Hello everyone,
I posted a new effect called Payback at the site. It is a looping sampler with a host of features. There is article explaining it's operation and several modification suggestions.
Enjoy.
The Tone God's Domain (http://geocities.com/thetonegod)
Oh and about that little challenge:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/payback_top.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/payback_inside.jpg)
;)
Happy Canada Day to all my fellow Canadians. Happy 4th of July to all my brothers and sisters to the south as well.
Your Tone God,
Andrew
| (http://www.blockaholic.com/tpbfig5.jpg) | Mr. Lahey! Mr. Lahey!
Friggen' Tone God has done it again! |
Nice job!
http://www.blockaholic.com/tpbwpage.htm
Tone God you are the best, I have been wanting to build a looper now I know which one. Thanks for giving us so much here at this forum.
Thanks Again
Darryl :icon_mrgreen:
Looks great! Can't get on your site to see more right now unfortunately (bandwidth exceeded).
Does it run very long on batteries?
Quote from: Peter Snowberg on June 30, 2006, 05:23:52 PM
Mr. Lahey! Mr. Lahey!
Friggen' Tone God has done it again!
This should take care of Lego Randy:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/lego_burger.jpg)
Quote from: KORGULL on June 30, 2006, 05:34:33 PM
Looks great! Can't get on your site to see more right now unfortunately (bandwidth exceeded).
Does it run very long on batteries?
The site a smacked again ? Crap. I wasn't sure how busy it would get and if I should have off loaded the pics. I might just do that now.
Edit: I have moved the graphics to another host so the site should be able to handle more traffic.
I don't know how long it would last with batteries as I just finished it last night. I measured that current usage at 9mA in bypass and 21mA with both LEDs on. You can do the math from there. I'm sure the LEDs chosen would affect current consumption. I used a LDO regulator and the 25xx is put into sleep on bypass to reduce current consumption.
Andrew
That is some mighty fine work Andrew.
I have a 2560 that has this projects name on it.
I need to read the mod section again to determine how much point there is to utilising the multiple loop function.
As I understand it there is no overdub function, the multiple loop mod wont be too user friendly and to use the mod effectively I will have to be careful not to go over my alloted address timeslot. To select between more than two loops with a footswitch would take some electronic switching.
Despite the mod limitations this is by far the best looper DIY project yet.
Thanks and kudos on getting all that on perf and in a 1590b. If there was a thumbs up icon I would use it.
... nice going Andrew
doing my patriotic duty in the Karmanah today with some Newfy Screech ... :icon_wink:
that's great Peter ... LOL ...
Very nice; I am impressed.......
Need to have those IC's..... then need to build this!
Does it matter which inputs of the CD4093 are used? They're A and B but does it function the same if they are reversed? I'm half way done with my layout but have to go to work now.... balls..
Thanks for the good words everyone. I have to make this quick as my internet connection is behaving as the french would say "le crappy".
Quote from: Michael Allen on July 01, 2006, 05:56:32 PM
Does it matter which inputs of the CD4093 are used? They're A and B but does it function the same if they are reversed? I'm half way done with my layout but have to go to work now.... balls..
Yes inputs can be switched with the same result. Good luck and let us know how it works.
Now all my fellow Canadians can join in with me on this special holiday in our national anthem:
Oh! The good old hockey game,
Is the best game you can name;
And the best game you can name,
Is the good old Hockey game!
Inside Canadian joke for rest of you wonderful worldwide folks.
Andrew
Arrgh!
I haven't a clue which looper to build now!
The cheapest IC is the ISD1020 from smallbear, anything above that costs mental money where I live! What do I do, what do I do! ???
PS. that looper looks awesome
Quote from: Peter Snowberg on June 30, 2006, 05:23:52 PM
| (http://www.blockaholic.com/tpbfig5.jpg) | Mr. Lahey! Mr. Lahey!
Friggen' Tone God has done it again! |
Nice job!
http://www.blockaholic.com/tpbwpage.htm
That lego had me pissing myself.
-Dream
Excellent work Andrew, you certainly move a lot quicker than I ever do?!
There's some excellent features in your design which I wish i'd come up with, especially the ability to kill vibrato during playback!
With regards to the way in which you've achieved the vibrato, i'd actually come up with the same workaround independantly. I don't know if you recall me saying my version was a dirty hack so I went back to the drawing board with it ;)
Goddamn nice design!
Quote from: RaceDriver205 on July 02, 2006, 05:55:00 AM
Arrgh!
I haven't a clue which looper to build now!
The cheapest IC is the ISD1020 from smallbear, anything above that costs mental money where I live! What do I do, what do I do! ???
PS. that looper looks awesome
http://www.futurlec.com/ICSFOthers.shtml
WOW!! Those prices are so low it doesn't even make sense!
Im really liking some of the things they sell too. UHF PIC! They've got 514256 DRAMS as well, which I really, really needed.
You really helped us out there nelson.
Will this work with a ISD25120P? Im liking the sound of 2minutes record time. Thanks loads for the new looper! :icon_biggrin:
Quote from: RaceDriver205 on July 02, 2006, 08:45:05 AM
WOW!! Those prices are so low it doesn't even make sense!
Im really liking some of the things they sell too. UHF PIC! They've got 514256 DRAMS as well, which I really, really needed.
You really helped us out there nelson.
Will this work with a ISD25120P? Im liking the sound of 2minutes record time. Thanks loads for the new looper! :icon_biggrin:
It will work with any of the ISD25xx family. As the time increases sound quality decreases. It will be decidedly Lo-fi if you opt for 2 mins.
Thanks everyone! :)
Quote from: RaceDriver205 on July 02, 2006, 05:55:00 AM
The cheapest IC is the ISD1020 from smallbear, anything above that costs mental money where I live! What do I do, what do I do! ???
One of the reasons the 1020 is cheap is that it is old and has less memory. Truth be told the circuit would be much simpler if I had used the 1020. Essentially
most of the external logic I have in the
Payback is inside the 1020. Hmm...maybe I will do a quick variation using the 1020. It may make the project more available to others who order mainly from Smallbear and help with the sales of the 1020 but the 1020 is becoming somewhat hard to find from other sources hence one of the reasons why I went with the 25xx. I would hope that if the
Payback became popular enough that Smallbear would carry the 25xx ICs as other projects use it as well but who knows.
Edit: I just noticed that the 1020 is not made anymore. I was thinking of the 1420. Silly me. I'll stick with the 25xx.
I got my ICs from Digikey. They have the whole family of ISD recorder ICs.
Quote from: Jaicen_solo on July 02, 2006, 06:51:47 AM
Excellent work Andrew, you certainly move a lot quicker than I ever do?!
There's some excellent features in your design which I wish i'd come up with, especially the ability to kill vibrato during playback!
With regards to the way in which you've achieved the vibrato, i'd actually come up with the same workaround independently. I don't know if you recall me saying my version was a dirty hack so I went back to the drawing board with it ;)
Goddamn nice design!
Thanks Jaicen. :) The vibrato seemed kinda obvious so I am not surprised that you came up with the same thing too. I didn't like the optocoupler as it would have taken up room, be difficult to calibrate, and with the RoHS scare moving over to something that is commonly available was smart move.
Quote from: RaceDriver205 on July 02, 2006, 08:45:05 AM
Will this work with a ISD25120P? Im liking the sound of 2minutes record time. Thanks loads for the new looper! :icon_biggrin:
Yes it will work with 25120 but as Nelson mentioned and I point out in the "recommendation" portion of the article the long the time the lower the fidelity. I recommend either the 2540 or 2575 for performance similar to the 1020. 75 seconds is alot of record time hence why I decided to split it with the multiple message function. The choice is yours of course.
And one more time for the world:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/sttom.jpg)
Oh! The good old hockey game,
Is the best game you can name;
And the best game you can name,
Is the good old Hockey game!
Andrew
Very nice :)
The switching looks much better than the design I came up with. I'll see if I can come up with a vero layout :icon_mrgreen:
Quote from: nelson on June 30, 2006, 07:54:56 PM
If there was a thumbs up icon I would use it.
Feel free to use mine, although I guess it means different things in different places. (http://davebales.com/avatars/thumbsup.gif)
incredible work indeed, especially fitting all that in such a small box!
Do you plan on posting the pcb layout that you used to make it so tight?
That would be great!
greetings
Quote from: slacker on July 03, 2006, 01:54:51 PM
Very nice :)
The switching looks much better than the design I came up with. I'll see if I can come up with a vero layout :icon_mrgreen:
Thanks and good luck :icon_exclaim: While I breadboarded one and perf'd a second with both working I would actually feel better if someone would breadboard it to make sure the circuit works, the timings are appropriate for their 25xx, and the sound is acceptable as I tunned mine somewhat to my tastes which may not be the same as others before a bunch of layouts came out which could contain errors. Thats just me as I am kind of particular about those things.
Quote from: j.frad on July 03, 2006, 05:04:44 PM
incredible work indeed, especially fitting all that in such a small box!
Do you plan on posting the pcb layout that you used to make it so tight?
That would be great!
I think I have a chance at the "most stuff in a 1590B" crown. ;)
I didn't use a PCB. It is perf board. I decided awhile back that I will not be doing PCB layouts for anything for now on. To do "proper" PCB for that size enclosure I would need a double sided board anyways IMHO. Those gray wires you see near the top of the case on the board are the jumpers not the main collection of connections which essentially makes it a double sided board. I also used various tricks to get everything in there. All the parts with exception of the two LED resistors are on the face of the board. There are no jumpers on the face of the board.
Andrew
wow I'd love to build this!
if anyone makes a layout, pcb, perf or otherwise, could they please hook me up with a copy of it?
happy (belated) Canada day to my fellow canucks and happy (early) July 4th to our brothers to the south.
I tell you what though, im liking the look of the ISD4xxx series, futurlec sells an 8Khz resolution 4minute chip.
Needs serial comm. though. But 4 minutes! I could record a whole backing for a song with that!
Shame they dont sell the 8minute 8Khz 4xxx model.
Something else to add to the list (groan).
Heres's my first draft layout! It's about 2.1 in by 2.8 in.... It should fit in a 1590B if I plan the box right... we'll see i've always just flown by the seat of my pants in that area and it never really works out!
Andrew, and others, do you think that all the parallel traces might pose noise issues? I put a little grid plane between the logic IC (left) and the audio portion (right) because I've seen this in several other pcbs to help reduce crosstalk, does it serve a purpose or can I get rid of it? There is a filter cap and resistor at the +V input as per the vanishing point article, and the logic and audio both have separate ground loops. The only place the power loops connect is through the 1N4148 leaky diode (top center), and through the 5v regulator (bottom next to ISD chip.)
I want to make sure this looks alright as far as inital physical layout before I do all the image editing and such...
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v368/soma_hero/payback_lay_one.gif)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v368/soma_hero/payback_lay_one.gif
Good to see someone is making a PCB layout for it, I think I'd struggle with this one :P Hopefully I'll be able to build this one in a week or two, I've been looking at the ISD2560P from Futurlec.. I suspect it'll work?
I don't have much time right now so I can't to go through the whole layout but the first thing that throws me off are the traces between the IC pads. I don't think most people with common PCB making means (i.e. PNP and the like) have the resolution to do something like that. Someone else can go through to confirm the connections.
I let you in one little trick I used for the
Payback in the initial post. I used open frame sockets, you could also use SIP sockets, for all my ICs. While this makes replacing IC easier it also serves as a spacer of the IC from the board allowing me to place parts under the ICs. The vast majority of parts in my
Payback are under the ICs. By using parts like lower voltage ceramic caps, minature electrolytic caps some times on their side, and 1/8 watt resistors (I actually used 1/6 watt if you want to be specific) that one can fit under the IC when placed in the socket the board can be made MUCH smaller. If you are will to space the IC high enough you maybe able to fit standard 1/4 resistors.
