I thought that this product would open possibilities for many builders, especially given the increased interest in DIY delays, both digital and bucket-brigade:
http://www.smallbearelec.com/Detail.bok?no=795 (http://www.smallbearelec.com/Detail.bok?no=795)
Springbreak
and new flowers will bloom soon
great find!
12C508 PIC for the tap tempo. :icon_lol:
This seems like it could get interesting.
OK, I'm going to go out on a limb here...
Most delay circuits that I know of set their delay time by means of a resistance. How do you go about turning this 25mA pulse into a resistance for say a PT2399? or am I in way over my head (I don't yet know how to program a microcontroller).
Ian
Quote from: ianmgull on April 09, 2009, 01:58:54 PM
This seems like it could get interesting.
OK, I'm going to go out on a limb here...
Most delay circuits that I know of set their delay time by means of a resistance. How do you go about turning this 25mA pulse into a resistance for say a PT2399? or am I in way over my head (I don't yet know how to program a microcontroller).
Ian
good question. can that be done?
Quote from: aziltz on April 09, 2009, 02:07:38 PM
Quote from: ianmgull on April 09, 2009, 01:58:54 PM
This seems like it could get interesting.
OK, I'm going to go out on a limb here...
Most delay circuits that I know of set their delay time by means of a resistance. How do you go about turning this 25mA pulse into a resistance for say a PT2399? or am I in way over my head (I don't yet know how to program a microcontroller).
Ian
good question. can that be done?
I've been playing around with this stuff for a little bit now. If you vary your pulse width and run it through a lowpass, you can vary your current. Run that through to an led shining on a LDR and you have your differing control voltages.
Might not have all my ducks in a row in explaining but having fun with it right now.
there's probably better ways of doing it though. I just use what I have on hand..
Quote from: trendyironicname on April 09, 2009, 02:21:29 PMI've been playing around with this stuff for a little bit now. If you vary your pulse width and run it through a lowpass, you can vary your current. Run that through to an led shining on a LDR and you have your differing control voltages.
Can that be accurately calibrated?
Interesting find and will be of use for those who want things like sequencers and chopper pedals to work in time but from what I understand its not a drop in solution for analog and digital delays. There still need to be something in between to translate those taps to an appropriate output for the delay.
Andrew
Quote from: The Tone God on April 09, 2009, 03:07:51 PM
Interesting find and will be of use for those who want things like sequencers and chopper pedals to work in time but from what I understand its not a drop in solution for analog and digital delays. There still need to be something in between to translate those taps to an appropriate output for the delay.
Andrew
It has never been hard to make a microcontroller sense a switch closing at intervals and output a persistent pulse train at intervals approximating that pulse timing.
As Andrew notes, that ain't what drives a delay. A delay is driven by a quite-high-frequency clock pulse. What you're trying to do with a tap tempo on a delay chip is to sense the time between taps then *compute how many delay clocks to put in* to make the total delay come out to be the time between taps. This is complicated by the fact that the RC oscillators which generate clocks for delay chips are not too stable, and their timing is often dependent on a nonlinear function of the resistance. Then you have the cap tolerance to factor in. On top of that, if you "simply" convert to a resistance, you add any nonlinearities of the conversion to resistance to the errors in timing. When you get left, how close is the delay time to what you tapped? Sometimes it'll be fine. Sometimes, not so fine.
It's not like no one ever programmed a PIC to sense a tapped tempo before... :icon_biggrin: I'll bet that some people have even run into some of these problems on their breadboards before. :icon_biggrin:
Not that it can't be done. Just be careful what you think "tap tempo" means, and what pedals you think it applies to.
Ah, didn't think past the pulse to voltage thing when replying. R.G. and Andrew are some of the main people I get my real knowledge from. I go to class for hours a day to get the EE degree but, honestly, my working understanding of stuff comes from places like here.
smallbear did throw it out there mentioning tap tempo for delay. will this not make sense at all for that?
I'll chip in some more info for the PT239x based crowd.
Unlike clock based delays the PT239x do not have an external clock input. They have an internal clock whose frequency adjusted by an external resistance. The accuracy of the internal clock is not know as Princeton does not publish that information from what I have seen.
Another issue is the relationship of resistance to time for the clock is not very well known. Even with what information that has been published it results in an odd shaped log-ish curve. The idea of using this IC or another clock source with a linear time to output relationship will not work. Neither will using a optocoupler of some sort as it will never match this odd shape curve.
Digital delays do not suffer from these issues as all the math is done in one common part sharing the same clock source so they can be accurate. With analog and multi-IC digital delays this is not the case so there is room for accuracy problems. One of the questions that needs to be asked is how accurate do you want to be ?
If you need absolute accuracy then you will be hard pressed to develop something or atleast something within a reasonable amount of resources. If you are willing tolerate alittle bit of inaccuracy then you can get something working within reasonable resources.
So after all that can a reasonably accurate simple tap tempo be made for the PT239x ? YES! In fact someone may already have done that. :icon_twisted:
Andrew
Quote from: The Tone God on April 09, 2009, 04:39:35 PM
So after all that can a reasonably accurate simple tap tempo be made for the PT239x ? YES! In fact someone may already have done that. :icon_twisted:
That's true. In fact, convergent evolution being the illegitimate stepchild of Mother Nature that it is, perhaps more than one person may have. :icon_wink:
All delay issues aside the "Tap Tempo Volume Sequencer" in the Application Notes seems interesting (and functionally similar to a certain boutique tremolo on the market ;D)
My question is what is the deal with the input/output section? Maybe I'm reading the schem wrong, but are the In/Out jacks connected to the photo resistor portion of the optoisolator?
Reading the datasheet, it seems its only standalone use is for clocking circuits at the frequency of the taps, or by however many times the control pins allow you to scale the frequency.
To get a tap tempo analog delay you'd have to convert that frequency to a 50/50 duty cycle square wave, at the clocking frequency that corresponds to the delay time of the taps.
I suppose you could do this with a PLL, a 4013 and a CD4049. However, it's a bit much circuitry to support what is already a pre programmed PIC/AVR.
You'd be much better doing all the necessary logic in the code itself.
On the bright side, it's a drop in for tap tempo sequencers.
We are happy to see all the interest in our Tap Tempo Control Chip.
To answer some questions, the the signal from the 4017 goes to the LED side of the optoisolator in the App Note schematic.
Regarding a 50/50 duty cycle, MV-52 simultaneously outputs a pulse from pin 3 and a 50/50 duty cycle square wave from pin 2. These are both scalable "on the fly" by grounding the various control pins. See the datasheet for more info:
http://www.smallbearelec.com/Projects/MV-52Data.pdf
We have heavily researched the PT2399 issue and have plotted the variable resistances and agree with what is already in this thread, that the resistances are not linear and would therefore require an extensive table which is not possible with an 8 pin microcontroller. That combined with the inherent inconsistencies between chips makes using MV-52 with the PT2399 impractical.
MV-52 was designed to provide a compact and highly accurate Tap Tempo controller for circuits that rely on a pulse or square wave trigger. It has proven accuracy of greater than 1/1000th of a second.
Please post any other questions in this thread and we will do our best to answer them. Thanks!
~ Molten Voltage ~ visionary effects ~
According to Sebastian (stm), who normally knows his stuff, in this post (http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=68741.0) the delay time to resistance ratio is pretty linear for the PT2399. Like he says though it's probably not consistent enough to be able to make a reliable tap tempo.
Look, you can't handle a sample and hold Adaptive Sweep Generator, and yet you think you can fart about with tap tempo :o
Is there any reason why a tap tempo control chip cannot be adapted to controlling a parameter other than delay time or tremolo speed? For instance, could one use a momentary off to the side of a 1590BB to allow one to "tap" control the centre-frequency of a resonant section, ore the drive intensity, or some other parameter, using something analogous to the old MXR PWM trick?
Here are the PT2399 resistances charted against the delay time:
(http://www.moltenvoltage.com/downloads/2399_values.JPG)
As you can see, an equal change in resistance does not create an equal change in delay. A good example of this:
- going from 7200 to 8200 ohms (1000 ohm increase) increases delay by 10.4 ms
- going from 8200 to 9200 ohms (1000 ohm increase) increases delay by 12.5 ms
what's more, the delay times do not evenly increase as resistance goes up:
- going from 2400 to 3400 ohms (1000 ohm increase) increases delay by 11.5 ms!
This information is straight off the Princeton PT2399 datasheet
Quote from: Mark Hammer on April 10, 2009, 11:53:06 AM
Is there any reason why a tap tempo control chip cannot be adapted to controlling a parameter other than delay time or tremolo speed?
Of course but it becomes the same issue, how to translate the time value derived to some type of appropriate output.
And for everyone's enjoyment here is a graph of resistance vs. delay time just based on the data in the PT2399 datasheet.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/TheToneGod/pt2399_TvsR_graph.jpg)
In case it is not obvious that is NOT linear or even log.
You can do some things with this IC though like a chopper or maybe a metronome.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 10, 2009, 04:41:31 AM
...an extensive table which is not possible with an 8 pin microcontroller.
I beg to differ. ;D
Andrew
A standardized table that would provide delay time accuracy equal to that of MV-52 (better than 1/1000th of a second) with the PT2399 is simply not possible with an 8 pin microcontroller. You say that you "beg to differ". If you know something we don't, please share! Keep in mind that you would need to test the resistance v. delay time every 1ms, log that resistance then program the table to assign the proper value. Over 400ms, that would be 400 entries in the table. Even if you did all that, you would still need to tweak your table based on a particular chip's idiosyncrasies (not to mention any external components), making a standardized table impossible.
As far as applications for our Universal Tap Tempo Control Chip, they are more than just "metronomes and chopper effects". The most obvious example, as shown by our Application Note 1, is a sequencer design, but many other designs are possible if you let yourself think outside the box. :icon_idea:
http://www.smallbearelec.com/Projects/MV-52App.pdf
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 10, 2009, 02:47:48 PM
A standardized table that would provide delay time accuracy equal to that of MV-52 (better than 1/1000th of a second) with the PT2399 is simply not possible with an 8 pin microcontroller. You say that you "beg to differ". If you know something we don't, please share! Keep in mind that you would need to test the resistance v. delay time every 1ms, log that resistance then program the table to assign the proper value. Over 400ms, that would be 400 entries in the table. Even if you did all that, you would still need to tweak your table based on a particular chip's idiosyncrasies (not to mention any external components), making a standardized table impossible.
Perhaps I should have been alittle clearer as I thought the quote I made was descriptive enough. The main point I was disputing was that it was not be possible to have such a large table in a 8 pin microcontroller (uC). This maybe true for your chosen uC but it is still possible within the world of uCs to have such a large table in a 8 pin microcontroller. You do bring some other points up so I'll throw some other thoughts out.
Who said one needs to test for every 1ms ? The limitation in this application will not be the accuracy of uC derived time but the accuracy of the resistive element you choose to control the PT2399 with. Even if you had 1ms accurate tables there are very few resistive elements that would provide matching accuracy. Thus as I said earlier:
Quote from: The Tone God on April 09, 2009, 04:39:35 PM
If you are willing tolerate alittle bit of inaccuracy then you can get something working within reasonable resources.
Princeton does not publish the clock tolerances and AFAIK no one has publicly published data on this so we are all guessing at this point at how accurate the clock is. The clock variation maybe within the level of tolerance.
Andrew
Please forgive my cynicism but in a band situation, tap tempo may be quite useless because one is required to play guitar rather than play effects. But don't let me stop the infinitely entertaining thread :icon_biggrin:
Mid-song, I'd agree with you, but many band scenarios allow the guitar player to think of the tempo they want, tap a bit before a song starts, or maybe even tap into the lead-in of a song, to establish the tempo, and the band joins in. Not always, mind you, but it happens. No different than a drummer tapping their sticks together to set the tempo for everyone else.
I still find tap-tempo rather pointless for long sweeps on flangers or phasers, but that's me. YMMV.
