still exploring! :icon_wink:
Alan,
If you want to see what a Mutron Flanger looks like and sounds like, go to the first page of this thread. It's all Dino's fault! >:(
We've got board! ;D
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Pedal%20Flanger%20Board.jpg)
SWEET!!! 8)
I placed the Input/output jacks and the power jack on the board to check alignment with the enclosure......looks good!
I think my next step is to make a drilling template that fits snuggly inside the enclosure. The template can be printed out on a bit heavier paper stock to alleviate misalignment.
I'd like to check all board/enclosure alignment before I populate the board.....although I'm pretty confident that there are no issues. (I spent a little time on this!)
We are getting even closer! ;D
Dino,
Front lighted view:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/board%20trace.jpg)
Oh heck yeah! Much better. The lighting on the other shot was VERY deceiving.
Looks great. :icon_cool:
If you follow the letter "E" in the word Flanger, you'll see a hole to access a trimmer from the trace side. Right above that hole there is another hole that has been widened horizontally. That hole is for a test point that gets soldered to the trace side. There are four test points on the board.
There is very little clearance from the trace side of the board to the bottom cover of the enclosure.....so I devised a method to make this work.
Take a medium diameter component lead cutting, (example: 1N4001 lead) wrap it around a small jewelers screw driver shaft, (or something similar in diameter) squeeze the tag ends together with some pliers to form an eyelet.
Place needle nose pliers about 2mm below eyelet and bend the eyelet over to form a right angle.
This can now be soldered to the trace side with no clearance issues. The eyelet provides a good place for an alligator clip or an oscilloscope test hook.
This will be outlined in the build document.
How about these?
(http://www.verotl.com/images/images/PCB_accessories/20-313137.jpg)
http://www.newark.com/keystone/5000/test-point-pcb-color-coded/dp/07J9695?in_merch=Popular Test Connectors&in_merch=Popular PCB Test Points&MER=PPSO_N_P_PCBTestPoints_None (http://www.newark.com/keystone/5000/test-point-pcb-color-coded/dp/07J9695?in_merch=Popular%20Test%20Connectors&in_merch=Popular%20PCB%20Test%20Points&MER=PPSO_N_P_PCBTestPoints_None)
These were my first thought but I checked the PDF and they stand too high. There's not enough clearance.
I think these would actually work:
http://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Keystone-Electronics/5021/?qs=fP5bVVCrK/eNcXCJeuA88Q==
But the way that I outlined making test points with resistor lead cuttings, it doesn't make sense to buy them. There's only four! Now if there were fifty! :icon_wink:
Update:
I found that if you wrap a standard resistor lead (not the thin Tayda type) around a large (1 3/4" to 2") paperclip this makes the height only about 2.8mm which works for the bottom plate clearance.
The paperclip I used has a 1.33mm diameter.
Dear diary,
Making some progress!
Yesterday I worked out a drilling template that fits inside of the enclosure rather than the top. This allows for definitive borders for the template resulting in a much better alignment.
After I checked the template to the onboard components and was satisfied with the results, I started populating the board.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of Mutron, I will fear no flanger: for thou art with me; thy iron and thy solder they comfort me.
Amen.
You know....
I would occasionally dive in to a folder full of Mutron Flanger information over the last several years.
I would come away thinking.......there's just too many missing pieces to this puzzle! It's just not doable!
Now that we've filled in the blanks, and I'm working on the actual build, it's a bit surreal at times!
Every now and again the thought crosses my mind......we're building a Mutron FXXXXXG Flanger! :icon_eek:
Then a warm fuzzy feeling comes over me and I feel a sense of peaceful contentment. ;D
Quote from: armdnrdy on September 24, 2013, 12:59:01 PM
Then a warm fuzzy feeling comes over me and I feel a sense of peaceful contentment. ;D
Crossed fingers that your feeling of contentment carries over throughout the buildup AND testing process! ;D
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on September 24, 2013, 03:22:16 PM
Crossed fingers that your feeling of contentment carries over throughout the buildup AND testing process! ;D
I've heard that a feeling of contentment comes over you right before you die as well! :icon_wink: Can you say crash and burn?
I'm feeling pretty good about this so far....I've checked the board two, three, and four times for bugs.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/PCB%20bug.jpg)
And I've made sure that all of the dimensions are as close as I can get them!