Quote from: robbiemcm on July 06, 2006, 04:12:46 AM
Good to see someone is making a PCB layout for it, I think I'd struggle with this one :P Hopefully I'll be able to build this one in a week or two, I've been looking at the ISD2560P from Futurlec.. I suspect it'll work?
Any ISD25xx will work so yes the 2560 will work in it.
Andrew
ah...open frame.... I put connections through the pads beacuse I've been able to get them to come out before and I didn't want a lot of jumpers. I suppose it would be easier to use jumpers than not get the traces to come out....
As far as the physical layout goes, is there enough separation between the audio and logic to keep out noise? I suppose i'll only be able to tell when I make it....
Alright, round two coming up...
looks great andrew. one day when my skills are up to par I will attempt this build. great work! i like the mod suggestions.
excellent, Andrew. it's amazing how much you can stick on a perfboard if you hand-wire... you'd likely have to use a 3 or 4-layer board to wire something so complex with so many chips.
Quote from: The Tone God on July 03, 2006, 08:09:06 PM
...I think I have a chance at the "most stuff in a 1590B" crown. ;)...
err... this one has 10 pots, 8 chips and 3 circuit boards. ringtone prototype.
(http://myspace-576.vo.llnwd.net/00913/67/51/913271576_l.jpg)
Quote from: The Tone God on July 06, 2006, 01:46:44 PM
the first thing that throws me off are the traces between the IC pads. I don't think most people with common PCB making means (i.e. PNP and the like) have the resolution to do something like that. Someone else can go through to confirm the connections.
Andrew
I have managed 3 traces under an IC with PNP many times. Its possible to get impressive resolution.
Quote from: zachary vex on July 08, 2006, 06:18:15 PM
err... this one has 10 pots, 8 chips and 3 circuit boards. ringtone prototype.
Show-off :icon_razz:
Quote from: Michael Allen on July 06, 2006, 02:10:26 PM
ah...open frame.... I put connections through the pads beacuse I've been able to get them to come out before and I didn't want a lot of jumpers. I suppose it would be easier to use jumpers than not get the traces to come out....
I would use jumpers as annoying as they can be. I usually jump power supply runs before anything else. Then digital logic control signals. Audio gets priority. To get an idea about the parts under IC trick heres a pic:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/payback_inside_parts.jpg)
It is not my greatest work to say the least. :icon_rolleyes:
Quote from: Michael Allen on July 06, 2006, 02:10:26 PM
As far as the physical layout goes, is there enough separation between the audio and logic to keep out noise? I suppose i'll only be able to tell when I make it....
I haven't had any time lately to trace your layout and compare to the schematic but I think you should be okay. I the above picture I put all the logic on the left of the 2575 and all the audio on the right. Running control lines/wires is going to be important to noise as well.
Quote from: calculating_infinity on July 08, 2006, 04:59:50 PM
looks great andrew. one day when my skills are up to par I will attempt this build. great work! i like the mod suggestions.
Thanks. After doing a few articles I realized that its a good idea to try to cover those things in the article to help reduce posts and emails asking about such things. Good luck when you give it a shot.
Quote from: zachary vex on July 08, 2006, 06:18:15 PM
excellent, Andrew. it's amazing how much you can stick on a perfboard if you hand-wire... you'd likely have to use a 3 or 4-layer board to wire something so complex with so many chips.
Thank you! I agree. This was a fun build I must say and I enjoyed it. It even worked on the first try which was scary enough.
Quote from: zachary vex on July 08, 2006, 06:18:15 PM
err... this one has 10 pots, 8 chips and 3 circuit boards. ringtone prototype.
Bravo. Nice work but if thats they way its going to be then it is as the kids these days say "on". I'll come up with something from scratch and challenge that. Oh its on. :)
Quote from: nelson on July 08, 2006, 06:37:28 PM
I have managed 3 traces under an IC with PNP many times. Its possible to get impressive resolution.
I have actually gotten four 10mil connections under an IC but it is the runs between the pads that bother me. Granted they are the long style pads but it is one of the things that can be on the edge for some. It would be safer to do other things, even jumpers, to keep the project as accessible to others as possible.
Andrew
I'm just shocked on how that huge wiring sheet circuit can fit into such a tiny stomp box, i don't know enough about electronics to make this unit so I'm stuck spending money on one i guess ;D
BTW, great job
Quote from: The Tone God on July 08, 2006, 07:57:41 PM
Quote from: nelson on July 08, 2006, 06:37:28 PM
I have managed 3 traces under an IC with PNP many times. Its possible to get impressive resolution.
I have actually gotten four 10mil connections under an IC but it is the runs between the pads that bother me. Granted they are the long style pads but it is one of the things that can be on the edge for some. It would be safer to do other things, even jumpers, to keep the project as accessible to others as possible.
Andrew
Ah, I never noticed the traces in between the pads.
:icon_redface:
On a side note I just finished designing a layout for the Vanishing point v2.1 with the manual mod thats fits in a 1590b.
Just moving on to the fun part of designing little add on PCB's for the audio effects.
Ok here's the latest version. This one will be tight, so you have to use miniature caps and smaller wattage resistors. I printed it out and fit parts and it works with mini caps and can be done with 1/4w resistors (tight!).... should be able to fit in a 1590B.
70mm by 43mm
I'll most likely make another one or finish the old one so regular size parts can be used...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v368/soma_hero/payback_lay.png
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v368/soma_hero/payback_PCB.png
looking great man! hope it works!
Quote from: moody07747 on July 08, 2006, 08:01:19 PM
I'm just shocked on how that huge wiring sheet circuit can fit into such a tiny stomp box, i don't know enough about electronics to make this unit so I'm stuck spending money on one i guess ;D
Schematics tend to look complex due to the need to show everything clearly. Often when you go to build the actual circuit you can shrink things quite a bit. I've been doing this for awhile and have learned some tricks along the way but as Mr. Vex pointed out with perf (and even vero) you can easily produce a board that would take three or four layers on a PCB. It is one of the reasons I like to use perf for one offs.
Quote from: Michael Allen on July 08, 2006, 10:46:14 PM
Ok here's the latest version. This one will be tight, so you have to use miniature caps and smaller wattage resistors. I printed it out and fit parts and it works with mini caps and can be done with 1/4w resistors (tight!).... should be able to fit in a 1590B.
70mm by 43mm
MUCH better! I'll take a closer look later at the layouts and give some feedback. Nice work.
Andrew
Thanks for the layouts!!!
I think this will be my next project once I get my easy-vibe started/finished :icon_mrgreen:
I took a quick look through and found a few minor things.
1. Label the "Playback Level 1" pin.
2. Label the bypass control input.
3. See if you can get the 0.1uF decoupling caps closer to the ICs. Not a big deal but of you can work it out that would be good.
4. Flip the 1N4148/bypass diode. Cathode goes to 9v.
As for the noise issue I didn't have much as almost all the logic switching happens only occasionally. The only real noise to be concerned with is the clock gate and that only bled through when I did some bad wiring on the bread board.
Good work. :)
Andrew
Dont suppose you could record a short sound sample? Just of a backing guitar and solo guitar using the looper for the backing.
That'd be awesome.
I've got to build this now that there's a PCB layout! :) I have absolutely no use for a looper and it would be a pretty worthless pedal for my own personal use, so I had better get to it soon. Thanks so much to all of you who make layouts for the rest of us.
:icon_eek: Wow, that's nice work.
What are you (Andrew and Zach) using to stand those boards up like that? Is there a special mount/board or are you mounting directly to the pots? Whatever it is where are you getting these parts? I'm getting tired of wasting space inside my boxes.
Thanks
AL
Wow, arrived late to this topic. This looks like a fantastic project, thanks for sharing.
I have nothing else to contribute, except another Lego shot.
(http://www.beavisaudio.com/images/legoblunt2.jpg)
Quote from: RaceDriver205 on July 10, 2006, 06:10:28 AM
Dont suppose you could record a short sound sample? Just of a backing guitar and solo guitar using the looper for the backing.
That'd be awesome.
I'm not really setup for recording so I can't offer any samples right now. I'll look into it though.
Quote from: sta63bmx on July 10, 2006, 12:49:08 PM
I've got to build this now that there's a PCB layout! :) I have absolutely no use for a looper and it would be a pretty worthless pedal for my own personal use, so I had better get to it soon. Thanks so much to all of you who make layouts for the rest of us.
I don't really have much use for one either but this was based on something I played with a long time ago when I was younger so I was reconnecting with something from my electronics past. Plus it was just a fun project to figure out.
Quote from: AL on July 10, 2006, 01:51:31 PM
What are you (Andrew and Zach) using to stand those boards up like that? Is there a special mount/board or are you mounting directly to the pots? Whatever it is where are you getting these parts? I'm getting tired of wasting space inside my boxes.
I'm connecting the board straight to the pots. Truth be told those are horizontal PCB mount 9mm pots I had lying around. I "converted" them to vertical mounting by sawing off the horizontal supports and carefully bending the legs.
I got my parts from Digikey.
Andrew
QuoteI'm connecting the board straight to the pots. Truth be told those are horizontal PCB mount 9mm pots I had lying around. I "converted" them to vertical mounting by sawing off the horizontal supports and carefully bending the legs.
Thanks for the info. I think I may need to try that. Have you done it before? How do the pots hold up compared to standard panel mounted pots?
AL
Quote from: AL on July 11, 2006, 09:09:19 AM
Thanks for the info. I think I may need to try that. Have you done it before?
That was the first time I modded the horizontal pots to vertical and I wouldn't do it again as I used most of my old stock of pots up with that project. The pots I used are available in vertical mounting form but I had a bunch of these lying around and decided to use them up plus I was doing things on the cheap using parts I had lying around. Ten minutes to do the work was sufficient enough of a savings to not order the vertical parts for me.
Quote from: AL on July 11, 2006, 09:09:19 AM
How do the pots hold up compared to standard panel mounted pots?
The ones I used have plastic 6mm shafts. If you look at the internal pic there are four little tabs that wrap the plastic body. That is what holds them together. If you don't provided some stress relief one stomp on them will force them apart. The good news is that the stress relief can be the knob you use. Those knobs I used sit just above the mounting nut of the pot. If you put any serious pressure the knob will hit the nut protecting the pot. So its tough enough. The other thing to be aware of is there is only enough thread height on the pot to just clear the thickness of the Hammond case so getting the nut on is tricky and you won't get very much thread but that hasn't been an issue for me yet.
Andrew
QuoteI usually jump power supply runs before anything else.
Me, too.
I saw this thread earlier, but didn't have much time to chime in. That's a very cool project, and it's impressive that it is on such a small piece of perf. The bar keeps getting elevated around here these days! :icon_cool:
i'm about to start a payback and am wondering...would it be possible to use a spdt (?) switch or jumper to disable the vibrato and allow manual pitch shifting via the speed pot?
Quote from: caress on July 04, 2007, 01:27:45 AM
i'm about to start a payback and am wondering...would it be possible to use a spdt (?) switch or jumper to disable the vibrato and allow manual pitch shifting via the speed pot?
I would sooner disconnect the clock at the 10K resistor and put the pot in through the 10K. You can use the depth pot to make sure you don't go too far.
I will point out that you should set it back to full voltage when you record. This is normally done by the gate being overridden thru it's second input during the record cycle.