Quote from: StephenGiles on April 10, 2009, 05:09:29 PM
Please forgive my cynicism but in a band situation, tap tempo may be quite useless because one is required to play guitar rather than play effects. But don't let me stop the infinitely entertaining thread :icon_biggrin:
I've heard people say this in other threads and I still can't wrap my head around it. Isn't the idea of a tap tempo that you use your foot to do the tapping?
I have quite a few songs where I make use of synchronized delays. This being the case I have to readjust my tempo a couple times in a song to keep in line with peoples natural variations.
I have a couple Line 6 Echo Parks that I have linked up to a common tempo switch. I run them in parallel each with a different setting. If you're into the kind of rhythmic delay that U2 is known for tap temp delays are pretty much a necessity live. It's really not that hard. If you can tap your foot while you play you can use a tap tempo delay in this way.
Yes tap tempo is only really useful for quicker stuff which is why you don't see tap tempo chorus pedals. I still think we are jumping around the accuracy issue. Do players really need a 1ms accurate delay ? Most don't and I would bet in most band situations the audience will not notice the delay being slightly off. Those who do need this level of accuracy will shift to a commercial digital delay so that issue moves out of the scope of this discussion.
We should also be alittle bit honest about the PT239x. It is a cheap and easy to use IC which is great for cheap commercial delays and us DIYers. It was never meant to be a highly accurate delay so to argue about 1/1000th of a second accuracy is kind of a waste. You'll never get it. I think most DIYers would be happy just to get the delay into the rough average time wise.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 10, 2009, 02:47:48 PM
As far as applications for our Universal Tap Tempo Control Chip, they are more than just "metronomes and chopper effects". The most obvious example, as shown by our Application Note 1, is a sequencer design, but many other designs are possible if you let yourself think outside the box. :icon_idea:
I forgot to respond to this previously. Firstly just make sure my tone is understood please take this as a friendly suggestion to help with your product. No long lasting company produces a product and then expects people to find uses for it. If you are in the business of selling a product it is your job to tell the potential buyers, like members of this forum, what we can and cannot do with your product. You should not tell potential buyers to "think outside the box" and then offer no suggestions other then one application which I think we already acknowledged earlier in this thread. If you want to sell more product I would suggest your company come up some other ideas for the use of this product along with
detailed app. notes for those uses. Making it as easy as possible for buyers to use your product will make more people want to buy your products.
Andrew
Just curious.
How many people is "we" in Molten Voltage?
Really neat chip to have available to the average stompboxing type that doesn't know how to program. I'll definitely be getting a few, have a music from outer space CV sequencer PCB lying around and that would be outstanding.
Questions for Molten Voltage, does tapping the switch once get the clock back on beat when it starts to drift? Does the tap tempo switch need to be debounced? How many taps does it take to set the tempo, and when does the tempo change to the one tapped in? What happens if you keep tapping the pedal, does it average the tap time, or just go with the last taps?
Re: Usefulness.
When a drummer taps their sticks together, or when someone counts off a Ramones-like "1-2-3-4!!", they are setting the approximate tempo of the song. There is no assumption about precision, but more about average feel. I'm pretty certain that the actual BPM will drift over time but the musicians will generally "regress toward the mean", in the sense that their average pace will coalesce as the tune moves on (or fall apart if it was too damn fast for them in the first place). Whether it started off a little too fast or a little too slow is not always that important. The main thing is it's in the ballpark, tempo-wise.
And that's pretty much what one expects from tap tempo: the right feel.
Which brings me to another issue: Is the feel most appropriately achieved or "sensed" via 2 taps, or do you need more to nail it? By that, I don't mean whether it is technically possible to provide a sensed tempo from two taps, because this chip clearly demonstrates that it is. What I want to know is whether the sensed tempo would be more "correct" with 3 or 4 than with 2 taps. Do people who use 2 taps find that what they got was exactly what they were aiming for?
And another thing. If you didn't get the tempo you were aiming for, how do you establish a new tempo? Do you simply tap 2 more times and if so, after what minimum interval? Just trying to get a handle on how to plan for this chip, because dammit...it's interesting.
Quote from: The Tone God on April 10, 2009, 07:57:24 PM..Do players really need a 1ms accurate delay ? Most don't and I would bet in most band situations the audience will not notice the delay being slightly off...
My feet are retarded. Would need my drummer to do it for me. I'd prefer something to quantize my taps . "I know you're doing this but here's what you really want.."
Quote from: Mark Hammer on April 10, 2009, 08:40:00 PM
Which brings me to another issue: Is the feel most appropriately achieved or "sensed" via 2 taps, or do you need more to nail it? By that, I don't mean whether it is technically possible to provide a sensed tempo from two taps, because this chip clearly demonstrates that it is. What I want to know is whether the sensed tempo would be more "correct" with 3 or 4 than with 2 taps. Do people who use 2 taps find that what they got was exactly what they were aiming for?
I have used delays with the ability to average more then two taps and I find after the initial two taps you don't get much more out of the extra taps. The only time I found it useful is when my foot slipped off the switch I was able to recover the tempo but to redo two taps is not that big of deal.
Quote from: trendyironicname on April 10, 2009, 08:49:31 PM
My feet are retarded. Would need my drummer to do it for me. I'd prefer something to quantize my taps . "I know you're doing this but here's what you really want.."
Computers can only do so much. GIGO ?
Andrew
Where to begin...
First, while we agree that 1ms accuracy isn't that big of a deal playing live if you have a "flexible" drummer, accuracy is a big issue if you are playing along with other tracks while overdubbing.
Assume a typical song of 120 bpm (2 beats per second : 500 ms between beats)
If this is a 3 minute song, it is 180 seconds (180,000 ms) long.
Now assume you want the effect tempo at 1/4 notes, you are at 125ms between quarter notes.
If your effect gets out of time 1ms per second, by the end of the song (180 seconds), you are well over a quarter note out of time (180ms).
Instead of being on the downbeat, you are well past the snare beat!
With MV-52, the tempo is set when you tap twice. You can tap in a new tempo at any time after about half a second.
As far as the suggestion that we should provide piles of design ideas, we are also in the pedal manufacturing business and spend a lot of resources copyrighting and patenting our intellectual property. The application note we provided is very detailed and, with just a little creativity, allows builders to create all kinds of interesting sequenced effects. We are sorry if this is not good enough for you, but we aren't going to give away our future pedal designs for the sake of selling this chip. We are confident that there are builders out there who can create original designs and will see the potential in our Universal Tap Tempo Control. (see Processaurus' comment, above)
Other questions:
1) Does tapping the switch once get the clock back on beat when it starts to drift?
- No, but tapping twice does
2) Does the tap tempo switch need to be debounced?
- No, it is internally debounced. Check out the datasheet if you want to see how to get started with just a few basic components:
http://www.smallbearelec.com/Projects/MV-52Data.pdf
3) How many taps does it take to set the tempo, and when does the tempo change to the one tapped in?
- 2 taps always sets a new tempo, and as soon as you tap the second time, the new tempo begins
4) What happens if you keep tapping the pedal, does it average the tap time, or just go with the last taps?
- If you keep tapping, the tempo will be the time between the last two taps (assuming an even number of taps)
Hopefully we caught all the questions. Thanks for all the feedback!
Quote from: The Tone God on April 10, 2009, 10:07:36 PM
Computers can only do so much. GIGO ?
Indeed, Gigo. Indeed.
Must've heard my stuff..
:D
Quote from: Processaurus on April 10, 2009, 08:30:48 PM
Does the tap tempo switch need to be debounced?
*All* switches used by digital logic for inputs need to be debounced. Sometimes people do a less good job of this, with mildly amusing to hilarious results. :icon_biggrin:
:) I kind of want one of the chips.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 10, 2009, 11:07:08 PM
Where to begin...
First, while we agree that 1ms accuracy isn't that big of a deal playing live if you have a "flexible" drummer, accuracy is a big issue if you are playing along with other tracks while overdubbing.
Assume a typical song of 120 bpm (2 beats per second : 500 ms between beats)
If this is a 3 minute song, it is 180 seconds (180,000 ms) long.
Now assume you want the effect tempo at 1/4 notes, you are at 125ms between quarter notes.
If your effect gets out of time 1ms per second, by the end of the song (180 seconds), you are well over a quarter note out of time (180ms).
Instead of being on the downbeat, you are well past the snare beat!
This doesn't make sense to me. This would only be a problem if you let the same note repeat with 100% feedback for the entire song. As long as you are putting new notes into the delay line, each new note "resets" the beginning of the bar.
Quote from: Taylor on April 10, 2009, 11:32:01 PM
This doesn't make sense to me. This would only be a problem if you let the same note repeat with 100% feedback for the entire song. As long as you are putting new notes into the delay line, each new note "resets" the beginning of the bar.
Good point. With a basic delay, you really don't need as much accuracy.
When I wrote the last post, I was thinking about sequencer and chopper designs, where you need a super-accurate tap tempo control or you get out of time very quickly. Maybe the PT2399 thing is do-able with a microcontroller since you just need to be in the ballpark with a delay...
Quote from: R.G. on April 10, 2009, 11:14:18 PM
Quote from: Processaurus on April 10, 2009, 08:30:48 PM
Does the tap tempo switch need to be debounced?
*All* switches used by digital logic for inputs need to be debounced. Sometimes people do a less good job of this, with mildly amusing to hilarious results. :icon_biggrin:
I think what Processaurus was asking was whether or not you need external circuitry to debounce the chip. In this case, you don't because we did it with code and tested it using this standard momentary on pushbutton switch:
http://www.smallbearelec.com/Detail.bok?no=672
As you can see from the datasheet, the lower limit for the real-time tap interval is about .175 seconds (342 bpm):
http://www.smallbearelec.com/Projects/MV-52Data.pdf
This was necessary to prevent false switching. By grounding pin 4 you can scale the tap interval to a minimum interval of .044 seconds. This equates to 1,363 bpm.
MV-52's maximum possible interval between taps is 4.19 seconds (real-time).
Quote from: ianmgull on April 09, 2009, 08:35:43 PM
All delay issues aside the "Tap Tempo Volume Sequencer" in the Application Notes seems interesting (and functionally similar to a certain boutique tremolo on the market ;D)
My question is what is the deal with the input/output section? Maybe I'm reading the schem wrong, but are the In/Out jacks connected to the photo resistor portion of the optoisolator?
Hi all
From my lo level of deigning knowledge it seams that this IC is a great easy but expensive way to use in all kind of LED/LDR couplers like tremolo and such or as i assume ianmgull referes to The Catalinbread The Valcoder. I have just built a similar one with another odd ball Circut the 2N2646 It's a unijunction transistor - a unique type of semiconductor - it has two bases and one emitter that with a five components a round it makes a square wave. http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=75372.msg613734#msg613734 (http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=75372.msg613734#msg613734)
This is thought from a my lo level design horizon, What if this IC was made as an LFO to one ore more 404x switches folloved by a type op-amp buffer to drive one or a couple of LED/LDR hooked up to filters like in the Easy vibe or the Nurse Quack. If more than one LED/LDR could oscillate out of phase/speed this would create some odd sound?????
and the tempo could be set by foot
Has my horses left the stables or is this possible as an design idea????
//Solderman
PS. I really love this thread. It's handled everything from top nudge knowledge about electronic design to what how we act as musicians in or bands.
Quote from: The Tone God on April 10, 2009, 07:57:24 PM
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 10, 2009, 02:47:48 PM
As far as applications for our Universal Tap Tempo Control Chip, they are more than just "metronomes and chopper effects". The most obvious example, as shown by our Application Note 1, is a sequencer design, but many other designs are possible if you let yourself think outside the box. :icon_idea:
I forgot to respond to this previously. Firstly just make sure my tone is understood please take this as a friendly suggestion to help with your product. No long lasting company produces a product and then expects people to find uses for it. If you are in the business of selling a product it is your job to tell the potential buyers, like members of this forum, what we can and cannot do with your product. You should not tell potential buyers to "think outside the box" and then offer no suggestions other then one application which I think we already acknowledged earlier in this thread. If you want to sell more product I would suggest your company come up some other ideas for the use of this product along with detailed app. notes for those uses. Making it as easy as possible for buyers to use your product will make more people want to buy your products.
