Flintlock Flanger not Sweeping

[eh la bas ma]

These pads look suspicious for shorts (conductive residue between pads) :



One more thing, did you confirm with a continuity test that C & S are connected as they should be ?

Edit : I would carefully reflow every overly-trimmed pads on the board.



I wonder if it's good practice to cut them so short like that ?

I would have thought that it could break or weaken the connection in some cases. Be that as it may, they aren't cone-shaped, and we know a good soldering joint is cone-shaped...

Looks like you used too much solder, and decided to cut it off, instead of using the desoldering pump to suck it off : I guess that would be derogating from the Laws which relate to Soldering and good Morals.

Threshold pot and Odd/Even switch, both have one bubble-shaped soldering joint (yes, i know it worked once, but still).

Edit 2 : You said it worked once, before puting the circuit in the enclosure. Did it really work like in the sound sample i posted ? Every controls working and a beautiful and precise modulation, without any noises ? Is it really just a dodgy component somewhere being the issue here ?

[matopotato]

These pads look suspicious for shorts (conductive residue between pads) :

The upper one is ok. For the lower one both go to ground, so hard to tell.
The residue is probably from cleaning away flux with isopropyl and some cotton Q-tips...

One more thing, did you confirm with a continuity test that C & S are connected as they should be ?

Yes the switching jack keeps them connected when jack is empty

Edit : I would carefully reflow every overly-trimmed pads on the board.

I wonder if it's good practice to cut them so short like that ?

Probably not, but it happens. I still test for connectivity between component leg and next point in the schematic.
I don't have it as a goal to trim that close unless space is an issue.

I would have thought that it could break or weaken the connection in some cases. Be that as it may, they aren't cone-shaped, and we know a good soldering joint is cone-shaped...

I know.

Looks like you used too much solder, and decided to cut it off, instead of using the desoldering pump to suck it off : I guess that would be derogating from the Laws which relate to Soldering and good Morals.

Most likely. Guilty as charged.
Morals? Never had any that were useful to me....

Threshold pot and Odd/Even switch, both have one bubble-shaped soldering joint (yes, i know it worked once, but still).

Looks so, but I think it is not the case. They both connect to their next points as they should.

Edit 2 : You said it worked once, before puting the circuit in the enclosure. Did it really work like in the sound sample i posted ? Every controls working and a beautiful and precise modulation, without any noises ? Is it really just a dodgy component somewhere being the issue here ?

This is some time back. The painting, printing took too long. But I think it was more like your clip than what I hear now. Especially the thumping/clicking was not there.
But I also do not remember being totally overwhelmed by the flanging. On the other hand I did the frequency settings but did not loop any song to do the other ones perfectly. Figured I'd do them after boxing.
I think some component is broken.
When I was messing with the boxing, I sometimes get the in or out lead to touch a wrong place and the amp freaks out if I forgot to turn everything off. Stuff happens. And I am afraid, and it seems possible that the 9V might have touched the enclosure when it was almost boxed and power was on.
At least that would explain the totally broken CD4047. After changing that one, I got flange of some sort, but the tick/thump is there.
That is why I suspect some other component took a beating but not enough to kill it.
So I got a few of the ICs that are cheap to find and tried them out, but no change.
The ones that remain are LT1054 which would make it power related. Or MN3007 which would make it cost related...
The 4558s I have cycled around and although that might not have resolved the issue had either of them been bad, I would have expected a different sounding issue at least by the cycling maneuver...

Will try to generate some more energy and read up on the latest suggestions again.
Resoldering is an option, but motivation is a bit low unless I have a suspected area that does not conduct. IMHO.
Buying another Flintlock is tempting, but prices have gone up a bit since last, so I am not so sure anymore.

Thanks for supporting me on this though, I really appreciate it.

[matopotato]

Time for  an intermediary report of sorts...
I decided to go through the moosapotamus flanger calibration as it also applies to the Flintlock.
The video in 4 parts is very good for the calibration.
https://youtu.be/J4JCAFanSog
https://youtu.be/fjSh_nPvWSY
https://youtu.be/Op2diq9Ofl0
https://youtu.be/D2aT9mK9CV8
I struggle getting the signal to computer with meters for the Mix and Vol parts, but I do not think they have a high impact on my current issue.