Andrew
Quote from: The Tone God on July 04, 2007, 02:37:58 AM
I would sooner disconnect the clock at the 10K resistor and put the pot in through the 10K. You can use the depth pot to make sure you don't go too far.
the 10k between the 4093 and the 2n5088? if so, do you mean to disconnect from the 10k and jumper directly to the emitter of the transistor? then i could use the speed pot for the pitch shifting, yes? ...also, what exactly is too far? ??? is there a danger of damaging the chips? etc...
Quote from: The Tone God on July 04, 2007, 02:37:58 AM
I will point out that you should set it back to full voltage when you record. This is normally done by the gate being overridden thru it's second input during the record cycle.
any issues when recording with the lowered voltage? i'm ok with it sounding crunchy or weird, i just don't want to damage anything....
Quote from: caress on July 04, 2007, 03:26:03 AM
the 10k between the 4093 and the 2n5088? if so, do you mean to disconnect from the 10k and jumper directly to the emitter of the transistor? then i could use the speed pot for the pitch shifting, yes? ...also, what exactly is too far? ??? is there a danger of damaging the chips? etc...
Disconnect the 10K from the clock 4093's output so you still have the 10K going through the 100uF cap to the base of the transistor. The clock will be disconnected and you can insert your own pot.
Quote from: The Tone God on July 04, 2007, 02:37:58 AM
any issues when recording with the lowered voltage? i'm ok with it sounding crunchy or weird, i just don't want to damage anything....
If you go too low the IC may not function at all. I don't think you will damage the IC but the the charge injection method they use for recording starts having issues IIRC.
Andrew
ok just so i'm sure about the manual pitch method...
disconnect where the red line is...then the pitch could be controlled with the depth pot?
(http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j255/btroniq/vibrato.jpg)
alright, i should be done with this tomorrow. all perfed up...i just need to box it and wire it!
Yep. Thats where I would do it. You will still still need to insert your own pot feeding into that 10K resistor. The depth pot will restrict how far the manual control will go but the depth pot in itself will not control the IC vibrato.
Andrew
wouldn't the speed pot work as a manual pitch shift if i left the 4093 connected to the 100uf and the speed pot/1k connected to the 10k but disconnected the two?
like this:
(http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j255/btroniq/vibrato-1.jpg)
i'm trying to leave the pot count low... ::)
Quote from: caress on July 04, 2007, 06:18:08 PM
wouldn't the speed pot work as a manual pitch shift if i left the 4093 connected to the 100uf and the speed pot/1k connected to the 10k but disconnected the two?
No. The speed pot is a part of the clock circuit and won't operate on its own. You are either going to need another pot or a more complex switching schem to make it work.
Andrew
Many thanks, that looks excellent although I understand 2% of the text!
So, is there a verified PCB layout for this project yet? I am kind of intrigued by it, and have been considering getting/using a looper since it would seem to fit my musical personality...
I believe Michael Allen has a layout around here but I know there was one minor error which AFAIK has not been corrected. Otherwise I don't remember it be confirmed yet but someone may have so a search would be in order.
I have received reports of people building it according to the schematic successfully themselves using other methods.
Andrew
A PCB layout would be preferred due to limited time for building stuff these days...
Micheal Allen's layout is the only PCB layout publicly available that I am aware of.
Andrew
OK, thanks!
OK, I have a few more questions:
1. If I wanted 120 seconds of record time, which ISD25xx chip would I need to get?
2. What 5V regulator should I use?
3. I am a little confused on how the record/safe switch is to be wired. Has anyone done a little diagram of how that would be wired to an actual DPDT switch?
4. Is the "loop" switch the same as the "record select" switch on the schematic?
5. Is there any wires that need to be shielded?
I think I might finally give this one a try, if I can figure out these last few questions...
Quote from: Paul Marossy on July 06, 2007, 11:51:32 PM
1. If I wanted 120 seconds of record time, which ISD25xx chip would I need to get?
2. What 5V regulator should I use?
3. I am a little confused on how the record/safe switch is to be wired. Has anyone done a little diagram of how that would be wired to an actual DPDT switch?
4. Is the "loop" switch the same as the "record select" switch on the schematic?
5. Is there any wires that need to be shielded?
all that i can answer at this moment...
1. the ISD25120 for 120sec, ISD2560 for 60sec, etc...
2. i'm using a 78L05 (although i haven't fired up the effect yet ;)). pretty sure those are the standard 5v regs.
3. this has always confused me too...
Your answers to 1 & 2 are the same as what I was thinking.
Also, will this effect hold your recording indefinitely like that Z Vex looper pedal?
Quote from: Paul Marossy on July 06, 2007, 11:51:32 PM
4. Is the "loop" switch the same as the "record select" switch on the schematic?
got this and it's no. the record select switch switches between two different loops that the chip holds.
check this: http://www.geocities.com/thetonegod/payback/payback.html and look for
multiple recordingsi'm pretty sure that the logic is configured to have it always loop. i bet if you disconnected the 4093 from pin 23 on the 25xx you would have a one-shot...?
OK, that makes sense. Now I am confused by the start record switches. It's probably just a semantics game, but I know virtually nothing about digital stuff, so I wouldn't know the difference.
Quote from: Paul Marossy on July 06, 2007, 11:51:32 PM
1. If I wanted 120 seconds of record time, which ISD25xx chip would I need to get?
2. What 5V regulator should I use?
3. I am a little confused on how the record/safe switch is to be wired. Has anyone done a little diagram of how that would be wired to an actual DPDT switch?
4. Is the "loop" switch the same as the "record select" switch on the schematic?
5. Is there any wires that need to be shielded?
1. You would get the ISD25120 but if you read the article regarding 25XX recomendations the bottle line is that to get more time you lose in audio quality. I would not go to the 120 myself. Quite frankly 60-75 seconds is alot of time.
2. A plain old 78L05 will work. I think I used a LDO regulator in mine.
3. The safe switch disables the record switch which involves disconnecting one connection and jumpering another. It looks more complicated then it is. The safe switch is explained quickly in the article.
4. "Record Select" selects the loop being used. The circuit always loops the selected recording. If you saw "Loop" on my pedal it was just because it was shorter to write. :icon_redface:
5. If you are careful in you wire routing then you don't need shielded wire.
Quote from: Paul Marossy on July 07, 2007, 07:30:41 AM
Also, will this effect hold your recording indefinitely like that Z Vex looper pedal?
Well for 100,000 years give or take. That is a function of the IC and not the circuit itself.
Quote from: caress on July 07, 2007, 10:07:17 AM
i'm pretty sure that the logic is configured to have it always loop. i bet if you disconnected the 4093 from pin 23 on the 25xx you would have a one-shot...?
Yes but you have to manually start the record session as well as the playback session. It's toe tapping fun.
Is this a bad time to mention that I have Payback v1.1 on the drawing board ? :icon_twisted:
Andrew
Quote from: The Tone God on July 07, 2007, 04:19:50 PM
Is this a bad time to mention that I have Payback v1.1 on the drawing board ? :icon_twisted:
Andrew
Is this a bad time to say that I finally have the board perfed, and now you go and change it? Damn you Tone God! :icon_twisted: :)
Quote from: pbrommer on July 07, 2007, 06:13:21 PM
Is this a bad time to say that I finally have the board perfed, and now you go and change it? Damn you Tone God! :icon_twisted: :)
Well your still good then but hey it wasn't my choice. It was Winbonds!
Andrew
Thanks for the clarification! :icon_cool:
Oh dang it. Payback v1.2 is on the drawing board too. ;D
Andrew
Hmm... should I wait to see what V1 & V2 are about before going full bore?
Quote from: Paul Marossy on July 08, 2007, 05:21:02 PM
Hmm... should I wait to see what V1 & V2 are about before going full bore?
good question...
i probably finished perfing the day you did, paul ;D
Quote from: Paul Marossy on July 08, 2007, 05:21:02 PM
Hmm... should I wait to see what V1 & V2 are about before going full bore?
If you can get the ISD25xx then I would say stick with v1.0. It is a proven design. I don't know when I will get the new version(s) done and it will probably take sometime before someone else confirms the design.
The reason for the new version(s) is not new features but Winbond has EOL'd the complete 25xx series. You should still be able to get NOS 25xxs for awhile but I don't like having designs based on old parts so as I promised previously I am going to update Payback. I am also hoping to have a "mini" version that should easily fit in a 1590B.
Andrew
Hmm... maybe I will hold off on it then. :icon_confused:
Hi Andrew, how are the new versions coming along? I'm really curious to see them!
Bump? 8)
I'm also waiting on the new version before I start my build. Would you mind letting us know what IC you'll be using for the new ones (sorry if you've already mentioned it and I've missed it) that way I can check if it's available where I live.
Payback v1.1 is coming soon. I hope to have it out in about a week. I still have some things to finish up with the design but I'll give a few of the definitive bits out.
I was originally planning on doing two versions. One that would be v1.0 with an updated IC and a mini version. I tried to make the mini work but gave up and went to work on the update. The IC I wanted to use for replacement has not gone into full production in DIP format yet. The funny thing is the specs of the IC I wanted were not much if any better then the mini's IC. I tried another IC but there were too many issues to make the update work. Before giving up I decided to go back to the mini and it seems I gave up too soon. Payback v1.1 is now a mix of the original and the mini version which I think is better in the end for everyone.
Okay enough blabbing, here some details about Payback v1.1. It is based on the ISD1600B from Winbond. It is a new IC that comes in a 16pin 300mil (narrow) DIP IC. Beats out that huge 28pin 600mil (wide) DIP previous ICs came in. It will save alot of space making that 1590B goal easy now. The IC costs between $5-7 CDN from Digikey so it is much cheaper too. I got the circuit down to a dual opamp as well saving more space. A 4093 NAND gate will still be needed but the logic physically is simpler to wire up including the record and safe switches.
Some features have been lost to the IC change over. You won't be able to get ICs with as long times. Multiple samples are gone too along with the phase switch. I also decided to not boost the output instead opting to make it unity so the final output pot is gone. As of now the main schematic version will not have vibrato but I will have information on how to add it if you wish.
Time to get back to work on it right now. Yippie.
Andrew
Thanks for the update Andrew! It looks really good! It will definately be on my todo list once it is out.
Quote from: The Tone God on June 30, 2006, 04:42:51 PM
The Tone God's Domain (http://geocities.com/thetonegod)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/payback_top.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/payback_inside.jpg)
reminds me alot of the lofi loop junky
this pedal could be of great use to me
Quote from: ambulancevoice on October 01, 2007, 01:57:05 AM
reminds me alot of the lofi loop junky
Well that was kind of the idea when Mr. Vex challenged me to fit the design into a 1590B. Payback v1.1 should be much easier to fit into a 1590B so I dare him to make that challenge again. ;)
Andrew
that sounds like him...
how is the v.1.1 coming?
It was more of a rhetorical challenge then a direct one. I don't work often with 1590Bs and I had a stash of small pots that I wasn't using so what the hey.
I took a day off from working on Payback v1.1 to get a FX-X entry done. The circuit seems to be be tweaked properly but I have some testing to do. I can move forward with the article and start doing the images. Its coming.
Andrew
I stumbled into this thread today. This is exactly THE pedal I need in my band. Instead of me repeating one riff like 50 times I can use this pedal.
It would be sweet to have this built.
Is the schematic on your geocities website for the V1.1 finished? Because if so, we can all start making a PCB for this :D
Quote from: Valoosj on November 03, 2007, 08:23:15 AM
Is the schematic on your geocities website for the V1.1 finished? Because if so, we can all start making a PCB for this :D
The
Payback v1.1 schematic is finished. It has not been verified by anyone though. There is a thread about v1.1 here:
http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=61722.0
Andrew
which of the 2 versions is the best? I just need a nice loop, 20 seconds would be super. I don't need any vibrato and stuff. volume and record controls are enough.