Andrew
Andrew makes a great point... as a company, the first company/person to release an easy 'paint by numbers' diagram on how to easily implement tap tempo into delay using their product will experience a jump in profit I predict... I'm pretty certain we're all aware that there are alot of pedal 'builders' out there who sell ALOT of pedals using simple cloned circuits with a new name and a few part values changed. Some of them are using GGG or BYOC boards. If they can't do something as simple as design a somewhat custom effect circuit there's no way in hell they are going to figure out anything to do with tap tempo circuitry.
I predict the first company to come out with this wins *big*. ;)
bw
Quote from: wampcat1 on April 11, 2009, 09:35:39 AM
Quote from: The Tone God on April 10, 2009, 07:57:24 PM
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 10, 2009, 02:47:48 PM
As far as applications for our Universal Tap Tempo Control Chip, they are more than just "metronomes and chopper effects". The most obvious example, as shown by our Application Note 1, is a sequencer design, but many other designs are possible if you let yourself think outside the box. :icon_idea:
I forgot to respond to this previously. Firstly just make sure my tone is understood please take this as a friendly suggestion to help with your product. No long lasting company produces a product and then expects people to find uses for it. If you are in the business of selling a product it is your job to tell the potential buyers, like members of this forum, what we can and cannot do with your product. You should not tell potential buyers to "think outside the box" and then offer no suggestions other then one application which I think we already acknowledged earlier in this thread. If you want to sell more product I would suggest your company come up some other ideas for the use of this product along with detailed app. notes for those uses. Making it as easy as possible for buyers to use your product will make more people want to buy your products.
Andrew
Andrew makes a great point... as a company, the first company/person to release an easy 'paint by numbers' diagram on how to easily implement tap tempo into delay using their product will experience a jump in profit I predict... I'm pretty certain we're all aware that there are alot of pedal 'builders' out there who sell ALOT of pedals using simple cloned circuits with a new name and a few part values changed. Some of them are using GGG or BYOC boards. If they can't do something as simple as design a somewhat custom effect circuit there's no way in hell they are going to figure out anything to do with tap tempo circuitry.
I predict the first company to come out with this wins *big*. ;)
bw
I've got to say that the lack of creativity and initiative on this "Do It Yourself" forum is really disappointing.
This is the top forum for this stuff and there are only a couple people who seem to get it.
The point is being CREATIVE. Pedal building is art. If you want to make copies, go to Kinko's.
If Cartman owned an electronics business, that's how he'd run it. Insult his customers and tell them they weren't creative enough to utilise his product. A smart person would make it as easy as possible for the end user to implement it into their designs, instead of pretending that they "don't get it.".
Electronics is as much an art form as mathematics. You can't suddenly create a new green, just as you can't suddenly create a new 1. Either you want to sell them or you don't. I'd listen to the suggestions, it's not as if they are out to get you.
I'm all over this chip for a sequencer build--that application alone makes it worth it for me.
Generally an effect with a tap tempo also has a way to adjust the speed based on a pot. Is there a way to incorporate both without having to add a switch between the tap chip and a separate lfo?
Quote from: jacobyjd on April 11, 2009, 12:05:21 PM
I'm all over this chip for a sequencer build--that application alone makes it worth it for me.
Generally an effect with a tap tempo also has a way to adjust the speed based on a pot. Is there a way to incorporate both without having to add a switch between the tap chip and a separate lfo?
We can't connect a pot to this 8-pin chip since all the pins are used, but we could make a 14-pin version that could use a pot. Would that make it more attractive?
Quote from: nelson on April 11, 2009, 12:02:58 PM
If Cartman owned an electronics business, that's how he'd run it. Insult his customers and tell them they weren't creative enough to utilise his product. A smart person would make it as easy as possible for the end user to implement it into their designs, instead of pretending that they "don't get it.".
Electronics is as much an art form as mathematics. You can't suddenly create a new green, just as you can't suddenly create a new 1. Either you want to sell them or you don't. I'd listen to the suggestions, it's not as if they are out to get you.
I guess its time to separate the men from the boys.
"I've got to say that the lack of creativity and initiative on this "Do It Yourself" forum is really disappointing. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_win_friends)"
I have to agree with Stephen Giles here...
this thread is starting to be entertaining.
Reminds me of a certain "gear" forum.
Andy
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 11, 2009, 12:10:40 PM
Quote from: jacobyjd on April 11, 2009, 12:05:21 PM
I'm all over this chip for a sequencer build--that application alone makes it worth it for me.
Generally an effect with a tap tempo also has a way to adjust the speed based on a pot. Is there a way to incorporate both without having to add a switch between the tap chip and a separate lfo?
We can't connect a pot to this 8-pin chip since all the pins are used, but we could make a 14-pin version that could use a pot. Would that make it more attractive?
A 14 pin version with LFO outs, BBD clock outs(scalable between 1024 and 4096 stages), various wave forms and tap tempo would be something that could be utilised in virtually all modulation/delay designs and would guarantee sales imo. You could demand a higher price too.
Quote from: frequencycentral on April 11, 2009, 12:14:33 PM
"I've got to say that the lack of creativity and initiative on this "Do It Yourself" forum is really disappointing. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_win_friends)"
frequencycentral provided a link to the classic self-help book "How to Win Friends and Influence People", a very very funny move. Nice job!
For the record, I am utilizing steps 10 and 12, namely
#10 - Appeal to noble motives.
#12 - Throw down a challenge.
Quote from: nelson on April 11, 2009, 12:17:17 PM
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 11, 2009, 12:10:40 PM
Quote from: jacobyjd on April 11, 2009, 12:05:21 PM
I'm all over this chip for a sequencer build--that application alone makes it worth it for me.
Generally an effect with a tap tempo also has a way to adjust the speed based on a pot. Is there a way to incorporate both without having to add a switch between the tap chip and a separate lfo?
We can't connect a pot to this 8-pin chip since all the pins are used, but we could make a 14-pin version that could use a pot. Would that make it more attractive?
A 14 pin version with LFO outs, BBD clock outs(scalable between 1024 and 4096 stages), various wave forms and tap tempo would be something that could be utilised in virtually all modulation/delay designs and would guarantee sales imo. You could demand a higher price too.
Thanks for the feedback nelson. We need to do our homework and will definitely get back to you.
Quote from: wampcat1 on April 11, 2009, 09:35:39 AM
Quote from: The Tone God on April 10, 2009, 07:57:24 PM
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 10, 2009, 02:47:48 PM
As far as applications for our Universal Tap Tempo Control Chip, they are more than just "metronomes and chopper effects". The most obvious example, as shown by our Application Note 1, is a sequencer design, but many other designs are possible if you let yourself think outside the box. :icon_idea:
I forgot to respond to this previously. Firstly just make sure my tone is understood please take this as a friendly suggestion to help with your product. No long lasting company produces a product and then expects people to find uses for it. If you are in the business of selling a product it is your job to tell the potential buyers, like members of this forum, what we can and cannot do with your product. You should not tell potential buyers to "think outside the box" and then offer no suggestions other then one application which I think we already acknowledged earlier in this thread. If you want to sell more product I would suggest your company come up some other ideas for the use of this product along with detailed app. notes for those uses. Making it as easy as possible for buyers to use your product will make more people want to buy your products.
Andrew
Andrew makes a great point... as a company, the first company/person to release an easy 'paint by numbers' diagram on how to easily implement tap tempo into delay using their product will experience a jump in profit I predict... I'm pretty certain we're all aware that there are alot of pedal 'builders' out there who sell ALOT of pedals using simple cloned circuits with a new name and a few part values changed. Some of them are using GGG or BYOC boards. If they can't do something as simple as design a somewhat custom effect circuit there's no way in hell they are going to figure out anything to do with tap tempo circuitry.
I predict the first company to come out with this wins *big*. ;)
bw
see springbreak reply #1 (http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=75600.msg615979#msg615979)
we`re wondering who`ll be the first kit-supply company offering the new feature?
"Build Your Own Tap" :icon_mrgreen:
Quote from: eleanor296 on April 11, 2009, 12:16:03 PM
I have to agree with Stephen Giles here...
this thread is starting to be entertaining.
Reminds me of a certain "gear" forum.
Andy
the "FreeGearBoxesOrg" ? :icon_lol:
This thread took a weird turn. I'm on the fence of, "i could build this myself with about an hour of coding" and that's a pretty neat idea, thank you. Guess it's both.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 11, 2009, 12:29:28 PM
Quote from: nelson on April 11, 2009, 12:17:17 PM
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 11, 2009, 12:10:40 PM
Quote from: jacobyjd on April 11, 2009, 12:05:21 PM
I'm all over this chip for a sequencer build--that application alone makes it worth it for me.
Generally an effect with a tap tempo also has a way to adjust the speed based on a pot. Is there a way to incorporate both without having to add a switch between the tap chip and a separate lfo?
We can't connect a pot to this 8-pin chip since all the pins are used, but we could make a 14-pin version that could use a pot. Would that make it more attractive?
A 14 pin version with LFO outs, BBD clock outs(scalable between 1024 and 4096 stages), various wave forms and tap tempo would be something that could be utilised in virtually all modulation/delay designs and would guarantee sales imo. You could demand a higher price too.
Thanks for the feedback nelson. We need to do our homework and will definitely get back to you.
Nelson's thoughts are spot-on. Since programming has so far eluded my understanding (and I don't have the time to devote to learning it at the moment), an all-inclusive 'interfacing' chip with a minimum of external components would be extremely attractive to me. Even if it cost a lot, it would be a way for me to make custom pedals for my live rig (what I do now) that would be able to completely beat the pants off 90% of the commercial effects out there (which I can do sound-wise, but not always through interface features--tap tempo goes a long way here).
Additionally, like I mentioned, the application for the current chip is exactly what I'm looking for w/ a sequencer design. Tap tempo is all but essential for me to match the small variances of other musicians while playing live.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 11, 2009, 11:45:32 AM
I've got to say that the lack of creativity and initiative on this "Do It Yourself" forum is really disappointing.
This is the top forum for this stuff and there are only a couple people who seem to get it.
The point is being CREATIVE. Pedal building is art. If you want to make copies, go to Kinko's.
for a newly designed tempo-sensitive pedal,
one could add a "cliquetrack IN" jack
for plugging in a (software-) sequencer`s or drummachine`s or even an old taperecorder`s synctrack signal,
or a triggering signal from an envelope-detector :icon_question:
(to have it translated to delaytime or tremolo or vibrato rate by the chip).
Quote from: Lurco on April 11, 2009, 01:16:03 PM
for a newly designed tempo-sensitive pedal,
one could add a "cliquetrack IN" jack
for plugging in a (software-) sequencer`s or drummachine`s or even an old taperecorder`s synctrack signal,
or a triggering signal from an envelope-detector :icon_question:
(to have it translated to delaytime or tremolo or vibrato rate by the chip).
;D
i love it
Audio path processing is not control circuitry. Most DIY pedal folks (esp. those without EE degrees) haven't had to deal with control stuff, and the resistive delay input to the PT2399 makes it friendly for those people, myself included. So the fact there's a gap in understanding is no surprise, and sneering about it doesn't help. Methinks certain folks selling chips would do well to remember that there are guys out there who can school them in 30 seconds flat----the few who hang around here just haven't taken the bait.