With all this attention to detail......what can possibly go wrong?
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/circuit-board-shoe.jpg)
:D
The main board is populated except for the input/output jacks, the pots, and the power jack.
Next step is to drill the enclosure, fit the board with unsoldered pots into the enclosure, tighten up the pot nuts, then solder the pots in place to ensure the correct height. The same goes for the main board mounted rate LED.
When I'm through, I'll post a picture with the results. So far so good! :icon_wink:
(http://weknowgifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/billy-dee-williams-clapping.gif)
Billy D approves!!!!
Can't wait! 8)
I'll throw a smattering of glitz as well...
(http://bjc.uol.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/clap.gif)
Billy Dee and Orson encouraged me to move this project forward!
I printed the drilling template on a heavier "card" type stock thinking that it would be better for alignment with the enclosure.
I had file folders on hand that I trimmed down to letter sized stock (8.5 X 11) for printing.
Here's the template inside of the enclosure with the initial pilot holes drilled:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Template%20in%20enclosure.jpg)
After I drilled the enclosure, I fitted the board mounted pots, set the PCB in the enclosure, and soldered the pots in place at the correct "installed" height.
Here's a shot of the main board component side:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Componant%20side.jpg)
Here's a shot with the main board installed, all buttoned up with everything aligned. (I threw some knobs on to give the effect an effect!)
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Enclosure%20fitting.jpg)
Tomorrow I'll work on the LED/LDR board and beyond.
(New images on page 12)
If you look at the DC jack on the component side image, you'll notice that it's sitting on a shim fabricated from scrap etched PC board.
We're dealing with an enclosure that has a few existing holes that may not have been in the optimum location.
The shims are two pieces of board, filed down to the total thickness of 2mm with holes/slots drilled for the DC jack.
The two pieces are "glued" together with 5 minute epoxy, glued to the DC jack, then the whole assembly is glued to the PC board. .
There is just enough "meat" of the DC jack's pins coming through to the board's trace side to achieve a good solder joint.
Gluing the DC jack to the board will keep pressure off of the DC jack's solder pins where a board mounted jack's failure usually occurs
This modification was necessary to align the DC jack with the existing hole. If you recall, we had to flip the input/output jacks upside down to make board mounted pots work with this enclosure. This is why the existing DC jack hole doesn't work without the shim.
One more thing of note.
The angle of the component side image doesn't show the board's output connector. The connector is underneath the "start" pot which is located on the bottom left side of the board. Although you can't tell by the picture, there is about 12.5mm of space under the pot body.
Here is the LED/LDR board:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/2013-09-29%2023.28.10.jpg)
Here is the trace side showing the Effect and Pedal LEDs on the "outriggers".
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/2013-09-29%2023.30.12.jpg)
This morning I fitted the LED/LDR board into the enclosure.....perfect fit!
The Effect/Pedal LEDs are perfectly aligned! ;D
It looks like I know how to use a ruler and a caliper......who knew?
We're on the thoroughfare and can see the finish line.
OMFG!!! YOU`RE KILLING ME WITH THESE BITS AND PIECES SUSPENSE.
You should take up writing thrillers. I`ve resorted to sitting here, and constantly clicking REFRESH for the next installment.
:D
Did Pope Julius II call out, "heya you! whatsa takin so long? Are you ever gonna finish thisa ceiling? when Michelangelo was painting the Sistine Chapel's ceiling?
I think not!
Good things come to those who wait.....Rome wasn't built in a day.....patience is a virtue....A half finished Mutron Flanger in the hand is worth two in the bush......
Quote from: armdnrdy on October 01, 2013, 01:35:10 AM
Did Pope Julius II call out, "heya you! whatsa takin so long? Are you ever gonna finish thisa ceiling? when Michelangelo was painting the Sistine Chapel's ceiling?
I think not!
Good things come to those who wait.....Rome wasn't built in a day.....patience is a virtue....A half finished Mutron Flanger in the hand is worth two in the bush......
I've been slammed at work the last week......yes I have a job!
and I haven't had much time or energy to work on this project but...I worked this up:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Pedal%20Flanger%203007%20Offboard%20Wiring.jpg)
The image of the main board is mirrored. This is the view when looking at the enclosure with the bottom cover removed.