As soon as I can I will post a vero layout, or if I get better a pcb
Its hard to say which is best. v1.0 is confirmed but the circuit is more complex and you have to find the IC which went out of production recently. You can still find the IC at some places...for now. v1.0 also can have more time if you want.
v1.1 is easier to build, cheaper, smaller, and uses current parts but comes in shorter times and it is as of this time unconfirmed. 20 secs is very do able with either.
Andrew
Ok Thanks Andrew. I'll stick with version 1.1
but I haven't found the IC for this one either in Europe :-\
Quote from: Valoosj on November 03, 2007, 07:41:40 PM
but I haven't found the IC for this one either in Europe :-\
The ISB1600B family is fairly new so I wouldn't be surprised that most vendors are not carrying them yet. I got mine from Digikey.
Andrew
so, which one do I need?
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Cat=2556441;keywords=ISD1600
I clicked on 20 sec, SOIC (or should this be DIP?) and then I get to a new screen where they offer 6 possibilities :icon_confused:
you probably want the DIP. that's the standard size stompboxers use.
DIP - Dual Inline Package - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_in-line_package
SOIC - Small-Outline Integrated Circuit - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small-Outline_Integrated_Circuit
Is there a layout for Payback 1.1?
ok, so this is the one I should, and can get?
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail?name=ISD1620BPY-ND
the others only come in packages of 120 if I understood correctly.
Quote from: soggybag on November 04, 2007, 01:14:40 PM
Is there a layout for Payback 1.1?
I'm not aware of one yet.
Quote from: Valoosj on November 04, 2007, 02:11:56 PM
ok, so this is the one I should, and can get?
Looks like they are out till near the end of the month. There is a section in the v1.1 article that discusses the different versions. There are some charts in the article to help you out as well. You could grab another length version and change the clock speed to get your desired time but at the loss of quality. In the article I was trying to emulate the old ISD1420 in time and quality which ended up being a ISD1616B with a 100K oscillator resistor.
So you can change to another IC length or wait until their shipment comes in. You could also change ICs later as all the IC behave the same.
Andrew
But if I get the ISD1620B in stead of the ISD1616B, won't I be able to have a longer recording at the same quality?
As I can read in your article, I would have 25sec at 6.4KHz. with the ISD1616B I would only have 20 seconds at 6.4 KHz.
(Does the KHz refer to the quality of the record?)
Forgive me this third degree, but I am new at this.
Digi-Key Part Number Minimum Quantity Unit Price
ISD1616BPIY-ND ISD1616BPIY 120 4.37500
ISD1616BPY-ND ISD1616BPY 1 5.34000
ISD1616BPY01-ND ISD1616BPY01 120 3.81500
ISD1616BPYI-ND ISD1616BPYI 120
The second IC on the list I can buy per 1. The others only per 120. So that narrows the choice a bit
Quote from: Valoosj on November 05, 2007, 07:23:00 AM
But if I get the ISD1620B in stead of the ISD1616B, won't I be able to have a longer recording at the same quality?
As I can read in your article, I would have 25sec at 6.4KHz. with the ISD1616B I would only have 20 seconds at 6.4 KHz.
(Does the KHz refer to the quality of the record?)
Correct.To get the longer time from the shorter ICs you will have to drop the sampling rate which is what the frequency rating is referring to.
I just checked and all the other DIP versions are availible in singles.
http://www.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail?name=ISD1610BPY-ND
http://www.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail?name=ISD1612BPY-ND
http://www.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail?name=ISD1616BPY-ND
Andrew
So, If I want to get the longest delay time at 6.4KHz, then I should get the 1620.
Is 6.4KHz the best quality, or intermediate? You highlighted this in the scheme with the IC's, just wondering why :)
Quote from: Valoosj on November 05, 2007, 06:52:06 PM
So, If I want to get the longest delay time at 6.4KHz, then I should get the 1620.
Yes. The only difference between the ICs is how much memory they put in. The rate sets how fast the IC goes through that memory so less memory means less time. You can slow down the clock so it doesn't go through the memory as fast hence longer time but at a lower quality since the clock is not sampling as often due to the slower clock.
Quote from: Valoosj on November 05, 2007, 06:52:06 PM
Is 6.4KHz the best quality, or intermediate? You highlighted this in the scheme with the IC's, just wondering why :)
Oh no. You can get much better but then you run through the memory faster thus less time. The specs go up to 12khz but I would bet you can go even higher. All you need to adjust is the clock resistor.
The reason I highlighted that specific setup (ISD1616B with 100K) is because that is what the old ISD1420 performed at. Many people try to capture that old IC's characteristics because of it's "lo-fi"-ness. If you are looking for quality crank the rate up and go with a bigger IC.
Also think about how often you may end up using 20 seconds. I never found myself using that much but thats me.
Andrew
Ok, then I'll get the biggest IC, being the 1620.
The clock resistor, that's the record pot right?
I know I will not be using the 20 seconds that often, but I will use it from time to time.
So when I turn back the clock resistor (record?) then I have a high quality, but short record, which is good. and I can get really longs recordings that still sound good as well.
This might be useful to add a second guitar line underneath a solo or something.
Tomorrow I'll read through the article, now I just don't have the time.
And as soon as possible me and Ponq are going to work on a pcb layout
Quote from: Valoosj on November 06, 2007, 09:45:24 AM
The clock resistor, that's the record pot right?
No. It is the Rosc resistor (R2 on schematic stated as 100K) off of pin 14 on the ISD1600B. You can put a pot on this pin to adjust it if you wish. Adjusting the value will change the pitch of the current recording which is why I use it for the vibrato function.
Andrew
ah ok. Thanks for the replies. I'll stop asking until I read through the article
On the 4093, pin 14 goes to power? Is there a cap to ground too? just to filter the power supply or what? And then pin 7 to ground right?
Just finished a layout for version 1.1 that's 2.1 x 1.6 inches. It's pretty small, i just have to finish drawing up the layout and then i'll post it.
Quote from: Michael Allen on November 07, 2007, 01:00:22 AM
On the 4093, pin 14 goes to power? Is there a cap to ground too? just to filter the power supply or what? And then pin 7 to ground right?
Yes pin 14 of the 4093 goes to the 5v supply. The cap goes from pin 14 of the 4039 to pin 7 which is ground of the 4093. The cap should be as physically close to the 4093 as possible. It is a decoupling capacitor.
Andrew
The schem shows two sets of .1 and 10uF caps off of ISD pin 10. One sets grounds off pin 5 of 4093 and the other off of pin 9 of ISD. Is this necessary to connect them to ground with the respective pins or just how it appears on the schem?
Here it is, layout for Payback 1.1. 54mm x 41mm.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v368/soma_hero/payback1_1_pcb.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v368/soma_hero/payback1_1copy.jpg)
There is a square pad by the 1N4148 diode, jumper it to the other square pad on pin 8 of the TL072. The circle pad on the other end of the 1N4148 goes to the bypass switch as per schematic. Also, I couldn't remember how to ground the unused portion of the CD4093 but it should be easy to do. I went through it so it should all be correct, but it has not been confirmed.
damn you're fast. :o
once this is confirmed, and the grounding and whatever else might not be fully there, I'm etching!
yeah just tie pin 12 and 13 on the CD4093 together to ground. you can add it in in paint or just draw it on the copper with a sharpie.
maybe I'm seeing this wrong, but did you not forget about pin 15?
Good call, i had a pad on there to jumper pin 15 to the 5V rail but I took it off by mistake. I''ll fix it soon.
no problem ;)
Only thing left that I don't understand is how to wire all the pots and switches. Each pot only has one lug attached to your pcb :s
Could you possibly add the offboard wiring? I know how to do it with other effects, but this one does things a bit different as I read in the schematic
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v368/soma_hero/payback_wiring.jpg)
Thanks, that makes it a lot clearer, but weren't there 2 switches? ???
one for recording, and one to start the playback? and the safe switch, is a 1pdt nog enough? I don't see the reason why to use a 2 pdt
ok, I looked at the schematic, and tried to help out a bit :)
This should be correct
(http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i45/Valoosj/payback_wiringadded.jpg)
the only thing that is not clear to me is how the 2 leds funtion. referring to the article where it said something about blinking when recording etc. that part was not too clear to me
Quote from: Valoosj on November 11, 2007, 08:57:54 AM
the only thing that is not clear to me is how the 2 leds funtion. referring to the article where it said something about blinking when recording etc. that part was not too clear to me
I guess I didn't make the LED situation very clear. The LED off the speaker output gate (D2) is being used to limit the signal going into the filter network. It is not meant to be visible to the user, it is just the diode type I choose happens to give off light.
The LED indicator (D1) is controlled by the ISD and will blink the LED during playback automatically without any work on the builder's part.
Andrew
would it not be easier with 2 leds? one that is on or off when play button is pressed. and the other that blinks during recording, and when using the playback that it blinks once when the recorded session repeats. kinda like the lofi loop junky.
I would like to build this with 2 buttons, like version 1.0 , and I was thinking it would have 2 leds. If you have one led, that comes from the ISD, doesn't it always blink when not recording? since the playback is controlled with another switch.
Is that possible?
(and is my offboard wiring from my previous post right?)
I haven't gone through the whole board to be sure everything is correct. What I am pointing out is that D2 was never meant to be external or visible for the user. It does not give any useful information to the user that is not given by the LED indicator. It is just a diode on the board so the PCB should be corrected by removing the external D2 access and just treating the LED like a normal diode.
In v1.0 the play/rec LED indicator was just a coincident that it operated similar to the Lo-Fi Loop Junky. In v1.1 the LED indicator operation off the ISD is determined by the ISD and not the external logic. It is fixed and cannot be changed. The operation of the LED is off when powered down, on solid when recording, and blinking when playing back. To be honest I think this is better the the v1.0 setup as you would only know if playback is happening when you saw that very quick blip at the end. With this setup you know when it is playing back when the LED is blinking.
If you want a different operation you will need some more logic. Just thinking off the top of my head if you are not using the spare gate to disable the vibrato during playback you could reuse it for a v1.0 style LED indicator attaching the one input of the gate off the PLAYL input and the other input off of the record switch. Thats just a guess though.
Andrew
too bad that I don't know much about it :s
Maybe I should just make the play switch a 3pdt instead of a 2pdt, and add a led there. that way that will be solid, and one blinking when playing back.
The only thing that would make it better then is when the blink would only be there when the record starts over
The 3PDT switch is a valid option. If you want a "blink at the end of playback" LED you could tap a LED off the PLAYL input.
Andrew
but then I would have 3 leds?
one that goes to port 16, one with the 3pdt, and another at the playl port?
Yeah. Thats why I thought reusing the vibrato gate was a valid option. I have to think about this one.
Andrew
thanks :)
I just want the 2 leds, the rest of this whole version 1.1 is all good
ok, almost ready to order all of this stuff. Just one question, are the pots lin or log? or reverse log?
and I have a parts list, can you check this please?
Resistors
7x 1K
2x 33K
9x 100K
2x 1M
Elco
6x 1uF
3x 10uF
Capacitor
8x 0,1uF
Pots
2x 100K
1x 10K
1N4148
1 LED (which one should I get? this is the one that you don't see on the outside)
Thanks in advance
I am checking the pcb that Michael Allen made, and I just noticed something. Pins 12 and 13 of the 4093 are grounded, while this is not in the schematic. what about pin 11? why is this left blank? Pin 3 of the ISD has the same story, but in the schematic it is clear, because there is a cross at the end of it's line connected to that pin. Have I missed something while reading through the article?
I heard that I should make the volume pot log, and the others lin, is this correct?