I looked over the datasheet and it struck me that by chaining two of these, using the pulse ouput of one to drive the tap tempo of the other, more combinations are possible---one chip gives 1:1, 1:2, and 1:3(triplets), but with chaining one could get a secondary pulse that is effectively 1:6 or 1:9. There are probably cheaper ways to do pulse doubling/tripling, but this would be pretty easy. So for instance a delay modulation controlled by the first output, and a tremolo at synched 3x controlled by the second....or a delay modulation on the first output, and the delay time at synched 2x on the second.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 11, 2009, 11:45:32 AM
Quote from: wampcat1 on April 11, 2009, 09:35:39 AM
Quote from: The Tone God on April 10, 2009, 07:57:24 PM
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 10, 2009, 02:47:48 PM
As far as applications for our Universal Tap Tempo Control Chip, they are more than just "metronomes and chopper effects". The most obvious example, as shown by our Application Note 1, is a sequencer design, but many other designs are possible if you let yourself think outside the box. :icon_idea:
I forgot to respond to this previously. Firstly just make sure my tone is understood please take this as a friendly suggestion to help with your product. No long lasting company produces a product and then expects people to find uses for it. If you are in the business of selling a product it is your job to tell the potential buyers, like members of this forum, what we can and cannot do with your product. You should not tell potential buyers to "think outside the box" and then offer no suggestions other then one application which I think we already acknowledged earlier in this thread. If you want to sell more product I would suggest your company come up some other ideas for the use of this product along with detailed app. notes for those uses. Making it as easy as possible for buyers to use your product will make more people want to buy your products.
Andrew
Andrew makes a great point... as a company, the first company/person to release an easy 'paint by numbers' diagram on how to easily implement tap tempo into delay using their product will experience a jump in profit I predict... I'm pretty certain we're all aware that there are alot of pedal 'builders' out there who sell ALOT of pedals using simple cloned circuits with a new name and a few part values changed. Some of them are using GGG or BYOC boards. If they can't do something as simple as design a somewhat custom effect circuit there's no way in hell they are going to figure out anything to do with tap tempo circuitry.
I predict the first company to come out with this wins *big*. ;)
bw
I've got to say that the lack of creativity and initiative on this "Do It Yourself" forum is really disappointing.
This is the top forum for this stuff and there are only a couple people who seem to get it.
The point is being CREATIVE. Pedal building is art. If you want to make copies, go to Kinko's.
don't get me wrong... do what you want :)
Here's the thing about capitalism though... and making any sort of real money with guitar effects (or any product in general):
provide what people need and want, at a price they are willing to pay.
supply and demand.
The question is, does your company exist to make a profit, as a personal hobby, or just to kill time?
A company's purpose, by definition, is to make money. If you don't want to run your business LIKE a business, it's only a matter of time before you (i say 'you' generically, i mean 'a person') hit a ceiling.
The truth is that you/your company may not be the one to do make the tap tempo circuit an easy diy project.
But I GUARANTEE you that *SOMEONE* will. The opportunity is there. The truth is that many of those who have knowledge in *any* niche do very little with it. The successful people use it to better the world. The wealthy people use it to make money. The *smart* people use it to do both.
;)
bw
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 11, 2009, 12:12:59 PM
Quote from: nelson on April 11, 2009, 12:02:58 PM
If Cartman owned an electronics business, that's how he'd run it. Insult his customers and tell them they weren't creative enough to utilise his product. A smart person would make it as easy as possible for the end user to implement it into their designs, instead of pretending that they "don't get it.".
Electronics is as much an art form as mathematics. You can't suddenly create a new green, just as you can't suddenly create a new 1. Either you want to sell them or you don't. I'd listen to the suggestions, it's not as if they are out to get you.
I guess its time to separate the men from the boys.
:icon_rolleyes:
I'd have to disagree with you. Your response sounds like a bit egotistical.. a bit 'anti-business', a bit "if you don't know, I'm not going to tell" type of mentality.
I'll share my own personal experience with you.
In 2001 (or so) I started tinkering with guitar effects... reading alot, absorbing alot, and breadboarding like a mad man. I bought alot of pedals and came up with some simple mods sort of like what keeley/AM were doing. This is way before Monte or anyone else was doing mods. I tried at first to sell my service of modifying pedals for folks. What I found out though is that the emails I were getting were people asking me *HOW* to modify them themselves. Instead of spending my free time answering emails all evening giving away that stuff, I stuck the info in a small word file and charged a few bucks to download it.
I realized if it was in book form, 2 things would happen. More people would see value in it and purchase it, and more people would learn how to save money and mod their own pedals.
Fast forward to now and a HUGE part of my income comes from my DIY info. And it's snowballed... early on, my customers were MANY of the companies that are now building pedals or some sort of DIY project. One of my earliest customers include Keith from build your own clone, and Monte Allums - not that I know everything - not at all!!!! The difference is that my little itty bitty project helped a couple of 'outside of the box' thinking DIY'ers build very profitable businesses, which empowered even more people to try their hand at DIY.
It's called capitalism, brotha. ;)
Whatever you decide all the best to you... my point is I GUARANTEE this will be available soon... VERY soon ;)
The first to get there wins, in a business sense. If you don't believe me, test the idea.
Take some pre-order confirmations... See how many people you get that want it.
bw
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 11, 2009, 11:45:32 AM
I've got to say that the lack of creativity and initiative on this "Do It Yourself" forum is really disappointing.
Give us a chance mate, we've only known about this gizmo for about 24 hours, I'm sure it's only a matter of time before someone comes up with something cool to do with it. I'm tempted to buy one and make a tap tempo tremolo using it just for the hell of it.
I think it's unfortunate that Steve mentioned the words "Tap tempo" and delay in his post, because that's the holy grail to a lot of people round here. The fact that your chip, cool though it is, doesn't get us any closer to building one is the reason for most of the negativity.
just my 2ps worth of course ;)
+1 on slackers comment.
As cool as this little chip is, it is basically only a preprogrammed implementation of the micro-controller based tap tempo idea that's been floating around for ages. It still doesn't solve the original problem of the non-mathematical (so it seems) relationship between resistance and delay time. What will be interesting is seeing if the prepackaged solution will encourage more people to try to solve this problem and see if they can make something that is functional and close enough for rock and roll.
Tap tempo for a PT2399 is impossible and no-one should attempt it (at least for another week or so.) ;)
I have this sudden urge to record Don't You Lie To Me, which for the unknowing is a Chuck Berry song which does not require echo - thank goodness for that. Trouble is that I'm in Italy so 2 1/2 hours flying time from home. But anyway, somebody might like to sove the problem of the Adaptive Sweep Generator whilst they are at it!
Quote from: wampcat1 on April 11, 2009, 02:09:53 PM
don't get me wrong... do what you want :)
Here's the thing about capitalism though... and making any sort of real money with guitar effects (or any product in general):
provide what people need and want, at a price they are willing to pay.
supply and demand.
The question is, does your company exist to make a profit, as a personal hobby, or just to kill time?
A company's purpose, by definition, is to make money. If you don't want to run your business LIKE a business, it's only a matter of time before you (i say 'you' generically, i mean 'a person') hit a ceiling.
The truth is that you/your company may not be the one to do make the tap tempo circuit an easy diy project.
But I GUARANTEE you that *SOMEONE* will. The opportunity is there. The truth is that many of those who have knowledge in *any* niche do very little with it. The successful people use it to better the world. The wealthy people use it to make money. The *smart* people use it to do both.
;)
bw
OK - you`re into the Art Of Capitalism so it seems ?
The Art Of Effectsdesign is providing what people don`t have yet, don`t know it exists, will want when they hear it,
no matter what it costs to get it going.
Quote from: Lurco on April 11, 2009, 04:58:27 PM
Quote from: wampcat1 on April 11, 2009, 02:09:53 PM
don't get me wrong... do what you want :)
Here's the thing about capitalism though... and making any sort of real money with guitar effects (or any product in general):
provide what people need and want, at a price they are willing to pay.
supply and demand.
The question is, does your company exist to make a profit, as a personal hobby, or just to kill time?
A company's purpose, by definition, is to make money. If you don't want to run your business LIKE a business, it's only a matter of time before you (i say 'you' generically, i mean 'a person') hit a ceiling.
The truth is that you/your company may not be the one to do make the tap tempo circuit an easy diy project.
But I GUARANTEE you that *SOMEONE* will. The opportunity is there. The truth is that many of those who have knowledge in *any* niche do very little with it. The successful people use it to better the world. The wealthy people use it to make money. The *smart* people use it to do both.
;)
bw
OK - you`re into the Art Of Capitalism so it seems ?
The Art Of Effectsdesign is providing what people don`t have yet, don`t know it exists, will want when they hear it,
no matter what it costs to get it going.
agreed, definitely - however, I'm not the one trying to sell my chip. :)
bw
Quote from: slacker on April 11, 2009, 03:02:50 PM
I think it's unfortunate that Steve mentioned the words "Tap tempo" and delay in his post
Apologies for not doing more homework on this. Of course, I do hope the product turns out to be useful.
Regards
SD
How about a CONTEST :icon_surprised:
For the next 6 weeks (deadline May 31, 2009), anyone interested can post photos and description (including schematic) of your finished pedal that uses our Universal Tap Tempo Control Chip MV-52 to this thread.
At the end of 6 weeks, I will choose the 5 best ideas and let you vote on the best one. Voting will be open for 7 days.
The winner will receive a brand new TOGGLE pedal:
(http://www.moltenvoltage.com/photos/togpic.jpg)
http://news.harmony-central.com/Product-news/Molten-Voltage-Releases-TOGGLE-Pedal-.html
Any takers? :icon_question: :icon_idea: :icon_question:
From what I can tell, combine the tap tempo chip, an envelope follower/gate circuit, a latch, and some 4066's and you have something approaching the Toggle pedal. Wouldn't do the swing thing, though.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 11, 2009, 06:57:35 PM
How about a CONTEST :icon_surprised:
Fun! Too bad I'm going to be out of town for 5 of those weeks, I got an idea that would be a serious runner up to whatever wins.
Quote from: Lurco on April 11, 2009, 12:56:27 PM
Quote from: eleanor296 on April 11, 2009, 12:16:03 PM
I have to agree with Stephen Giles here...
this thread is starting to be entertaining.
Reminds me of a certain "gear" forum.
Andy
the "FreeGearBoxesOrg" ? :icon_lol:
I was thinking more along the lines of TGP...
haven't been on the "other" forum in a good while, actually.
They'd both fit the shoe though, so great guess!
Quote from: cheezit on April 11, 2009, 08:01:47 PM
From what I can tell, combine the tap tempo chip, an envelope follower/gate circuit, a latch, and some 4066's and you have something approaching the Toggle pedal. Wouldn't do the swing thing, though.
A pretty transgressive submission to this contest would be to design a better Toggle.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 11, 2009, 06:57:35 PM
How about a CONTEST :icon_surprised:
Any takers? :icon_question: :icon_idea: :icon_question:
great idea! :)
bw
Quote from: Taylor on April 11, 2009, 11:04:12 PM
A pretty transgressive submission to this contest would be to design a better Toggle.
I actually think the Toggle is pretty cool. What's not obvious from the youtube videos is that all the cool sounds it is switching between are coming from other effects. But the idea is neat and it does appear to generate some musically useful sounds---anyone going gaga over one of those sequenced-wah deals should be able to do something with this. Price point is a bit much for a switcher though.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 11, 2009, 06:57:35 PM
How about a CONTEST :icon_surprised:
Sounds like a great idea :)
Quote from: cheezit on April 12, 2009, 03:18:53 AM
I actually think the Toggle is pretty cool. What's not obvious from the youtube videos is that all the cool sounds it is switching between are coming from other effects. But the idea is neat and it does appear to generate some musically useful sounds---anyone going gaga over one of those sequenced-wah deals should be able to do something with this. Price point is a bit much for a switcher though.
I agree. And I'm realizing that maybe they're not trying to come off like I first thought.
It does look pretty. And I like the idea.
Just a side thought... let's take something similar like the belton reverb module:
http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=74345.0
Notice how the designer not only provided a data sheet but ALSO a pedal schematic... I'm willing to bet that there will be a TON of boutique reverb pedals veerrrrryyyy shortly. ;)
And THAT'S where you'll sell a ton of chips... to the guys that order 100 at a time. ;)
bw
We actually made 2 videos about TOGGLE.