You will actually see the trace/solder side of the main board. The wiring that crosses the main board will be hidden from this vantage point.
I just have to crimp the wires to the female connectors, plug them in, place the ICs and transistors in their sockets and with a little luck (do they have a crossed fingers emoticon?) we'll have flanging......or it will be the start of the debugging process! :'(
Yesterday I cleaned all of the nasty fingerprints from the trace side of the board and coated it with Rustoleum matte clear.
Now it won't rust! :icon_wink:
Today...I finished the off board wiring, set all of the trimmers to about 50%, powered it up.....all the switching, indicator LEDs, and rate LEDs worked as expected! Looks good so far! :icon_smile:
Plugged my guitar in the input.....output of the pedal into my amp......Nothing! No bypassed signal, and no wet signal! :icon_sad:
Pulled out my meter and within five minutes found no continuity between the bypass switch and the tip of the output jack.
I removed the nuts from the board mounted components, lifted the board part the way out, and spied the output jack connector flying in the wind! It must have came loose when I was organizing the wires before trimming them and soldering.
Secured the connector, buttoned everything back up, plugged it in......we have clean guitar! :icon_smile:
Hit the effect switch..........we have flanging! ;D
Turned it over to adjust the pedal trimmers.......hit the pedal switch........we've got pedal sweep! ;D
Then I got tired of it and smashed it with a hammer. :icon_twisted:
Just kidding! :icon_wink:
I'll work on dialing it in and get a video up as soon as I can.
I would like to thank Dino, Ian, Greg, Federico, R.G., DIYstompboxes, my girlfriend, the Academy, my first grade teacher, my parole officer, and last but not least.....Mutron for designing such a good flanger! ;D
Great to hear Larry!!! :icon_cool:
Can't wait to see what comes of this! Definitely on my build list!!!
Still working on adjusting the flanger.
Came across a small issue in achieving the lower range that Dino pegged as "sounds best at". (50kHz-800kHz)
I was only able to reach 88Khz at the lower range no matter where the two clock trimmers were set.
I reviewed the 4046 data sheet and did some research on 4046 clocks. A 4046's frequency is set by three components. A timing cap across pin 6 & 7, a resistor from pin 11 to ground, and a resistor from pin 12 to ground which offsets the base operating frequency set by the other two components.
Increasing the capacitance across pins 6 & 7 will decrease the frequency. I tried a few values and found that an additional 100pf was needed to achieve 50kHz at the lower end.
Dino's Flanger has a 120pf and 10pf ceramic caps in parallel for the timing cap. A board shot of a different unit shows one timing cap and empty holes where another would go. The original factory schematic depicts only a 120pf.
I believe this means that the actual capacitance for the timing cap would be chosen when the flanger was calibrated.
Kudos Larry...
you did a great job.
About the clock cap:
I use 2 solid wires (those used in LAN cables :icon_wink: )
cut them ~2cm long and twist 'em together, you'll obtain a small cap...
Then, as Dino says, cut the pair 1mm a time until you don't reach the desired value.
A rare, more-than-mojo component.
PS
When looking for the exact lower clock, check the higher clock too
Quote from: Fender3D on October 08, 2013, 01:23:10 PM
Kudos Larry...
you did a great job.
PS
When looking for the exact lower clock, check the higher clock too
Coming from you....that's a great compliment! (remember....you helped me with my first flanger build....MXR with a MN3007)
I'll check the upper frequency as well. While adjusting the trimmers I've seen it up into the low MHz!
The two trimmers are very interactive much like the ADA clock trimmers.
CANNOT WAIT TO BUILD!!!! :icon_mrgreen:
I encountered a ticking problem that I was able to isolate in short order but.....the fix took a bit longer!
As you may know, we are retrofitting this circuit into a different enclosure (Morley) which includes predrilled jack holes and limited space to locate controls. (wedge shaped pedal)
The trace that runs from the LFO to lug 2 of the board mounted Rate pot was located too close to the input jack. (J1)
This trace is screaming!
After trying everything....and I mean everything! I had to cut the trace, ground it, and run a jumper wire away from the input jack.