When using CMOS chips, you need to ground the inputs of unused opamps for noise control, and leave the output unconnected. That is why the unused amp in the CD4093 has the inputs grounded and the output unconnected. It's not written, it's just understood when you use CMOS chips. Just another general circuit tidbit you pickup...
Hope you have luck building this one, I can't seem to find the IC yet. I'll give this layout a go when I get it.
I posted your layout on another forum, and I had some comments on it.
The IC's are available through digikey
comments: put a 7805 to create the 5v from 9v
move C17 closer to pen 14 from 4093 as it was specified by Andrew
I tried to go through the entire thing, but I'm still to green to find my way through it all
The pots for record and playback can be log. I presume the third pot is tone which could be linear. The LED can be any type. I tried out more the a dozen different types of LEDs of various colours, sizes, and brightness and all worked. I would just order another one of what you are already using.
Andrew
If I wanted to add vibrato, would I use gates 11,12 and 13 of the 4093?
(http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i45/Valoosj/payback_vib.jpg)
I would like to add this possibility, but I don't understand where the Clock goes to on this picture. What exactly is it? It has the same sign as the in and output.
As far as the tranny and R1 are concerned, which type and value should these be?
Quote from: Valoosj on November 25, 2007, 08:50:03 AM
If I wanted to add vibrato, would I use gates 11,12 and 13 of the 4093?
The block you have posted is the piece that would disables vibrato during a recording and enables the vibrato during playback. You don't want to have vibrato on during recording as your recording would have vibrato as well as the playback.
Quote from: Valoosj on November 25, 2007, 08:50:03 AM
I would like to add this possibility, but I don't understand where the Clock goes to on this picture. What exactly is it? It has the same sign as the in and output.
If it has the same sign as an input or output then it must be an input or output. Quoting from the article:
QuoteConnecting a clock source to the Rosc input altering the voltage will change the clock speed and pitch of the playback. You can use a clock source of your choice and set it to you tastes.
This means that you have have to provide your own clock source.
Payback v1.0 had an on board clock source but some people didn't like it and it made it hard for various mods. With
Payback v1.1 I removed the clock source and gave people the option to use whatever clock they wanted as well as the interface for other mods.
Quote from: Valoosj on November 25, 2007, 08:50:03 AM
As far as the tranny and R1 are concerned, which type and value should these be?
R1 will depend on the clock source you choose. The transistor can be just about any NPN you have lying around. Type will generally not matter.
Andrew
Quote from: The Tone God on November 25, 2007, 02:12:24 PM
Quote from: Valoosj on November 25, 2007, 08:50:03 AM
If I wanted to add vibrato, would I use gates 11,12 and 13 of the 4093?
The block you have posted is the piece that would disables vibrato during a recording and enables the vibrato during playback. You don't want to have vibrato on during recording as your recording would have vibrato as well as the playback.
Quote from: Valoosj on November 25, 2007, 08:50:03 AM
I would like to add this possibility, but I don't understand where the Clock goes to on this picture. What exactly is it? It has the same sign as the in and output.
If it has the same sign as an input or output then it must be an input or output. Quoting from the article:
QuoteConnecting a clock source to the Rosc input altering the voltage will change the clock speed and pitch of the playback. You can use a clock source of your choice and set it to you tastes.
This means that you have have to provide your own clock source. Payback v1.0 had an on board clock source but some people didn't like it and it made it hard for various mods. With Payback v1.1 I removed the clock source and gave people the option to use whatever clock they wanted as well as the interface for other mods.
Quote from: Valoosj on November 25, 2007, 08:50:03 AM
As far as the tranny and R1 are concerned, which type and value should these be?
R1 will depend on the clock source you choose. The transistor can be just about any NPN you have lying around. Type will generally not matter.
Andrew
The vibrato should be as you describe it. But the ports I need to use for it, are they 11, 12 and 13 of the 4093? In the bloc I posted it says 1, 2 and 3, but those are used already. OR should the entire schematic be adapted when adding vibrato?
What do you mean with that clock thing? Should I just search on clock? I have no idea on what you mean by this, exept for those things one would use to tell the time ;D
Quote from: Valoosj on November 25, 2007, 02:21:12 PM
The vibrato should be as you describe it. But the ports I need to use for it, are they 11, 12 and 13 of the 4093? In the bloc I posted it says 1, 2 and 3, but those are used already. OR should the entire schematic be adapted when adding vibrato?
If 11, 12, 13 are what you have leftover then yes use them.
Quote from: Valoosj on November 25, 2007, 02:21:12 PM
What do you mean with that clock thing? Should I just search on clock? I have no idea on what you mean by this, exept for those things one would use to tell the time ;D
Search around for terms like "LFO" and modulation type effects then rip the LFO section out of the circuit. I think for testing I used the LFO out of the Bullitt circuit I have at the site. Fairly simple, quiet, and provides a decent sine wave for smooth vibrato.
Andrew
Will the IC ISD1020AP from smallbear work on the Payback and the Payback 1.1 ??
Quote from: solarplexus on November 27, 2007, 01:21:36 AM
Will the IC ISD1020AP from smallbear work on the Payback and the Payback 1.1 ??
No.
Payback v1.0 uses the ISD25xx and
Payback v1.1 uses the ISD1600B. The ISD1020 that Smallbear sells is intended for the Mobius Trip Looper found at GGG.
Andrew
Is there a place I can buy either one of them that don't have minimum $$ orders and ship to Canada?
Ask Valoosj, he ordered some chips (for me too ;) ).
Quote from: solarplexus on November 27, 2007, 01:01:27 PM
Is there a place I can buy either one of them that don't have minimum $$ orders and ship to Canada?
Digikey. It cost me (and Auke) 60 euro in total for 6 chips.
Is there any substitute for the CD4093 ?
Perhaps the CD4011?
Quote from: DWBH on November 27, 2007, 03:44:22 PM
Perhaps the CD4011?
Could anybody confirm this?? plz! ;)
Thanks!
yep.
Helllo , Mickael can you confirm your payback pcb 1.0
is verified and ok
thank you.
There is no CD4011 at smallbear... is there another subsitute available at SB ?
Auke is currently debugging this one. he has breadborded it. Let's hope he fixes it soon :)
Well, the CD4049 doens't trigger the looping yet. And the played-back sound is very distorted. But, it is playing back if I trigger playback manually.
I don't know if the circuit will work with anything else other then the 4093. I didn't test it with any other gates. The 4049 is an inverter. The 4093 is a schemitt trigger NAND gate so the logic as given in the schematic will not work with a 4049 inverter.
Andrew
Quote from: Auke Haarsma on November 30, 2007, 04:00:06 PM
Well, the CD4049 doens't trigger the looping yet. And the played-back sound is very distorted. But, it is playing back if I trigger playback manually.
CD4049? I sent you a CD 4093 . Or I should have. my ICs are 4093
Yeah sorry, it's a 4093. Typo on my side. :icon_redface: I blame it on the beer! ::) ::)
nothing like a good binge!
I do hope you're drinking some belgian beer?
Quote from: Mich P on November 29, 2007, 03:40:51 AM
Helllo , Mickael can you confirm your payback pcb 1.0
is verified and ok
thank you.
No, I can't confirm any of them actually. I haven't tried to build this pedal with one of my layouts yet. But I've checked over them and so have others and I think they should be good. Take a schematic and trace over the layout for yourself though to see if you pick up on anything.
Quote from: Auke Haarsma on November 30, 2007, 05:49:54 PM
Yeah sorry, it's a 4093. Typo on my side. :icon_redface: I blame it on the beer! ::) ::)
Are you running the logic off of 9v or 5v ?
Andrew
No, I can't confirm any of them actually. I haven't tried to build this pedal with one of my layouts yet. But I've checked over them and so have others and I think they should be good. Take a schematic and trace over the layout for yourself though to see if you pick up on anything.
Thank to answer michael
Mich P.
Quote from: The Tone God on December 01, 2007, 02:21:52 PM
Are you running the logic off of 9v or 5v ?
I'm running it off of 5V (as per the schematic. 5V to pin 14.
I breadboarded it, so there's no footswitching involved. I just manually rewire it. To record I ground Pin 2 of the ISD. To stop recording I break the connection with ground.
If I manually ground Pin 3 of the ISD I can start playback. It seems however, that pin 4 of the ISD and CD4093 do not trigger eachother.
I'm not 100% sure if I understand SW3 on the schematic. What's the line starting between P2 and B2 (sw3)? With the switch wired like that input will always go into the TL072, right? (I didn't put it like this on my breadboard btw. I let the input via B2 go to either A1 or C3, and do the same with B5 going to either A4 or C6).
Any voltages I can measure to help verify my breadboard? (+5V and +9V are stable and ok).
I happen to have a pcb layout I made for the v1.1 circuit. minus the vibrato....
I've been a little hesitant to post it though, until I have verified it for myself. I plan on putting it together in a week or so. I have everything excepting the ISD chip. Digikey has the 10 and 12 second versions, but not the 20 second version. I'd love to get my hands on the longer one, but it looks like I'll have to test it out with the shorter one. :-\
I have to thank Mr. John Lyons for making beautiful PCB's for me!!!! Can't wait to start.
If there is any interest, I'll post my layout, even though it's a bit sloppy(i.e. too many jumpers for my usual taste), and though it might be a bit big(looks bigger than Mike Allen's), I think I can wedge the thing in a 125b, and would definitely fit a BB sized box with lots of room.
-morgan
Please post! We can have a look and help you verify the pcb!
Quote from: Auke Haarsma on December 04, 2007, 03:29:44 AM
Please post! We can have a look and help you verify the pcb!
very well, here it is!
(http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y130/idiot5avant/payback_v11.gif)
notes:
-->r9 isolates 5v ground from 9v ground (i had the regulator use 5v ground, don't know if isolation is even needed)
-->voltage regulator is 78L05(to-92 package)
-->c13/c19 filters on the 9v rail
-->c12 filters on the 5v rail, I haven't yet determined if I need an Electro there for more filtering like the 9v side.
This one was my first time using Bancika's DIY Layout software, big thanks to him. It is a neat little program, but I think I like my other PCB making software better(more compact layouts possible).
Thanks to Mr. Lyons as mentioned before, he made me a few really nice PCB's
And of course Thanks to the Tone God! everytime I find myself fiddling with ideas, I look at his site and see that he's beaten me to it, and done it better....!
Quote from: idiot savant on December 04, 2007, 04:48:12 AM
-->r9 isolates 5v ground from 9v ground (i had the regulator use 5v ground, don't know if isolation is even needed)
Thanks for sharing! I'm using common ground all the way. But then again, my breadboarded version is not working yet. Could you explain a bit more why seperating 5v ground grom 9v ground makes sense? (I though the regulator needed a connection to ground -9v ground- to do its regulating work, am I mistaken here? Is ground
required by the regulator, or is it
created by the regulator?)
Quote from: idiot savant on December 04, 2007, 04:48:12 AM
Quote from: Auke Haarsma on December 04, 2007, 03:29:44 AM
Please post! We can have a look and help you verify the pcb!
very well, here it is!
(http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y130/idiot5avant/payback_v11.gif)
notes:
-->r9 isolates 5v ground from 9v ground (i had the regulator use 5v ground, don't know if isolation is even needed)
-->voltage regulator is 78L05(to-92 package)
-->c13/c19 filters on the 9v rail
-->c12 filters on the 5v rail, I haven't yet determined if I need an Electro there for more filtering like the 9v side.
This one was my first time using Bancika's DIY Layout software, big thanks to him. It is a neat little program, but I think I like my other PCB making software better(more compact layouts possible).