The first one is a product demo video, the second is a song that shows 31 ways to use TOGGLE and lets you know what mode is being used and what effect is on each channel:
TOGGLE demo video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KznB3VhY3c)
31 Flavors of TOGGLE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Fn_ZmeL7hI&NR=1)
Looks like there are at least a few of you interested in the contest, so let's do it!
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 12, 2009, 01:37:05 PM
We actually made 2 videos about TOGGLE.
The first one is a product demo video, the second is a song that shows 31 ways to use TOGGLE and lets you know what mode is being used and what effect is on each channel:
TOGGLE demo video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KznB3VhY3c)
31 Flavors of TOGGLE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Fn_ZmeL7hI&NR=1)
Looks like there are at least a few of you interested in the contest, so let's do it!
IMO, the toggle is a unique product and a very useful product - plus it looks good!
I'd give you a special pat on the back for not going after the 'same ol, same ol' and repackaging a tubescreamer like so many other pedal companies. :)
Contest is a great idea too! you ought to put something on your website about it. :)
bw
Thre are a lot of girls tapping in high heels here in Italy - chest pushed up (often big) maybe they could provide inspiration. :icon_lol:
Cool, do you have schematics or even just decent photos ;D
I don't have the time to participate, but I have a few guesses/observations:
- this is a rough drop-in for any circuit with a 555 used as a timer in it, for instance the Vanishing Point. That circuit uses additional ICs of the right "flavor" to provide interesting permutations. A four-loop version of Toggle?
- by adding a pulse-to-constant-resistance LDR circuit (as mentioned earlier in the thread) it can sub in for many pots, though range/curve adjustment is going to be tricky, hence the PT2399 issues.
- conversion to other waveforms (sine, triangle, sawtooth) is possible and can provide variable resistive control through an LDR, giving a continuously varying resistance for things like gain, depth, etc.
- conversion to sine might provide a base frequency for ring modulation and other two-frequency type circuits
- many more interesting things are possible if someone wants to go into PIC-land, but the point of this chip is to stay out of there---this chip isn't really needed if someone wants to do PIC programming.
- what about other sources of tap-tempo triggers than just a footswitch? Others have mentioned sequencer clicks....how about miking a real drummer's kick drum?
I`ll try to figure out a way how to tap reverse delay/reverb for the contest... :icon_smile:
Quote from: slacker on April 12, 2009, 04:39:46 PM
Cool, do you have schematics or even just decent photos ;D
Photos (including one of the finished product in the enclosure and one of the PCB showing the MV-52 chip), a description of what it does and how it works, and a schematic are all required.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 11, 2009, 11:45:32 AM
I've got to say that the lack of creativity and initiative on this "Do It Yourself" forum is really disappointing.
Yeah. Me too. :icon_biggrin:
I posted pseudocode for programming tap tempo into a uC here a few years ago. :icon_biggrin:
Quote from: nelson on April 11, 2009, 12:02:58 PM
Electronics is as much an art form as mathematics. You can't suddenly create a new green, just as you can't suddenly create a new 1.
"Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development."
- Julius Frontinus (Highly respected engineer in Rome, 1st century A.D.)
Quote from: StephenGiles on April 12, 2009, 02:53:50 PM
Thre are a lot of girls tapping in high heels here in Italy - chest pushed up (often big) maybe they could provide inspiration. :icon_lol:
Quote from: slacker on April 12, 2009, 04:39:46 PM
Cool, do you have schematics or even just decent photos ;D
Yes please, and some gut shots and how about some off board wiring diagrams??? ;D ;D
Hi
How about controlling this one http://www.spinsemi.com/Products/datasheets/spn1001/FV-1.pdf (http://www.spinsemi.com/Products/datasheets/spn1001/FV-1.pdf) With it. Seams that digital to digital ( 1 Or 0 ON or OFF ) would be much easier than converting to analog resistens.
//Solderman
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 13, 2009, 01:49:17 AM
Quote from: nelson on April 11, 2009, 12:02:58 PM
Electronics is as much an art form as mathematics. You can't suddenly create a new green, just as you can't suddenly create a new 1.
"Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development."
- Julius Frontinus (Highly respected engineer in Rome, 1st century A.D.)
Not quite my point. My point was more that you can't defy the laws of nature. Not that they can't be manipulated to create new, interesting and beautiful things.
Quote from: solderman on April 13, 2009, 04:25:06 AM
Hi
How about controlling this one http://www.spinsemi.com/Products/datasheets/spn1001/FV-1.pdf (http://www.spinsemi.com/Products/datasheets/spn1001/FV-1.pdf) With it. Seams that digital to digital ( 1 Or 0 ON or OFF ) would be much easier than converting to analog resistens.
//Solderman
I think the FV-1 could probably be made to do tap tempo quite easily within itself.
MV - could you change the output from pin 3 to be a PWM square wave at around 1000Hz (guessing here) with a duty cycle of, say 1% with a long tap interval and 99% with a short one? Either that or output a frequency proportional to the tap interval. I know you have already done the ground-work for that with the x1, x2, x3, x4 switch (S1), but how about x512, for example?
I've had a few thoughts...
Quote from: solderman on April 13, 2009, 04:25:06 AM
Hi
How about controlling this one http://www.spinsemi.com/Products/datasheets/spn1001/FV-1.pdf (http://www.spinsemi.com/Products/datasheets/spn1001/FV-1.pdf) With it. Seams that digital to digital ( 1 Or 0 ON or OFF ) would be much easier than converting to analog resistens.
//Solderman
Hey look! The FV-1 has a comprehensive datasheet, including a reference schematic and a list of typical applications! They must have some uncreative customers... ;)
Quote from: cheezit on April 13, 2009, 01:27:19 PM
Quote from: solderman on April 13, 2009, 04:25:06 AM
Hi
How about controlling this one http://www.spinsemi.com/Products/datasheets/spn1001/FV-1.pdf (http://www.spinsemi.com/Products/datasheets/spn1001/FV-1.pdf) With it. Seams that digital to digital ( 1 Or 0 ON or OFF ) would be much easier than converting to analog resistens.
//Solderman
Hey look! The FV-1 has a comprehensive datasheet, including a reference schematic and a list of typical applications! They must have some uncreative customers... ;)
A few thoughts about the FV-1. First of all, it is very very cool and packs a lot of customizable digital effects in a small package. If you actually read the datasheet, it says "8 demonstration programs are built into the internal ROM...The default ROM programs are for demonstration purposes and should not be used in production". In other words, don't even think about selling pedals with it unless you write your own custom code using their assembly language.
Second, it turns your signal digital. For the most part, guitar players want to keep their signal analog if possible (although I admit I love the Whammy).
Third, in order to use FV-1, you need to write your own assembly code. Not that this is a bad thing, its very cool if you are willing to climb the learning curve. It's just that you are making it sound like a simple "drop in" solution which it doesn't appear to be.
Finally, its been out at least 3 years and there are a total of two (2) app notes for it. If you go to their website, they leave it to their customers to share ideas on how to use it. How's that for a novel idea.
In case you missed it, the MV-52 datasheet shows how to hook up the chip with a handful of components:
http://www.moltenvoltage.com/downloads/Universal_Tap_Tempo_Control_Chip_MV-52_-_Datasheet_v2.pdf
And we provided an Application Note that gets you started building cool sequenced effects:
http://www.moltenvoltage.com/downloads/Application_Note_1_for_MV-52_-_v1_1_-_Molten_Voltage.pdf
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 13, 2009, 06:56:10 PM
Quote from: cheezit on April 13, 2009, 01:27:19 PM
Quote from: solderman on April 13, 2009, 04:25:06 AM
Hi
How about controlling this one http://www.spinsemi.com/Products/datasheets/spn1001/FV-1.pdf (http://www.spinsemi.com/Products/datasheets/spn1001/FV-1.pdf) With it. Seams that digital to digital ( 1 Or 0 ON or OFF ) would be much easier than converting to analog resistens.
//Solderman
Hey look! The FV-1 has a comprehensive datasheet, including a reference schematic and a list of typical applications! They must have some uncreative customers... ;)
A few thoughts about the FV-1. First of all, it is very very cool and packs a lot of customizable digital effects in a small package. If you actually read the datasheet, it says "8 demonstration programs are built into the internal ROM...The default ROM programs are for demonstration purposes and should not be used in production". In other words, don't even think about selling pedals with it unless you write your own custom code using their assembly language.
Second, it turns your signal digital. For the most part, guitar players want to keep their signal analog if possible (although I admit I love the Whammy).
Third, in order to use FV-1, you need to write your own assembly code. Not that this is a bad thing, its very cool if you are willing to climb the learning curve. It's just that you are making it sound like a simple "drop in" solution which it doesn't appear to be.
Finally, its been out at least 3 years and there are a total of two (2) app notes for it. If you go to their website, they leave it to their customers to share ideas on how to use it. How's that for a novel idea.
In case you missed it, the MV-52 datasheet shows how to hook up the chip with a handful of components:
http://www.moltenvoltage.com/downloads/Universal_Tap_Tempo_Control_Chip_MV-52_-_Datasheet_v2.pdf
And we provided an Application Note that gets you started building cool sequenced effects:
http://www.moltenvoltage.com/downloads/Application_Note_1_for_MV-52_-_v1_1_-_Molten_Voltage.pdf
1. A lot of musicians that I know is crazy about Line6 and there stuff. Most of them focus on the music and don't give a F-k in the tech stuff as long as it delivers.
2. Ever heard of google. I did a quick search for FV-1 AND assembly code and got 11 700 v after (0,32 seconds). It will never cease to amaze me how many people that puts in uncountable numbers of hours to spread info on the Internet of everything under the sun. Assembly code for FV-1 is one of thees subjects.
All this is not about what is wrong or right, its about what is usefol and for home.
BTW i thinks this chip is cool we just have to find the coolest way to use it that non of you ever could had imagined (or not wanted to). This is what happens to stuff you drop to in this. comunity ;D ;D
//Solderman
If you want to turn a a frequency into a voltage or current for your delays etc, try a "tachometer" or "frequency-to-voltage" circuit. Or the less-linear, passive version: a capacitor.
P.S. Just to clear up, the PT2395 and PT2396 both accept an external clock source, only the PT2399 does not.
Wow, I spend a day away getting a bikini wax and come back and someone has invented a tap-tempo module.
Very cool! Molten Voltage, I can see a lot of very cool uses for this, simply because I'm not hung up on tap-tempo for PT23999 delays.
I'm shall procure said device and do shameful things to it. Thanks for the device and your posts.
Quote from: dano12 on April 14, 2009, 09:51:41 AM
Wow, I spend a day away getting a bikini wax and come back and someone has invented a tap-tempo module.
I'm shall procure said device and do shameful things to it.
That IS what we (a least I) expect from you :D
//Solderman
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 13, 2009, 06:56:10 PM
A few thoughts about the FV-1. First of all, it is very very cool and packs a lot of customizable digital effects in a small package. If you actually read the datasheet, it says "8 demonstration programs are built into the internal ROM...The default ROM programs are for demonstration purposes and should not be used in production". In other words, don't even think about selling pedals with it unless you write your own custom code using their assembly language.
Actually, that language was removed in the latest version of the datasheet. It was there originally as the ROM code was created prior to having actual chips, and while I tested the code in the Verilog simulator we could only do short audio tests (I was simulating the FV-1 in Verilog and it may take an hour to simulate 100mS, so it took days to simulate a few seconds) and we didn't want people to design product around the ROM programs then discover an error later. But as Spin is confident with the code, feel free to build products using the ROM code, sell them, make a profit, all fine with Spin!
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 13, 2009, 06:56:10 PM
Second, it turns your signal digital. For the most part, guitar players want to keep their signal analog if possible (although I admit I love the Whammy).