I reworked the board to move this trace as far away as possible from the input jack. It should be good to go now.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53299166/DIYstompboxes/Mutron%20Flanger%20main%20board%20II.jpg)
Overall....this is a great sounding flanger! The sweep pedal aside, the flanger itself is very versatile! The Stop/Start controls add another dimension with a whole array of tone/textures available. This is one of my favorite flangers now!
Video coming soon.
QuoteVideo coming soon.
Anxiously awaiting!! ;D
Larry,
Are you going to make a batch of boards for this?
Quote from: UKToecutter on November 08, 2013, 09:16:44 AM
Larry,
Are you going to make a batch of boards for this?
Hey Andy,
I wasn't planning to do to lack of interest.....only a small handful of people seem to want to build one of these.
I think it's a great, versatile flanger. Definitely at the top of my list.
Quote from: armdnrdy on November 08, 2013, 10:50:07 AM
I wasn't planning to do to lack of interest.....only a small handful of people seem to want to build one of these.
I think it's a great, versatile flanger. Definitely at the top of my list.
Hey Larry...
Any idea on if or when you will be able to release the PCB and document? I know you are pretty bogged down but, I am itching to get this built and the wife wants the Morley Volume off of her table ASAP! ::) ;D
I'll see if I can get it done today.
I'm working on CAD drawings for a few sizes of sloped aluminum enclosures.
A friend works at a sheet metal manufacturing company. I talked to the owner who has agreed to make some prototypes for me.
It seems that we are always looking for a larger, sloped enclosure to house bigger builds or multiple circuits. I've searched the net many times and haven't found anything that will work at a reasonable price.
If the price is right...I may be offering these for sale.
The first design is a cross between the old EHX enclosures and the Mutron Biphase enclosure, with measurements of
8" X 6" - 3" in the back sloping to 1.9" in the front.
Does someone have a schematic for this flanger?
Links/pics are dead and I'm very interested how Mu-tron has done it. :icon_frown:
Thanks a lot!
Quote from: armdnrdy on October 08, 2013, 12:38:24 PM
Dino's Flanger has a 120pf and 10pf ceramic caps in parallel for the timing cap. A board shot of a different unit shows one timing cap and empty holes where another would go. The original factory schematic depicts only a 120pf.
I believe this means that the actual capacitance for the timing cap would be chosen when the flanger was calibrated.
I'd say this is highly likely. My experience with 4046 high frequency clocks suggests that the variation from one chip to another is huge. Variation between different manufacturer's versions is even worse.
Quote from: Zwachi on September 27, 2018, 03:54:20 AM
Does someone have a schematic for this flanger?
Links/pics are dead and I'm very interested how Mu-tron has done it. :icon_frown:
Thanks a lot!
I've reupped the schematic and many pictures to here;
https://imgur.com/a/ZVvbAvp (https://imgur.com/a/ZVvbAvp)
The clone build doc is here;
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3awa2fwc3ntsl9n/Pedal%20Flanger%20Build%20Document.pdf?dl=0 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/3awa2fwc3ntsl9n/Pedal%20Flanger%20Build%20Document.pdf?dl=0)
Exciting, thank you very much!
There aren't many DIY projects with compressor and expander out there..
Quote from: digi2t on September 27, 2018, 06:10:18 PM
Quote from: Zwachi on September 27, 2018, 03:54:20 AM
Does someone have a schematic for this flanger?
Links/pics are dead and I'm very interested how Mu-tron has done it. :icon_frown:
Thanks a lot!
I've reupped the schematic and many pictures to here;
https://imgur.com/a/ZVvbAvp (https://imgur.com/a/ZVvbAvp)
The clone build doc is here;
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3awa2fwc3ntsl9n/Pedal%20Flanger%20Build%20Document.pdf?dl=0 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/3awa2fwc3ntsl9n/Pedal%20Flanger%20Build%20Document.pdf?dl=0)
Is that Larry's project? I've been keeping an eye out for a morely pedal to house it. Thank you for sharing this I haven't seen it in a couple of years.
Quote from: Kevin Mitchell on September 28, 2018, 09:16:29 AM
Is that Larry's project? I've been keeping an eye out for a morely pedal to house it. Thank you for sharing this I haven't seen it in a couple of years.
If you need anything for the project, let me know. I have a few Morley chassis, etched PCBs (empty and partially populated), and parts for this project kicking around.