Thanks to Mr. Lyons as mentioned before, he made me a few really nice PCB's
And of course Thanks to the Tone God! everytime I find myself fiddling with ideas, I look at his site and see that he's beaten me to it, and done it better....!
You seem to have a lot more resistors and capacitors than on the original schematic. Are these the ones you added comment about? I like your schematic, but it's a bit too big for my taste.I'll just have to make my own pcb or use michael allen's if Auke gets it to work
Quote from: Auke Haarsma on December 03, 2007, 04:17:28 PM
Quote from: The Tone God on December 01, 2007, 02:21:52 PM
Are you running the logic off of 9v or 5v ?
I'm running it off of 5V (as per the schematic. 5V to pin 14.
I breadboarded it, so there's no footswitching involved. I just manually rewire it. To record I ground Pin 2 of the ISD. To stop recording I break the connection with ground.
If I manually ground Pin 3 of the ISD I can start playback. It seems however, that pin 4 of the ISD and CD4093 do not trigger eachother.
I'm not 100% sure if I understand SW3 on the schematic. What's the line starting between P2 and B2 (sw3)? With the switch wired like that input will always go into the TL072, right? (I didn't put it like this on my breadboard btw. I let the input via B2 go to either A1 or C3, and do the same with B5 going to either A4 or C6).
Any voltages I can measure to help verify my breadboard? (+5V and +9V are stable and ok).
Quote from: Auke Haarsma on December 04, 2007, 04:57:26 AM
Quote from: idiot savant on December 04, 2007, 04:48:12 AM
-->r9 isolates 5v ground from 9v ground (i had the regulator use 5v ground, don't know if isolation is even needed)
Thanks for sharing! I'm using common ground all the way. But then again, my breadboarded version is not working yet. Could you explain a bit more why seperating 5v ground grom 9v ground makes sense? (I though the regulator needed a connection to ground -9v ground- to do its regulating work, am I mistaken here? Is ground required by the regulator, or is it created by the regulator?)
Anyone?
I suspect the idea in separating 5v from 9v ground is to make sure you don't end up with ground loops to introduce noise. They all connect together at one point so everything including the regulator are grounded together, but physically isolated except for the point they meet.
Thanks, that excludes the grounding from being the cause of why my breadboarded Payback doesn't work yet.
Could you explain the working of SW3 too?
Quote from: Auke Haarsma on December 06, 2007, 03:03:10 AM
Could you explain the working of SW3 too?
It is the effect bypass switch which operates just like most effect bypass switch with the only difference being that it also starts and stops the playback. You have to be careful how you wire the run to the diode. It can be sensitive and sometimes force the playback to halt. For testing you might even want to just use a pull up resistor, say 100K, and control it separately from the bypass switch.
Andrew
Thank you Andrew!
so, is it working yet you lazy bum ;)
I was awaiting the arrival of your mail, but nothing came in today. Nor did my other packages come in
Nope... I don't have time untill (if lucky) sunday night, or next week. Sinterklaas with parents-in-law ... I'll keep you posted if I make progress.
you still believe in him? ;D
As long as he brings me presents and a good time... yup! :icon_mrgreen:
Some people just get a girlfriend for that ;) Or does Saint Nikolaas pleasure you that way as well? (Hans Teeuwen gezien als de Sint :D)
haha, that's with Jiskefet :icon_mrgreen: But yeah, I have a really nice girlfriend ;)
Ok, that was OT, apologies :icon_cool:
On topic: I didn't have time to do further testing, but I wonder if other people can report on the sound quality of the loop? I was quite disappointed in the quality, it was very distorted. I didn't expect a clean signal, but more something a long the lines of the lo-fi-loop junky. Anyone have a sample recording of payback 1.1?
If I'm lucky then the paper in my letterbox was for the stuff I ordered from musikding. I will breadbord the payback asap.
I just hope you @#$%ed up somewhere :p it would be dissapointing if the payback 1.1 is somewhat distorted
Quote from: Auke Haarsma on December 07, 2007, 10:06:42 AM
haha, that's with Jiskefet :icon_mrgreen: But yeah, I have a really nice girlfriend ;)
Ok, that was OT, apologies :icon_cool:
Yes, that was a bit disturbing..
I also have the IC's for the payback lying around for ages.. I have a question about the ISD (not having read up on the payback for a long time so I'm sorry if it's obvious) can it record and playback at the same time? that would make a nice delay challenge.
Quote from: ~arph on December 07, 2007, 11:27:04 AM
I have a question about the ISD (not having read up on the payback for a long time so I'm sorry if it's obvious) can it record and playback at the same time? that would make a nice delay challenge.
No it cannot playback and record at the same time. Of course the next idea will be use two ISDs and sequence them to alternate record and playback. Done that. Thats why I had the two ISDs that I used in last months FX-X. It doesn't work that well. Too much delay between switching from playback and record.
Andrew
anyone has large-size v1.0 schematic image? tonegod's one (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/payback/payback.jpg) is too small for me I can't read values... or where can I get ISD1600? digikey looks doesn't have stocks, parts shop around me stocks only ISD1700 series.
Quote from: junkwork on December 08, 2007, 02:24:26 AM
anyone has large-size v1.0 schematic image? tonegod's one (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/payback/payback.jpg) is too small for me I can't read values...
I can make a large version availible at the site later for you.
Quote from: junkwork on December 08, 2007, 02:24:26 AM
where can I get ISD1600? digikey looks doesn't have stocks, parts shop around me stocks only ISD1700 series.
Digikey is carrying the 10 and 12 second versions right now.
Something strange is happening. The 16 and 20 second versions are now listed "Obsolete" which general means Digikey is not going to carry that model anymore. I don't know what is happening. There is nothing on Winbond's site about EOLing. It could be that either Digikey has decided to not carry them, a newer version is going to replace it, or Winbond has discontinuing them without notice on the site.
I'll keep an eye out to see what is happening.
Andrew
seems like I bought them just in time.
Andrew, when you made the schematic for v1.1 , did you breadboard it?
Or do you have the skills and knowledge to come up with this kind of plan without having to make the pedal?
If you made it, do you happen to have pics or anything? Could be helpful for Auke
Quote from: Valoosj on December 09, 2007, 06:28:15 AM
Andrew, when you made the schematic for v1.1 , did you breadboard it?
Or do you have the skills and knowledge to come up with this kind of plan without having to make the pedal?
If you made it, do you happen to have pics or anything? Could be helpful for Auke
Yes I breadboarded the design. I don't put anything up that I haven't built and tested. I also don't have any pics as I have since gutted the build. I'll see if I can rebuild it in a few days and post some pics to help out.
Andrew
Great
Thanks in advance
Quote from: The Tone God on December 08, 2007, 08:36:37 PM
Quote from: junkwork on December 08, 2007, 02:24:26 AM
anyone has large-size v1.0 schematic image? tonegod's one (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/payback/payback.jpg) is too small for me I can't read values...
I can make a large version availible at the site later for you.
well was it done? I'll wait, thank you.
Quote from: The Tone God on December 09, 2007, 02:20:54 PM
Quote from: Valoosj on December 09, 2007, 06:28:15 AM
Andrew, when you made the schematic for v1.1 , did you breadboard it?
Or do you have the skills and knowledge to come up with this kind of plan without having to make the pedal?
If you made it, do you happen to have pics or anything? Could be helpful for Auke
Yes I breadboarded the design. I don't put anything up that I haven't built and tested. I also don't have any pics as I have since gutted the build. I'll see if I can rebuild it in a few days and post some pics to help out.
Andrew
Any chance you found the time to breadboard it?
I've made a soundclip of the quality I get when I have it on the breadboard. Can anyone confirm this is the actual soundquality?
You can hear the clip here:
http://profile.ultimate-guitar.com/toomuchgear/music/
The 'clean' parts are a clean guitar looped via my DD20. The 'not-so-clean' parts are looped by the Payback.
Isn't your recording volume too high? I read something about it with the lo fi loop junky...
I don't think so. I have this level of distortion with the rec level high and with the level low. The difference in volume in the clip is caused by me adjusting the playbacklevel-pot.
Well, I rechecked after your comment. It appears the playback level and the recording level interact. If I record with playback level at max and recording level at 'normal' I get a lot of clipping. If I lower the playback level while recording I get a cleaner sound.
However, it doesn't get much cleaner than the first sample of the clip. Then again, it's a lofi-looper.
And it doesn't loop btw, just one playback and then it stops.
then you must be doing something wrong :) which is good, since then there is room for improvement.
yeah, could very well be the case. I can trigger playback by touching ground anywhere with my hand. The logic seems very sensitive. I guess it works as designed when boxed.
Do you keep it grounded? If not that might be why it only plays back once
Ok, I had a go at making a pcb. Could somebody help me find any errors?
(http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i45/Valoosj/Paybackwires.gif)
(http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i45/Valoosj/Payback.gif)
Just say which component is wrong, and how it should be, I still have the file in layout creator.
Just an update. I noticed that Digikey is not stocking any of the ISD1600Bs now. Trouble is brewing.
Andrew
Indeed. I received an email from them one week after I got my ICs in. But I think they can be found at other places.
Schematic has been checked by Auke Haarsma, I edited according to his instruction, I think this should be it now.
(http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i45/Valoosj/Payback-1.gif)
CRAP! Gate 10 of the ISD needs to get his 5V. I forgot this on the schematic. Errors keep popping up!
Any body else that spots something?
(http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i45/Valoosj/Paybackv11.gif)
Last time (I hope). Now it should be correct.
I just finished soldering, something is wrong. I hook up the power to the pedal, the led goes on, and after 20 seconds it goes out. Pushing the record/play button doesn't change the status of the led.
Tonegod, are you still there? I sent you some PMs, with the layout and a vid of what is going wrong. Apparently it's a grounding problem of some kind, but I can't find out what went wrong. I did everything I normally do.
appologies for the necro-bump. I've been having trouble with this build I've partially breadboarded. I'm doing v1.1.
http://www.geocities.com/thetonegod/payback_v11/payback_v11.html
I haven't done any of the opamp buffer parts. for now, I'm just doing the recording and looping logic. started with the recorder, and by grounding pin 2, I succeeded in making it record a short clip, and grounding pin 2 to play it back! with that part of the circuit working, I put it aside and did the 4093 logic. unfortunatelly when I hooked it up, it doesn't work anymore. the record led blinks rapidly for half a second (shorter duration and more rapidly than normal record blinkage) and the led around the 14093 stays on at all times when I have power hooked on.
I couldn't find a place in town that had 4093's so I got 14093's instead, which as far as I can tell are the same thing. is this a problem? you should consider me a total noob at logic switching with these types of components.
I noticed the tone god's post about mislabeled pins
http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=65575.0
but I'm really confused. :-[
I've found datasheets for both the 4093 and 14093 and neither of them are the same pinouts, and as far as I can tell neither of them would "support" tone god's advice to switch pins 8 and 10, and 4 and 6. if I did either of these, it seems like the layout diagram would change "logic" in the v1.1 circuit.
http://ece-www.colorado.edu/~ecen4618/cd4093b.gif
http://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/11974/ONSEMI/MC14093.html
what should I assume to be true? the pin number swap, or the little pictures representing each of the four triggers, regardless of the pinout?
The diagram symbols are correct. Its the pin numbers on the symbols that were messed up. So match the symbols to you datasheet and adjust from there.
Andrew
alright, thanks!
I matched the symbols and it know works. thank you muchly!
Does your payback work? I spent about a year trying to get it to work, but it never fully did.
Where can I get this ISD? would love to build this :(
I have six for sale. They come with three CD4093 for free. But it's quite an expensive IC.