A personal choice, I respect you prefer to stay in analog but many guitar players have no problem working in the digital domain.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 13, 2009, 06:56:10 PM
Third, in order to use FV-1, you need to write your own assembly code. Not that this is a bad thing, its very cool if you are willing to climb the learning curve. It's just that you are making it sound like a simple "drop in" solution which it doesn't appear to be.
Write your own code, use the ROM code, d/l the code from the site or Keiths notes area. Actually lots of ways to get free code to use.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 13, 2009, 06:56:10 PM
Finally, its been out at least 3 years and there are a total of two (2) app notes for it. If you go to their website, they leave it to their customers to share ideas on how to use it. How's that for a novel idea.
Yes, two formal app notes but lots of notes/tricks/hints in Keith's area, he decided to do that instead of formal app notes. OK, a slightly different approach but we have received lots of good comments on it. Also there is the code for d/l, most has comments explaining what is going on so you can read the code to learn the techniques.
And, you can always email us with questions. We help people create new code for their products every day.
And, just for fun, here is some code I wrote a while ago that creates a delay based on the high time of one POT input (no s/w debounce, the input was from a signal generator but could be a switch with some debounce on it) + the voltage on another POT input. Could use the final count for many differnt things (a delay as in this case, the coefficient for LFO frequency or amplitude, reverb length, etc.)
;delay time controlled by high time of a square wave+POT
;Frank Thomson
;OCT Distribution (310)348-9626
;
;pot1 adjusts delay by voltage
;pot2 adjusts delay time based on high time of a square wave input
;total delay is sum of pot1 and pot2
equ length 32767
equ sdel 0x03ffff ;start up delay, 4 sec. at 32K sample rate
mem echo length ;echo delay
equ countval reg0
equ pot2fil reg1
equ sigval reg2
equ thiscount reg3
equ totaldel reg4
equ pot1fil reg5
equ delreg reg6
; Clear register on start
skp RUN, loop
clr
wrax countval, 0
wrax pot2fil, 0
wrax sigval, 0
wrax thiscount, 0
wrax totaldel, 0
or sdel
wrax delreg, 0
loop:
; Only look at POT2 input if we have timed out the start-up timer
sof 0,0
rdax delreg,1.0
skp zro,gopot ; if counter is 0 do the stomp pot routine
sof 0,0 ; else clear ACC
or 0xffffff ; load -1 into acc
rdax delreg,1.0 ; delreg - 1
wrax delreg, 0 ; write delreg and clear acc
skp zro, govar ; go to the variable pot routine
gopot:
; If signal is > 0.5, increase counter
sof 0,-0.5 ; Load -0.5 into ACC
rdax pot2,1.0 ; POT0 - 0.5
skp neg, siglow ; If < 0 then skip over following
; If here then the signal is high
; Was the old signal high?
clr ; Clear ACC
rdax sigval, 1.0 ; Read old signal
skp gez,lbl2 ; If old signal was high, skip the following else clear counter
clr ; 0 -> ACC
wrax countval,0 ; 0 -> counter
lbl2:
clr ; Clear ACC
or 0x000100 ; "1" -> ACC - normally would be 0x000100, may want to double it
rdax countval, 1.0 ; counter + 1 -> ACC
wrax countval,0 ; ACC -> counter
skp zro, outit ; At this point we have a high signal and have incremented the counter
; Skip over low signal routine and do the delay
; Signal low routine
siglow:
clr ; Clear ACC
rdax countval, 1.0 ; Read counter value
wrax thiscount ,0 ; Write it to the register used in the delay calculations
outit:
; At this point, thiscount contains the number of sample to delay
; Save wave value
sof 0,-0.5 ; Load -0.5 into ACC
rdax pot2,1.0 ; POT2 - 0.5
wrax sigval, 1.0 ; Save the current signal value
; Make sure total delay is less than delay length
govar:
clr
or length*256
mulx pot1 ; POT1*length -> ACC
rdax thiscount, 1.0 ; Add in the count
wrax totaldel,0 ; Save the total delay, clear ACC
or length*256
rdax totaldel,-1.0 ; length - totaldel
skp gez, goout ; if >=0 then totaldel < length so OK
clr
or length*256
wrax totaldel,0
goout:
; Smooth value
clr
rdax totaldel, 1.0 ; Load delay into ACC
rdfx pot2fil, 0.000125 ; Smooth it : (target - current) * C + current
wrax pot2fil, 0 ; Save it
;
rdax adcl, 1.0 ; Get left input
wra echo, 0 ; Write it to the head of the delay
;
or echo*256 ; Load base of delay into ACC
rdax pot2fil, 1.0 ; Get the value, it is the left delay tap to read
wrax addr_ptr, 0 ; Write it to the address pointer register
rmpa 1 ; Read from memory - left
wrax dacl, 0 ; ACC-> DACL
Quote from: octfrank on April 14, 2009, 12:36:36 PM
Actually, that language was removed in the latest version of the datasheet.
I just downloaded your datasheet 20 seconds ago and the language is still there (see page 4):
http://www.spinsemi.com/Products/datasheets/spn1001/FV-1.pdf
Great product, by the way.
Quote from: dano12 on April 14, 2009, 09:51:41 AM
Wow, I spend a day away getting a bikini wax and come back and someone has invented a tap-tempo module.
Very cool! Molten Voltage, I can see a lot of very cool uses for this, simply because I'm not hung up on tap-tempo for PT23999 delays.
I'm shall procure said device and do shameful things to it. Thanks for the device and your posts.
I checked out your website and all I can say is WOW! That's what we've been talking about!
www.beavisaudio.com
Hopefully we will see a Beavis design in the contest!
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 14, 2009, 01:02:46 PM
Quote from: octfrank on April 14, 2009, 12:36:36 PM
Actually, that language was removed in the latest version of the datasheet.
I just downloaded your datasheet 20 seconds ago and the language is still there (see page 4):
http://www.spinsemi.com/Products/datasheets/spn1001/FV-1.pdf
Great product, by the way.
Missed the mention of it in paragraph 2 there, will remove and upload new file later today. But, official word is that you can use the ROM code to make and sell product.
I hope it isn't bad form posting this to another thread, but the light at the end of the tunnel is over here (http://"http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=72815.msg617323#msg617323"). :)
Quote from: decc on April 15, 2009, 12:58:45 AM
I hope it isn't bad form posting this to another thread, but the light at the end of the tunnel is over here (http://"http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=72815.msg617323#msg617323"). :)
If you have tunnel vision re the PT2399, that is.
This is still the place to post your designs for the contest. ;D
An idea for interfacing between MV-52 and PT2399:
(http://www.aronnelson.com/gallery/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=39530&g2_serialNumber=1)
First IC (LM2900/3900, no substitute) is a tachometer circuit that converts pulses into a DC voltage output. Second IC converts this voltage to a current for controlling PT2399 delay time. Might be possible to replace the diode with the transistor/current sink portion and get it down to one op-amp, but I'm not sure. LM3900s only come in quad packages, so you still have 2 op-amps left for buffering, modulation or whatever. Perhaps a 3-chip delay with tap tempo (not including 5V regulator)?
Well, mine is on order--however, I'm not doing anything crazy...I've been working on putting together a sequenced effect pedal for live use, and tap tempo is what will motivate it to reality :)
More an issue of necessity rather than creativity :icon_biggrin:
RE: MV-52
What voltage is output from pin 2 (on-off) and from pin 3 (pulse)?
Sounds like you could also refer to pins 2 and 3 as gate and trigger outputs, yes?
Thanks!
~ Charlie
An MV-52 is winging its way towards me from Smallbear as we speak ;D
Just got to think what to do with it now.
Quote from: moosapotamus on April 15, 2009, 12:00:26 PM
RE: MV-52
What voltage is output from pin 2 (on-off) and from pin 3 (pulse)?
Sounds like you could also refer to pins 2 and 3 as gate and trigger outputs, yes?
Thanks!
~ Charlie
The pin output voltages are the same as the chip input voltage which can be anywhere from 2 - 5.5 volts DC. The schematics show 5 volts because that is what we always use in our prototypes.
Yes you could properly refer to pin 2 as a gate output and pin 3 as a trigger output.
It is important to keep in mind that the output from pin 2 switches on and off in time with the taps. In other words, the time it stays on is equal to the time between taps, and the time it stays off is equal to the time between taps (in real-time mode). If you need a full square wave cycle from pin 2 that is equal to the time between taps, you can ground pin 7, doubling the output frequency (1:2 mode).
It is also worth mentioning that the two outputs can be used simultaneously and sink or source 25mA each.
Please let me know if anything is unclear, and if you have any other questions.
Thanks!
Cool! 8)
I think I'm gonna try playing with a couple of these, too!
Thanks
~ Charlie
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 15, 2009, 05:19:58 PM
It is important to keep in mind that the output from pin 2 switches on and off in time with the taps. In other words, the time it stays on is equal to the time between taps, and the time it stays off is equal to the time between taps (in real-time mode). If you need a full square wave cycle from pin 2 that is equal to the time between taps, you can ground pin 7, doubling the output frequency (1:2 mode).
That's a handy bit of information. Just add an integrator to the output and you have a triangle LFO. :P
One thing I didn't see answered, did you have that chip custom made for you, or tweek an existing chip? Just curious as I thought it would be cost prohibitive to do that. I wish I could think of a good application we could use it for, will keep it in mind. thanks!
Quote from: analogmike on April 15, 2009, 10:06:18 PM
One thing I didn't see answered, did you have that chip custom made for you, or tweek an existing chip? Just curious as I thought it would be cost prohibitive to do that. I wish I could think of a good application we could use it for, will keep it in mind. thanks!
MV-52 is a custom programmed microcontroller that we created and manufacture.
Thanks for the feedback. Hopefully this thread and the contest will give you (and everyone else) some inspiration!
...for those new to this thread, see page 4 for contest details
Mine arrived over the weekend, I've only had a brief play with it, but it works as advertised :)
Hopefully in a couple of days I'll be able to knock up a simple tremolo.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 15, 2009, 05:19:58 PM
Quote from: moosapotamus on April 15, 2009, 12:00:26 PM
RE: MV-52
What voltage is output from pin 2 (on-off) and from pin 3 (pulse)?
Sounds like you could also refer to pins 2 and 3 as gate and trigger outputs, yes?
Thanks!
~ Charlie
The pin output voltages are the same as the chip input voltage which can be anywhere from 2 - 5.5 volts DC. The schematics show 5 volts because that is what we always use in our prototypes.
Yes you could properly refer to pin 2 as a gate output and pin 3 as a trigger output.
It is important to keep in mind that the output from pin 2 switches on and off in time with the taps. In other words, the time it stays on is equal to the time between taps, and the time it stays off is equal to the time between taps (in real-time mode). If you need a full square wave cycle from pin 2 that is equal to the time between taps, you can ground pin 7, doubling the output frequency (1:2 mode).
It is also worth mentioning that the two outputs can be used simultaneously and sink or source 25mA each.
Please let me know if anything is unclear, and if you have any other questions.
Thanks!
Isn't the onternally RC generated clocking frequency of these MCU's supply voltage dependant?
As such, you probably shouldn't be advising that the MCU can run down to two volts, wouldn't that throw off the timing?
Quote from: analogmike on April 15, 2009, 10:06:18 PM
One thing I didn't see answered, did you have that chip custom made for you, or tweek an existing chip? Just curious as I thought it would be cost prohibitive to do that. I wish I could think of a good application we could use it for, will keep it in mind. thanks!
From the pinout, it's probably one of the eight pin PICs or AVR uCs.
Quote from: nelson on April 20, 2009, 04:18:20 PM
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 15, 2009, 05:19:58 PM
Quote from: moosapotamus on April 15, 2009, 12:00:26 PM
RE: MV-52
What voltage is output from pin 2 (on-off) and from pin 3 (pulse)?
Sounds like you could also refer to pins 2 and 3 as gate and trigger outputs, yes?
Thanks!