Really alot of making Payback v1.1 work is tweaking the control logic but it is a collection of various hacks to make a limited IC do our bidding. I have a SOIC version I was going to test with to make sure the values I choose were wide enough to work with most ICs.
Payback v2.0 is coming out pretty good now. I am becoming quite pleased with it. It should make everyone's life much easier when it comes to building a Payback.
Andrew
what isd chip will payback 2.0 use?
Quote from: chilecocula on February 18, 2009, 04:49:01 PM
what isd chip will payback 2.0 use?
17xx series. It will work with any length version.
Andrew
Hey Andrew, would working a compander in this thing make sense? (Optimize input level, minimize noise, y'know...)
Quote from: Ben N on February 18, 2009, 05:13:05 PM
Hey Andrew, would working a compander in this thing make sense? (Optimize input level, minimize noise, y'know...)
I actually was thinking about that awhile back. Most of these ICs have 3-5v range so when driving them hard you get distortion. Granted you can bring down the input level but then you have to boost the output which also means boosting the output hiss which there is still a fair amount of at the high resolution settings. I thought a compander would be an interesting approach to attempt to solve this. Basically treating the recorder like a delay.
I will give it a try later. I don't have any compander ICs handy and I'm busy chasing down a couple of minor bugs with the current design.
Andrew
many chips are still available at digikey, but they're the surfacemount kind. you can find adapters on ebay for pretty cheap, or if you're masochistic like me you can make your own
(http://nearworlds.org/stuff/soic_dip.jpg)
Quote from: The Tone God on February 18, 2009, 05:08:38 PM
Quote from: chilecocula on February 18, 2009, 04:49:01 PM
what isd chip will payback 2.0 use?
17xx series. It will work with any length version.
Andrew
If you don't mind me asking, how far off is that? Both of these projects sound really amazing. I had no idea that looping was something you could even do DIY. I'm getting ready to order some parts soon, so just let me know if I should plan to put that in the next order or hold off for a little while on this order. Also, futurlec still claims to have the 25xx series, which you said was going to be obsolete. I know from experience that they don't let you know when something's out of stock. Can anyone verify that? What are the limitations of the 17xx series? futurlec carries them, but the stat sheet is MIA.
Thanks for this awesome project. Combine this with an echobase, and no one needs those high end pedals.
with 480 seconds of playback I don't even need an mp3 player anymore... :icon_eek:
Quote from: Radamus on February 19, 2009, 02:53:30 AM
If you don't mind me asking, how far off is that? Both of these projects sound really amazing. I had no idea that looping was something you could even do DIY. I'm getting ready to order some parts soon, so just let me know if I should plan to put that in the next order or hold off for a little while on this order. Also, futurlec still claims to have the 25xx series, which you said was going to be obsolete. I know from experience that they don't let you know when something's out of stock. Can anyone verify that? What are the limitations of the 17xx series? futurlec carries them, but the stat sheet is MIA.
Thanks for the comments!
I have couple of minor bugs that I am chasing right now. I am hoping to have everything done for FX-X entry at the end of the month. I will then write an article for it. I would guess a month and half maybe. Maybe alittle more. I can't be more specific as I am pretty busy at this point. If you want a Payback now and you can get them grab the 25xxs. If they have them they are old stock and are hard to find. There have been many reports of people being happy with v1.0.
As for limitations of the 17xx I really don't see any atleast with the IC itself compared to the 25xx and 16xx. It will be better in just about every respect to previous versions. The only real trick with v2.0 is that it will have one specialized part but I am working on that too.
Quote from: MarcoMike on February 19, 2009, 08:32:29 AM
with 480 seconds of playback I don't even need an mp3 player anymore... :icon_eek:
480 at 4Khz sampling which is fairly low. 240 at a better level or around 200 at the best level. Right now for testing I am using the 60 second versions at the highest level which gives 40 seconds and I have yest to run out of time.
Andrew
Quote from: The Tone God on February 19, 2009, 03:16:31 PM
I have couple of minor bugs that I am chasing right now. I am hoping to have everything done for FX-X entry at the end of the month. I will then write an article for it. I would guess a month and half maybe. Maybe alittle more. I can't be more specific as I am pretty busy at this point. If you want a Payback now and you can get them grab the 25xxs. If they have them they are old stock and are hard to find. There have been many reports of people being happy with v1.0.
As for limitations of the 17xx I really don't see any atleast with the IC itself compared to the 25xx and 16xx. It will be better in just about every respect to previous versions. The only real trick with v2.0 is that it will have one specialized part but I am working on that too.
What is the sampling rate like on these chips?
Thanks for the quick response. I guess the answer, then, is that I'll put this in the next order. I'm sure I'll have another five or six effects I want to build by then anyway, the 17xx chips are a little cheaper and available from futurlec, which is good for me (and probably a couple other people). Do they have the ability to record multiple tracks like the original design? And what's the deal with the ISD40xx? The data sheet says something about limited analog storage, which has me pretty confused.
Again, very excited to build one of these, very disappointed that I'll have to wait. Thanks for the great project, though. :icon_wink:
Quote from: Radamus on February 19, 2009, 05:37:52 PM
What is the sampling rate like on these chips?
Thanks for the quick response. I guess the answer, then, is that I'll put this in the next order. I'm sure I'll have another five or six effects I want to build by then anyway, the 17xx chips are a little cheaper and available from futurlec, which is good for me (and probably a couple other people). Do they have the ability to record multiple tracks like the original design? And what's the deal with the ISD40xx? The data sheet says something about limited analog storage, which has me pretty confused.
Sampling on rate on the 25xx change based on the length of the storage time. I think I mention that in the article. Winbond back then used the same memory structure in the series and just changed the internal clocks to get more time but at the loss of sampling rate and cutoff frequency. Now with the 16xxB and 17xx they set the clock through an external resistor allowing control of the sampling rate and cutoff and offer different memory amounts. Much better IMHO.
v2.0 will not have multiple loops this time. Just one big loop. Most people seem to do that anyways.
I used the 400x series in another Payback called Double Payback. They suffer from a number of problems I found. They have the same memory/clock/sampling rate structure like the 25xx series. The cost as much or alittle more then the 17xx series. They lack a few features which are handy with the 17xx. My ICs for some reason started developing an annoying tick that I could not get rid off. I decided to stop using them. As I had a 17xx around I started using it and I have been alittle happier. Not completely but alittle.
Andrew
Quote from: The Tone God on June 30, 2006, 04:42:51 PM
Hello everyone,
I posted a new effect called Payback at the site. It is a looping sampler with a host of features. There is article explaining it's operation and several modification suggestions.
Enjoy.
The Tone God's Domain (http://geocities.com/thetonegod)
Oh and about that little challenge:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/payback_top.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/payback_inside.jpg)
;)
Happy Canada Day to all my fellow Canadians. Happy 4th of July to all my brothers and sisters to the south as well.
Your Tone God,
Andrew
is that an ISD digital recorder? i have the same chip from an electronics class project. I've been meaning to make a pedal out of it...
Quote from: aziltz on February 19, 2009, 10:18:18 PM
is that an ISD digital recorder? i have the same chip from an electronics class project. I've been meaning to make a pedal out of it...
It is an ISD25xx IC although it is not digital in a pure sense. The audio storage is analog. Nuvoton (the spin off from Winbond that now handles the ISD series) will be offer a new series that is digital. 15100 I think.
If you do have a 25xx IC you can use v1.0 and make a pedal out of it. Its alot of fun. :)
Andrew
Quote from: The Tone God on February 19, 2009, 10:38:16 PM
Quote from: aziltz on February 19, 2009, 10:18:18 PM
is that an ISD digital recorder? i have the same chip from an electronics class project. I've been meaning to make a pedal out of it...
It is an ISD25xx IC although it is not digital in a pure sense. The audio storage is analog. Nuvoton (the spin off from Winbond that now handles the ISD series) will be offer a new series that is digital. 15100 I think.
If you do have a 25xx IC you can use v1.0 and make a pedal out of it. Its alot of fun. :)
Andrew
yeah, i have a 25xx. i basically built a breadboarded pedal as my project, only with trem on the output. vibrato was a bit daunting. i'm guess from the length of this thread and all that your design is quite stable?
your design, at least as far as functionality, reminds me of the lofi loop junky. Do you know if these ISD chips are similar to what that uses?
I didn't work on it at all this evening! still on the breadboard.
I'm trying to accomplish something a little odd. I have a simple oscillator wired into the ISD's input with a volume pot. the idea is to then modulate an input signal (guitar or whatever) with the loop for a crazy wave-shaped trem I think :P
it does loop the oscillator (with a loud pop every loop, but whatever I'll figure that out some other time) but the output isn't drivign the vactrol led as it should. according to the voltage I'm getting out of the chip, the noisy quiet parts are "as loud" as the looped oscillator. I'll mess around with the AGC to see if that helps.
Quote from: aziltz on February 19, 2009, 10:57:35 PM
your design, at least as far as functionality, reminds me of the lofi loop junky. Do you know if these ISD chips are similar to what that uses?
yeah, vex confirmed in one of the payback threads that the loop junky uses one of the ISD chips
Quote from: aziltz on February 19, 2009, 10:57:35 PM
yeah, i have a 25xx. i basically built a breadboarded pedal as my project, only with trem on the output. vibrato was a bit daunting. i'm guess from the length of this thread and all that your design is quite stable?
your design, at least as far as functionality, reminds me of the lofi loop junky. Do you know if these ISD chips are similar to what that uses?
For the number of positive reports I have received I would call v1.0 stable.
I was shooting for something in the same realm. I do believe that the ISD ICs are used in the junky, ISD1420 I believe.
Quote from: cloudscapes on February 19, 2009, 11:17:48 PM
I'm trying to accomplish something a little odd.
Awhile back I made a looper that after recording a loop you would have the controller lock onto a note on your guitar then when you played another note the speed of the playback would be shifted to match the note difference. Kinda funky.
Andrew
Is the ISD1790PY that Futurlec sells the right one for v2? It says "SPI Interface" - is this still DIP?
I'd like to order one while I have the chance so I can actually build it when it's ready ;)
Quote from: The Tone God on February 20, 2009, 01:37:13 AM
Awhile back I made a looper that after recording a loop you would have the controller lock onto a note on your guitar then when you played another note the speed of the playback would be shifted to match the note difference. Kinda funky.
Andrew
that actually sounds like it could pretty great, even if glitchy! sort of like a guitar-controlled mellotron.
the diode is really sensitive :(
sometimes it loops, sometimes it doesn't. sometimes it loops half a dozen times then stops, untill I wave my hand over the breadboard or something.
Quote from: kierc on February 20, 2009, 11:54:04 AM
Is the ISD1790PY that Futurlec sells the right one for v2? It says "SPI Interface" - is this still DIP?
Yes that IC will work and it is a DIP pacakge. The "P" in the name means plastic DIP.
Quote from: cloudscapes on February 20, 2009, 11:54:39 AM
that actually sounds like it could pretty great, even if glitchy! sort of like a guitar-controlled mellotron.
I showed it to a few people and they got a kick out of it but it is really not that useful live so I never built a permanent version. Stilll good for the experience and laughs.
Quote from: cloudscapes on February 20, 2009, 11:58:28 AM
the diode is really sensitive :(
sometimes it loops, sometimes it doesn't. sometimes it loops half a dozen times then stops, untill I wave my hand over the breadboard or something.
Yes it is very sensitive by it's nature. If you are using a 3PDT switch you can switch the audio and logic signals separately and use a pull up resistor of say 100K on the logic line. That makes things more stable. The diode option is for those with only DPDT switches.
Andrew
Well now, that would have come in handy when I had problems with the diode. Would using a 3PDT work on v1.1 in order to remove the diode?
Any hints on how to go about this process? Maybe I'll finally get some v1.1s working.
Quote from: Valoosj on February 20, 2009, 06:42:01 PM
Well now, that would have come in handy when I had problems with the diode. Would using a 3PDT work on v1.1 in order to remove the diode?
Any hints on how to go about this process? Maybe I'll finally get some v1.1s working.
Sure. Wire up the switch audio lines as per the diagram. Disconnect the logic line that contains the diode on the output side of the switch. Connect this line to the middle lug of the third pole of the switch. Which ever side of the switch that puts the effect in bypass connect that side's lug to ground. So now when the effect is bypassed the logic line is connected to ground. Replace the diode with a resistor say 100K in value.
Wash hands, wipe on pants. Done.
Andrew
Quote from: The Tone God on February 20, 2009, 07:44:14 PM
Sure. Wire up the switch audio lines as per the diagram. Disconnect the logic line that contains the diode on the output side of the switch. Connect this line to the middle lug of the third pole of the switch. Which ever side of the switch that puts the effect in bypass connect that side's lug to ground. So now when the effect is bypassed the logic line is connected to ground. Replace the diode with a resistor say 100K in value.
Wash hands, wipe on pants. Done.
Andrew
this works pretty well, thanks! I can understand how many people will still want the diode trick to spare a 3PDT, but personally I'm more comfortable with basic switching.
I'm getting a pause each time the loop starts again. the pause length varies depending on how fast I'm clocking the ISD chip, which leads me to believe it's a problem with that and not the 4093 logic (though I may be wrong))
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29QD7y1g7po
it does this diode or no diode, battery or adapter, and I've tried a few different chips. any ideas?
Ah I think I know whats going on. The clock that sets the sampling rate also sets the response time of the ISD. If you run the clock to slow the logic will run too fast for the ISD. The same thing can happen if you run the clock too fast, the logic won't keep up with the ISD. The values I gave were for 100K Rosc. Some tweaking maybe needed for different clock rates. Also when you run a lower clock rate it takes the ISD longer to re-power up itself, load the memory to the starting position, and start playing back so after certain clock rate the delay will just be impossible to overcome no matter the control logic. You test this by manually driving the play pin. The ISD will just respond slowly.
I ran into that with v2.0 and had to compensate when possible to get the loops tight. I just got through some initial jamming with v2.0. I think it is pretty close to being dial in.
Great video BTW. :)
Andrew
cheers, thanks for the enlightenment :)
so if I understand correctly, the logic part was specifically calibrated/timed to work with the 100k on ROSC. I think for my application, I'll just need to live with the pause (for now), because I need manual speed control for what I intend to do.
there's still a pause if I manually hit PLAYL. you were right.
looking forward to seeing 2.0!
No prob. BTW great videos of your other builds. :)
Just got through playing with v2.0. I'm really enjoying it. The vibrato is great. I'm going to box it this week and post some samples for FX-X.
Andrew
Can somebody make an off board wiring diagram for this? thanks
I'll build it some time later. I prepared this for my payback maybe it will help you. But thats not verified..
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/6783/123tfm.jpg
Quote from: The Tone God on February 19, 2009, 03:16:31 PM
The only real trick with v2.0 is that it will have one specialized part but I am working on that too.
Still waiting on that mysterious part? I'm curious to see how this project turns out.
He told me it's a controller chip, and he's working on a way to get it readily available to builders :)
I just can't wait to build this one!!! ;D
Quote from: The Tone God on June 30, 2006, 04:42:51 PM
Hello everyone,
I posted a new effect called Payback at the site. It is a looping sampler with a host of features. There is article explaining it's operation and several modification suggestions.
Enjoy.
The Tone God's Domain (http://geocities.com/thetonegod)
Oh and about that little challenge:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/payback_top.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/payback_inside.jpg)
;)
Happy Canada Day to all my fellow Canadians. Happy 4th of July to all my brothers and sisters to the south as well.
Your Tone God,
Andrew
this is cool. it won't make a good started project for me, but this stuff is starting to fall into place mentally for me, the schematic at least
makes sense to me after spending a week looking around here and at beavis. i am officially adding this to my list of builds though. killer work.
I've got my ISD chip ready and awaiting orders :icon_biggrin:
Andrew, are you using AVRs to control the ISD chips via SPI? if so, any pointers? I'm sort of tentitavely experimenting with some ISD1700s and AVRs. The main interest is in defining where the loop start playign and hwere it ends in the full loop, in realtime. ;)
Quote from: cloudscapes on October 23, 2009, 04:53:17 PM
Andrew, are you using AVRs to control the ISD chips via SPI? if so, any pointers? I'm sort of tentitavely experimenting with some ISD1700s and AVRs. The main interest is in defining where the loop start playign and hwere it ends in the full loop, in realtime. ;)
Yes I am using a AVR to control the ISD via SPI. There seems to be a recent renewed interest in this project so I may get back to it. Its been awhile since I have played with it. I do remember that some commands didn't play well with others and some did not behave as expected. I need to reacquaint myself with the software and the driver to be able to give more info.
One thing I do remember is that you can set the start record address then when finished you can read the address that the recording stopped at.
Andrew
Andrew, how is v2.0 coming along? You said you were getting ready to release the schematic together with an article.
Quote from: Valoosj on October 25, 2009, 06:21:12 AM
Andrew, how is v2.0 coming along? You said you were getting ready to release the schematic together with an article.
When I last left it there was just one minor software bug to deal with. I'll have to get back to the project and squash the last bug then I can get things moving with the article.
Andrew
anymore news? im REAAAALLY interested in building this!!!!! :icon_wink:
Quote from: TheAttackman on December 23, 2009, 10:09:00 PM
anymore news? im REAAAALLY interested in building this!!!!! :icon_wink:
Holidays and biz gets in the way. It is coming but it will be a bit until things settle down around here.
Andrew
sorry to be a pain.. but i read through everything and i cant tell exactally which layouts are confirmed ???
could someone help me out
thanks :icon_wink:
Quote from: The Tone God on June 30, 2006, 04:42:51 PM
Hello everyone,
I posted a new effect called Payback at the site. It is a looping sampler with a host of features. There is article explaining it's operation and several modification suggestions.
Enjoy.
The Tone God's Domain (http://geocities.com/thetonegod)
Oh and about that little challenge:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/payback_top.jpg)
how can i disable multiple recording on paybackv1?
thanks
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/payback_inside.jpg)
;)
Happy Canada Day to all my fellow Canadians. Happy 4th of July to all my brothers and sisters to the south as well.
Your Tone God,
Andrew
When I'm back on a pc, not iPhone, I'll look up the schem, but if i remember correctly, it really is as simple as tying the address pins to ground.
Quote from: Jaicen_solo on April 29, 2012, 06:04:51 PM
When I'm back on a pc, not iPhone, I'll look up the schem, but if i remember correctly, it really is as simple as tying the address pins to ground.
thanks a lot , don't forget :D
Yep. All the loop number switch does is set the address pins to the right value for roughly half the memory location to start from. Setting them all to ground starts from the beginning.
Andrew
Quote from: The Tone God on April 30, 2012, 04:02:36 PM
Yep. All the loop number switch does is set the address pins to the right value for roughly half the memory location to start from. Setting them all to ground starts from the beginning.
Andrew
a2,a3,a5,a8 pins directly to ground right? it will give me 60 sec loop? my english not good , i did'nt understand well , sorry.
and, do you have verified pcb layout for v.1? i saw very tight pcb layout for v1 in earlier posts. is it verified?
thanks a lot
Quote from: abakuzam on April 30, 2012, 08:11:33 PM
a2,a3,a5,a8 pins directly to ground right? it will give me 60 sec loop? my english not good , i did'nt understand well , sorry.
and, do you have verified pcb layout for v.1? i saw very tight pcb layout for v1 in earlier posts. is it verified?
Yes connect all the address pins (A0-A9) to ground.
I don't have a verified PCB layout myself but there ones out there.
Good luck! :)
Andrew
Quote from: The Tone God on April 30, 2012, 11:59:45 PM
Quote from: abakuzam on April 30, 2012, 08:11:33 PM
a2,a3,a5,a8 pins directly to ground right? it will give me 60 sec loop? my english not good , i did'nt understand well , sorry.
and, do you have verified pcb layout for v.1? i saw very tight pcb layout for v1 in earlier posts. is it verified?
Yes connect all the address pins (A0-A9) to ground.
I don't have a verified PCB layout myself but there ones out there.
Good luck! :)
Andrew
thanks, i found this layout
http://www.mediafire.com/?cobl8lxkqfr61gv
it seems right to me what do you think?
Hi all!
I am trying to figure out how to build the Payback v1.1
I am a bit confused,
is there a
verified list of links with:
- the PCB
the list of materials
wiring diagram
basic instructions and notes
Thanks!
Quote from: fatecasino on October 10, 2013, 11:21:23 AM
Hi all!
I am trying to figure out how to build the Payback v1.1
I am a bit confused,
is there a verified list of links with:
- the PCB
the list of materials
wiring diagram
basic instructions and notes
Thanks!
I do not know of a verified layout. The DIP version of the ISD1600 was short lived so not many people got to build it so there really is not a demand for a layout.
Andrew
HI!
i've been getting ready to build either V1 or V1.1..first shot will be v1, since i got 2 ISD2560s
the problem is, i bought a while ago on ebay, can't return, and they look dogdy (or they have started to do so :icon_rolleyes:),
compared to some pics i've seen working in circuits (which i found half a year AFTER buying, when i got some spare time) - those apparently working ICs had white markings and a small, deep dent near pin 1, as well as two shallow dents,
would anyone care to comment on these?? greatly appreciated... (i still don't have the circuit board to test them doh..)
did i get duped? ???
(http://i.imgur.com/RhSvMOz.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/wmgsXyI.jpg)
the other one has the two dents, but both are missing the pin1 one.
-- also, i've read as much about paybacks as there is on the net, but still have a question for any of you master (or god) circuiteers :
How is the pause between loops noticable in v1.1 compared to v1 (or to the zvex lflj), if the Rosc is set to 100k (v1.1)?
many thanks!
both of those pictured have the pin 1 id. it is the big dent at the "I" end of "ISD". more dents don't more identify. and if I was paying 15$ us or au for a chip, especially a cmos one (and these are cmos ones), I'd have it in conductive foam. wrapped in tinfoil at the very least, but never, never, NEVER in white, static-making polystyrene foam. not ever.
can't help with the circuit workings.
[edit: ] oh, and hello, welcome to the forum.
I purchased a SMD ISD1620BYS-NO IC from Digi-Key for a future build. (Payback V1.1)
It came on conductive foam, in an ESD blue bag, enclosed inside of a moisture barrier/ESD bag, with a silicon packet, and a humidity indicator card which reads "Bake parts if 60% is NOT blue"
These ICs might be sensitive. It is probably not a good idea to play tackle football with your kids with one of these in your shirt pocket during a lightning storm. ;D
ANY 15$ ic is sensitive.
Yea, my thoughts too, when i opened the package and saw the IC in styrofoam ??? i would have never store it like THAT, but since it is, i though maybe leave it be, not touch too much, not rub it against anything, until i have to install it in the socket...
i ment the dent in direct vicinity of pin 1, like in the pic (these are the ones i saw in a working circuit):
(http://i.imgur.com/nS7VrkU.jpg)
My IC has the same wave running through the ISD logo as the images you just posted.
I hate to throw the F word around, but jernop's ICs look like they were resurfaced and lasered.
it's those paralell lines right? >:(
ratz.
i'll test them in the "typical application" from the data sheet anyway, to make sure ... should be merciful with my time..