~ Charlie
The pin output voltages are the same as the chip input voltage which can be anywhere from 2 - 5.5 volts DC. The schematics show 5 volts because that is what we always use in our prototypes.
Yes you could properly refer to pin 2 as a gate output and pin 3 as a trigger output.
It is important to keep in mind that the output from pin 2 switches on and off in time with the taps. In other words, the time it stays on is equal to the time between taps, and the time it stays off is equal to the time between taps (in real-time mode). If you need a full square wave cycle from pin 2 that is equal to the time between taps, you can ground pin 7, doubling the output frequency (1:2 mode).
It is also worth mentioning that the two outputs can be used simultaneously and sink or source 25mA each.
Please let me know if anything is unclear, and if you have any other questions.
Thanks!
Isn't the onternally RC generated clocking frequency of these MCU's supply voltage dependant?
As such, you probably shouldn't be advising that the MCU can run down to two volts, wouldn't that throw off the timing?
Good questions.
Actually, the processor speed is relatively consistent (+/- 5%) across the specified voltage range (2 - 5.5 volts DC) and a very wide range of temperatures (-40 to +185 deg. Fahrenheit)
In addition, the timing is not absolute, but relative to the tap interval, therefore any processor speed variations make no difference.
I hope Mr Standard reads this. Or perhaps manufacturers start to make tap pedals wit external / aux input and ouput for that stupid tap signal.
Quote from: octfrank on April 14, 2009, 12:36:36 PM
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 13, 2009, 06:56:10 PM
A few thoughts about the FV-1. First of all, it is very very cool and packs a lot of customizable digital effects in a small package. If you actually read the datasheet, it says "8 demonstration programs are built into the internal ROM...The default ROM programs are for demonstration purposes and should not be used in production". In other words, don't even think about selling pedals with it unless you write your own custom code using their assembly language.
Actually, that language was removed in the latest version of the datasheet. It was there originally as the ROM code was created prior to having actual chips, and while I tested the code in the Verilog simulator we could only do short audio tests (I was simulating the FV-1 in Verilog and it may take an hour to simulate 100mS, so it took days to simulate a few seconds) and we didn't want people to design product around the ROM programs then discover an error later. But as Spin is confident with the code, feel free to build products using the ROM code, sell them, make a profit, all fine with Spin!
Thanks for clearing this up loudly and in public, Frank! :icon_biggrin: :icon_wink: :icon_cool:
Steve at SmallBear said a bunch of you have bought our Universal Tap Tempo Control Chip MV-52. Hopefully we will see plenty of designs for the contest (details on page 4 of this thread).
Deadline is May 31, 2009! :)
Beavis' insane Armageddon Processor, mentioned in another thread (http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=75354.20) I just read, has a section called "Sequencer/VCF" that uses a 40106 to pulse a 4017 decade counter to sequence a voltage controlled filter:
http://www.beavisaudio.com/projects/ArmageddonProcessor/
Replacing the 40106 pulse circuit with MV-52 would be a simple way to give it tap tempo control. :)
Note that you might need to add the 100 uF noise reduction cap shown on our application note:
http://www.moltenvoltage.com/downloads/Application_Note_1_for_MV-52_-_v1_1_-_Molten_Voltage.pdf
Here is a page full of VCF designs:
http://www.synthdiy.com/show/tags.asp?tag=vcf,%20voltage%20controlled%20filter
What might be even cooler is to run the pulse into 2 separate 4017 chips so you can sequence the frequency and resonance independently at each step.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 28, 2009, 12:33:04 AM
What might be even cooler is to run the pulse into 2 separate 4017 chips so you can sequence the frequency and resonance independently at each step.
That does sound cool, I've done it on my modular synth, but you only need to use one 4017 (or 4024). You can run each output of the 4017 to two (or three, or more) sets of pots for a multiple channel analogue sequencer. With the sequencers I've built this way I always use a buffer on each stage (can be opamp or transistor, two LM324 is my choice), with buffers you can drive many channels. I've never tried it without buffers but it may still work.
I only just started tinkering with the MV-52, so maybe I'm doing something wrong, but I have a few questions about the way it is acting...
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 15, 2009, 05:19:58 PM
The pin output voltages are the same as the chip input voltage which can be anywhere from 2 - 5.5 volts DC.
I've got a 9VDC wall wart power supply and am using a 7805 regulator to to make +5VDC for the MV-52. So, based on the quote, above, I should be able to measure +5V peaks at pin 2 and at pin 3, right?
But at most, I'm only getting about 2.5V peaks at the on-off output (pin 2). And, I can't even measure the voltage output at the pulse output (pin 3), but it's not even enough to light an LED. I thought maybe since it's a very narrow trigger output, maybe the LED wouldn't have enough time to light up fully, so I tried plugging the pin 3 output into a PC based oscilloscope and that confirmed that the output of pin 3 is very low compared to the output of pin 2. Is that normal, or am I doing something wrong?
Another thing that I don't recall reading about is that there is about a 3 second delay when tapping in a new tempo. It seems to vary a little depending on if you are increasing or decreasing the tempo. But the tempo does not change immediately. As soon as I tap in a new tempo the output from the MV-52 just stops for a while, then starts with the new tempo after a couple of seconds. Again, is that normal, or am I doing something wrong here, too?
Thanks
~ Charlie
Quote from: moosapotamus on May 02, 2009, 05:00:17 PM
I only just started tinkering with the MV-52, so maybe I'm doing something wrong, but I have a few questions about the way it is acting...
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on April 15, 2009, 05:19:58 PM
The pin output voltages are the same as the chip input voltage which can be anywhere from 2 - 5.5 volts DC.
I've got a 9VDC wall wart power supply and am using a 7805 regulator to to make +5VDC for the MV-52. So, based on the quote, above, I should be able to measure +5V peaks at pin 2 and at pin 3, right?
But at most, I'm only getting about 2.5V peaks at the on-off output (pin 2). And, I can't even measure the voltage output at the pulse output (pin 3), but it's not even enough to light an LED. I thought maybe since it's a very narrow trigger output, maybe the LED wouldn't have enough time to light up fully, so I tried plugging the pin 3 output into a PC based oscilloscope and that confirmed that the output of pin 3 is very low compared to the output of pin 2. Is that normal, or am I doing something wrong?
Another thing that I don't recall reading about is that there is about a 3 second delay when tapping in a new tempo. It seems to vary a little depending on if you are increasing or decreasing the tempo. But the tempo does not change immediately. As soon as I tap in a new tempo the output from the MV-52 just stops for a while, then starts with the new tempo after a couple of seconds. Again, is that normal, or am I doing something wrong here, too?
Thanks
~ Charlie
Hi Charlie,
We just re-tested MV-52 with an analog oscilloscope and a digital multimeter and confirmed that the output of pin 2 matches the input voltage for the chip on pin 1 (+5V DC using a 7805 voltage regulator and 9 volt wall wart), so we have to assume that you have set it up wrong. The 0.1uF capacitor is essential for proper operation, and it
must be connected
as close as possible to pin 1. Pin 4
must be held high with a 10K resistor for proper operation.
Are you using the exact setup on our datasheet:
http://www.moltenvoltage.com/downloads/Universal_Tap_Tempo_Control_Chip_MV-52_-_Datasheet_v2.pdf
There also shouldn't be any noticeable delay after pressing the second tap. Are you only tapping twice? Are you using a heavy duty pushbutton? There is an upper limit on how fast MV-52 allows you to tap, which is .175 seconds. If you are using a tactile switch, you can easily tap faster than that, but it's hard to tap any faster than that using a heavy-duty momentary on pushbutton like this:
http://www.smallbearelec.com/Detail.bok?no=672
Regarding the pin 3 output, we can easily flash an LED with it, provided it is connected without a resistor. Granted, the pulse is extremely brief and the LED appears very dim, but if you use a high-efficiency clear red LED, you can easily see it. The pulse width is around 1/20,000th of a second, making an accurate voltage reading difficult, but there is no reason it shouldn't be 5 volts, as it uses the exact same type of routine as pin 2. In any event, the pin 3 pulse easily drives a 4017 decade counter (while pin 2 simultaneously drives an LED) as shown in our Application Note:
http://www.moltenvoltage.com/downloads/Application_Note_1_for_MV-52_-_v1_1_-_Molten_Voltage.pdf
Thank you for posting your questions. Please let us know when you get it working and what you were doing wrong, because other people might have the same issues. If you can't get it working, please post a photo of your breadboard setup and hopefully we can spot the problem.
Just curious.
How many people is "we" in Molten Voltage?
Quote from: R.G. on May 02, 2009, 11:17:34 PM
Just curious.
How many people is "we" in Molten Voltage?
Currently 4. 2 full time, 2 part time.
Cool. Where are you located?
Quote from: R.G. on May 03, 2009, 08:18:03 AM
Cool. Where are you located?
In the shadow of volcanoes:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/0c/Three_Sisters_volcanoes.jpg/285px-Three_Sisters_volcanoes.jpg) (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8d/Mount_Bachelor.jpg/285px-Mount_Bachelor.jpg)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fe/Newberry_caldera.jpg/285px-Newberry_caldera.jpg) (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/Broken_Top_Oregon_volcano.jpg/300px-Broken_Top_Oregon_volcano.jpg)
Three Sisters, Mount Bachelor
Newberry Caldera, and Broken Top
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bend,_Oregon
The volcano on the front page of our website (http://www.moltenvoltage.com/) is South Sister (bulging about 10 feet a year)
The volcano on the logo is Mount Bachelor
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on May 02, 2009, 09:41:16 PM
We just re-tested MV-52 with an analog oscilloscope and a digital multimeter and confirmed that the output of pin 2 matches the input voltage for the chip on pin 1 (+5V DC using a 7805 voltage regulator and 9 volt wall wart), so we have to assume that you have set it up wrong. The 0.1uF capacitor is essential for proper operation, and it must be connected as close as possible to pin 1. Pin 4 must be held high with a 10K resistor for proper operation.
Are you using the exact setup on our datasheet:
http://www.moltenvoltage.com/downloads/Universal_Tap_Tempo_Control_Chip_MV-52_-_Datasheet_v2.pdf
Hey, thanks for the reply. Yes, that is exactly how I have it set up.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on May 02, 2009, 09:41:16 PM
There also shouldn't be any noticeable delay after pressing the second tap. Are you only tapping twice? Are you using a heavy duty pushbutton? There is an upper limit on how fast MV-52 allows you to tap, which is .175 seconds. If you are using a tactile switch, you can easily tap faster than that, but it's hard to tap any faster than that using a heavy-duty momentary on pushbutton like this:
http://www.smallbearelec.com/Detail.bok?no=672
Initially, I was just touching two wires together. But now I am using a small momentary push-button type switch, not a heavy duty stompswitch. I was also tapping several times, but since I read your reply I have only been tapping twice. I don't think I am taping faster than 0.175 seconds. But it does seem to make a difference how fast you tap. I have an LED on pin 2 and sometimes if I hold the first tap a little too long the LED starts blinking really fast. Then if I wait about two seconds and tap a second time the LED will then go out for several seconds and then start blinking really fast again. After trying that two second tap tempo a couple of times I can usually get it to work. But in general, it just seems like I have to be very careful about how long I hold each tap. Going from a slow tempo to a faster tempo also seems a lot easier than getting it to go from a fast tempo to a slow one. Slow to fast sometimes switches to the faster tempo relatively quickly. But there is almost always about a 3 second wait, while the LED is off, when going from a fast tempo to a slower tempo before the slower tempo begins.
I suppose there could be some intermittant problems with my breadboard (wouldn't be the first time that happened, right?). So I'll probably try moving it to a different spot, and maybe also try a different momentary switch. The way it's acting right now it's just hard for me to tell if really that sensitive to the duration of each tap, or if it's just a problem with my breadboard.
I suppose I should also mention that my point of reference for tap tempo pedals is a line 6 echo park. That's the only tap tempo effect I've really ever used and I think it works really well. I've had it on my pedalboard for a couple of years now, and like that it doesn't seem to care how many times you tap it. It usually takes me a few taps (while simultaneously playing the bass and not making any mistakes at the same time) to get the right tempo when either making a correction to stay in time with the drummer or to switch to a different tempo. Is it maybe too much to expect the MV-52 to perform equally well?
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on May 02, 2009, 09:41:16 PM
Regarding the pin 3 output, we can easily flash an LED with it, provided it is connected without a resistor. Granted, the pulse is extremely brief and the LED appears very dim, but if you use a high-efficiency clear red LED, you can easily see it. The pulse width is around 1/20,000th of a second, making an accurate voltage reading difficult, but there is no reason it shouldn't be 5 volts, as it uses the exact same type of routine as pin 2. In any event, the pin 3 pulse easily drives a 4017 decade counter (while pin 2 simultaneously drives an LED) as shown in our Application Note:
http://www.moltenvoltage.com/downloads/Application_Note_1_for_MV-52_-_v1_1_-_Molten_Voltage.pdf
I switched from a red LED to a green one and I can see it faintly blinking now.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on May 02, 2009, 09:41:16 PM
Thank you for posting your questions. Please let us know when you get it working and what you were doing wrong, because other people might have the same issues. If you can't get it working, please post a photo of your breadboard setup and hopefully we can spot the problem.
Will do, thanks.
~ Charlie
Quote from: moosapotamus on May 03, 2009, 11:41:12 PM
Initially, I was just touching two wires together. But now I am using a small momentary push-button type switch, not a heavy duty stompswitch. I was also tapping several times, but since I read your reply I have only been tapping twice. I don't think I am taping faster than 0.175 seconds. But it does seem to make a difference how fast you tap. I have an LED on pin 2 and sometimes if I hold the first tap a little too long the LED starts blinking really fast. Then if I wait about two seconds and tap a second time the LED will then go out for several seconds and then start blinking really fast again. After trying that two second tap tempo a couple of times I can usually get it to work. But in general, it just seems like I have to be very careful about how long I hold each tap. Going from a slow tempo to a faster tempo also seems a lot easier than getting it to go from a fast tempo to a slow one. Slow to fast sometimes switches to the faster tempo relatively quickly. But there is almost always about a 3 second wait, while the LED is off, when going from a fast tempo to a slower tempo before the slower tempo begins.
Hi Charlie,
MV-52 was designed for 2 sharp taps, which is how we always tap when testing and playing. Based on your experience, we discovered that if you hold down the pushbutton after the first tap more than .175 seconds, MV-52 automatically puts you at the top speed.
If you use 2 sharp taps, you won't have any problem.
The three second wait you occasionally experience most likely comes from holding down the button way too long (more than .5 seconds) which puts the chip back in the button press routine where it waits about 3 seconds for another tap.
You can input a new tempo by tapping twice at any time while the chip is in playback mode. It doesn't matter whether you are going from a slow tempo to a fast one or the other way around, there won't be any noticeable delay between the second tap and the start of playback.
I've found exactly the same thing as Charlie, you need very precise taps to get it to work reliably. I think in my case the 3 second wait is caused by the cheap momentary push switch I'm using, presumably the chip either isn't reading both taps so it waits for the 3 second before "timing out" or it's switch bounce and it's reading more than 2 taps and again "timing out".
If a better switch doesn't solve the problems I'll probably just add a simple pulse generator/switch debouncer between the switch and the chip to guarantee a clean thin pulse.
Quote from: slacker on May 04, 2009, 06:51:29 AM
add a simple pulse generator . . . to guarantee a clean thin pulse.
I was thinking the same thing.
the only pulse generator I have been able to find is on the MFOS sequencer; it uses a 40106
can a single transistor generate a pulse like that or does it have to be the 40106?
All right. Thanks for the advise, Karl. And thanks for the confirmation, Slacker. I'm using a pretty cheap pushbutton switch, too. I didn't think that the action and timing of using my finger instead of my foot would make much difference. But if each tap must be between 0.175 and 0.5 seconds, I can see that timing is pretty critical. Seems like a pulse generator would be a good idea.
Just out of curiosity, what goes on in the chip if you tap more than twice?
I'm sure there are other options besides a 40106 for making a pulse generator, but I would not expect a single transistor to be able to do it. However, even though I only have very little experience programming uC chips, I would think that a pulse generator and a switch debouncer could both be done in the code, no?
Thanks
~ Charlie
You can make a pulse out of a square wave easily with just a capacitor and a resistor or two:
http://sybarite.us/puertorico/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/edgetriggeringa555.gif
Well, that sure does look pretty simple. I'm assuming that the cap sets the pulse width? If so, I wonder what value would be needed to ensure that it is between 0.175 and 0.5 seconds?
Thanks
~ Charlie
Er... I was a little tired when I posted that. The picture I linked to is just a passive differentiator. It needs something on the output to make a clean pulse, such as a comparator, gate, schmitt trigger, 555 timer, or possibly just a transistor.
As for calculating the part values, once you know your voltages, that's a nice application of the RC time constant. :)
Pushbutton switches, especially the heavy-duty kind, bounce significantly both when pressed and when released. We repeatedly tested the standard heavy-duty momentary switches (again using sharp taps) and found that the outside limit of how long the switch would bounce (including both press and release) was .175 seconds. As such, we used a hard debounce routine which simply waits .175 seconds after the initial press to continue on in the tap routine. We wanted to make MV-52 work without a physical debounce circuit, which it does if you tap sharply, but it sounds like not everyone taps like we do.
Currently the first tap needs to be less than .175 seconds. Any more than that and the chip will switch to top speed. Any more than .5 seconds and it will jump back to the tap routine and pause for about 4 seconds.
We are going to revise the code and test the chip over the next couple days to deal with long button presses. Will let you know as soon as we are done.
The chips can be easily reprogrammed, so anyone who wants the revised code can send their chip in for re-programming.
For everyone else, we have asked SmallBear to send us their remaining inventory so we can re-program the chips. We will let you know as soon as the chip is available again, which should be within a week or so.
Just to be clear, the chip works as advertised if you tap sharply with your foot using a heavy duty button. You don't need to send in your chip, but if you want to, the address is:
Molten Voltage
P.O. Box 3753
Sunriver, OR 97707
Be SURE to include your name and return address. Also, be SURE to put the chip pins in hard foam or something to protect them from being crushed.
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on May 04, 2009, 12:29:51 PM
Pushbutton switches, especially the heavy-duty kind, bounce significantly both when pressed and when released. We repeatedly tested the standard heavy-duty momentary switches (again using sharp taps) and found that the outside limit of how long the switch would bounce (including both press and release) was .175 seconds. As such, we used a hard debounce routine which simply waits .175 seconds after the initial press to continue on in the tap routine. We wanted to make MV-52 work without a physical debounce circuit, which it does if you tap sharply, but it sounds like not everyone taps like we do.
Currently the first tap needs to be less than .175 seconds. Any more than that and the chip will switch to top speed. Any more than .5 seconds and it will jump back to the tap routine and pause for about 4 seconds.
We are going to revise the code and test the chip over the next couple days to deal with long button presses. Will let you know as soon as we are done.
The chips can be easily reprogrammed, so anyone who wants the revised code can send their chip in for re-programming.
For everyone else, we have asked SmallBear to send us their remaining inventory so we can re-program the chips. We will let you know as soon as the chip is available again, which should be within a week or so.
Just to be clear, the chip works as advertised if you tap sharply with your foot using a heavy duty button. You don't need to send in your chip, but if you want to, the address is:
Molten Voltage
P.O. Box 3753
Sunriver, OR 97707
Be SURE to include your name and return address. Also, be SURE to put the chip pins in hard foam or something to protect them from being crushed.
That's gotta suck.
What about folks that the price of postage makes this rather pointless?
Quote from: nelson on May 04, 2009, 12:33:50 PM
What about folks that the price of postage makes this rather pointless?
Good point nelson.
If you send us proof of your purchase from SmallBear, we'll send you replacement chips.
Please email us directly rather than posting any information here. Our email address is:
questions@MoltenVoltage.com
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on May 04, 2009, 12:42:47 PM
Quote from: nelson on May 04, 2009, 12:33:50 PM
What about folks that the price of postage makes this rather pointless?
Good point nelson.
If you send us proof of your purchase from SmallBear, we'll send you replacement chips.
Please email us directly rather than posting any information here. Our email address is:
questions@MoltenVoltage.com
That's service :)
Service indeed. Thanks very much, Karl! I'm sorry you need to look at updating your code, but offering to do it shows a lot of integrity on your part and is much appreciated!
While you're at it, any chance of also looking at handling more than just two taps at a time (maybe ignoring everything but the last two taps?), maybe? 8)
Thanks, again!
~ Charlie
Quote from: MoltenVoltage on May 04, 2009, 12:29:51 PM
(1) The chips can be easily reprogrammed, so anyone who wants the revised code can send their chip in for re-programming.
(2) Just to be clear, the chip works as advertised if you tap sharply with your foot using a heavy duty button.
1. - sounds good to me.
2. - No problem, we're just trying to figure this thing out on our breadboards. It took me a bit to see how quick a tap needs to be. My first thought was " that will be pretty tough to do with my foot"
Lastly, I hope you're working on something with a ramp output.
We have thoroughly reviewed and revised the code and have made the following refinements to our Universal Tap Tempo Control Chip MV-52:
1) You can hold down the first tap as long as you like. If you hold it down more than 4.2 seconds, the chip will time out and your original tempo will be restored when you release the button. This is because the maximum tap interval is 4.2 seconds in real time.
As before, if more than 4.2 seconds elapse between the time you press the first tap and the second tap, the chip will time out and your original tempo will be restored.
2) You can hold down the second tap as long as you like. As soon as you release the second tap, playback will begin.
- What this means is you can tap in your tempo then hold down the second tap, releasing it when you are on the downbeat so you are right on time.
3) Playback always starts right after you let go of the second tap.
- What this means is you can keep tapping as much as you like, as long as it is an even number of taps, until you get the tempo you like.
As before, the playback tempo is equal to the time between pressing the first tap and pressing the second tap. The release times are not part of the equation.
4) Pin 3 is the pulse output. The Pin 2 output (the on/off, [squarewave] output), now resets after a new tempo is input so that the pin always goes high as soon as you release the second tap.
The preliminary testing has shown the revised code to be every bit as accurate as before (1/1,000th of a second or better). We are going to test it for a couple more days and plan to ship replacement chips either Friday or Monday. We will let you know as soon as they ship and are once again for sale. We will also post a revised datasheet which includes these changes.
Thanks again for your feedback everyone. We have a much better product as a result of your help. :)
awesome! :D ;D 8)
The revised chips are finished and we shipped the first replacement chips today. :)
Please send us proof of your SmallBear purchase as well as shipping address if you haven't already done so.
The revised Datasheet and Application Note are available here:
http://www.moltenvoltage.com/molten_voltage_mv-52.html
After hours of testing and reviewing the chip code, we determined that the proximity of the decoupling capacitor (C1 ~ 0.1 uF) to pins 1 and 8 makes a HUGE difference in accuracy. Even a relatively short distance (.25 inches) changes the accuracy from better than 1/1,000th of a second to 3 or 4 thousandths of a second. For best results, solder the decoupling capacitor directly to pins 1 and 8 on your socket on the bottom of the circuit board. If that is not feasible, put C1 as close as possible to BOTH pins.
Because a number of you live overseas, and it takes a couple weeks for shipments to get through customs,
we have decided to extend the deadline for contest entries until June 30, 2009.
(Contest details are on page 4 of this thread)
We will be shipping replacement chips to SmallBear early next week, so they should be for sale late next week or early the week after.
We also sell MV-52 direct:
http://www.moltenvoltage.com/mvcart/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=66&products_id=215
Please email us (questions@MoltenVoltage.com) if you are interested in commercial quantity discounts.
Thanks again everyone.