After going through the steps, it felt as if the thumping was quite reduced, so I tried it out on the board. Then it did some "now I flange, now I don't" indicating a weak wire soldering somewhere, but when it is flanging the thump is still there.
I dialed back the SPEED a bit and noticed that the RANGE at noon or below would not produce the thumping. But very clearly if I went over midpoint on the RANGE. Then I tweaked the SPEED some more and higher and that shifted the dividing point of the RANGE towards CW.
Not sure it is a clue to anything, but for sure there are settings when the thumping is off or low enough.

I also began some probing again, but the Flange-Thumping starts at least at D4 cathode meeting R9 and R10, so IC1 part 2 already has the thumping. This lead me to the Bias control and in to the calibration as mentioned above.
The thumping seems to be integrated with the flanging so probing will probably not reveal where it begins. If there is flange there is also thump.

I already tried to put 18V straight into D8 D9 C33 junction with the 1054 out of socket, but then it just didn't work. I probably did something wrong since the idea is sound, so I will have to revisit.
But having shifted all the other socketed parts except MN3007, that is what remains. At least as far as ICs and Qs go. I have a hard time to digest that solder points break over time or bridges form "by themselves", so I am still hesitant to re-solder or re-heat all the points.
I wish there was some way to verify the MN3007 is working as it should. I did burn a 4007 earlier, so the MN3007 could have taken a hit as well.
Sorry, duck_arse no pictures today.

[duck_arse]

I have a hard time to digest that solder points break over time or bridges form "by themselves", so I am still hesitant to re-solder or re-heat all the points.

exactly this, I'm afraid. see this linked pic, the blue ringed joints -

https://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=130682.msg1268194#msg1268194

component leads with tarnish or dirt or oxidation can stop the heat from the iron from heating them enough**, and if the solder flux doesn't get the lead just right and pickle the rubbish out of the joint area, the solder won't wet the lead, you'll get a bad joint. when wetted properly, you get the volcano-shaped solders, like waterdrops, almost. when not wetted, the solder pulls itself under surface tension and you end up with ball shapes, or blobs. and you can see in those blue ringed, the black of the lead is peering out from a blob of solder that, from this distance and that photo, appears to be 'no good'.

and so heat and cool or vibration or handling shocks can make the lead/solder shift against each other enough to sometimes make contact, sometimes goes open circuit. poke a bad joint with a meter and it may make enough contact to show as good, hiding itself.

so bridges between joints, no, but joints themselves can go good or go bad by "themselves" - but it means they were no good to begin. mind, I don't know that this is the problem in your build. if the board was here, I'd be idly poking at this and wondering about that and looking here and there ..... until something waved a flag. also, having an oscilloscope really helps. (I'd be trying some of those leg-bending exerccises I mentioned a few posts back.)

I don't like looking at photos of solder joints - there is too many variables in the photo taking and displaying to try and account for.


** I refer to this as blacking, and the same effect comes from not wiping and tinning your iron tip - it gets just black enough to not transfer enough heat to solder. heats enough to destroy your components, but just doesn't heat the joint right.

[matopotato]

I have a hard time to digest that solder points break over time or bridges form "by themselves", so I am still hesitant to re-solder or re-heat all the points.

exactly this, I'm afraid. see this linked pic, the blue ringed joints -

https://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=130682.msg1268194#msg1268194

component leads with tarnish or dirt or oxidation can stop the heat from the iron from heating them enough**, and if the solder flux doesn't get the lead just right and pickle the rubbish out of the joint area, the solder won't wet the lead, you'll get a bad joint. when wetted properly, you get the volcano-shaped solders, like waterdrops, almost. when not wetted, the solder pulls itself under surface tension and you end up with ball shapes, or blobs. and you can see in those blue ringed, the black of the lead is peering out from a blob of solder that, from this distance and that photo, appears to be 'no good'.

and so heat and cool or vibration or handling shocks can make the lead/solder shift against each other enough to sometimes make contact, sometimes goes open circuit. poke a bad joint with a meter and it may make enough contact to show as good, hiding itself.

so bridges between joints, no, but joints themselves can go good or go bad by "themselves" - but it means they were no good to begin. mind, I don't know that this is the problem in your build. if the board was here, I'd be idly poking at this and wondering about that and looking here and there ..... until something waved a flag. also, having an oscilloscope really helps. (I'd be trying some of those leg-bending exerccises I mentioned a few posts back.)

I don't like looking at photos of solder joints - there is too many variables in the photo taking and displaying to try and account for.


** I refer to this as blacking, and the same effect comes from not wiping and tinning your iron tip - it gets just black enough to not transfer enough heat to solder. heats enough to destroy your components, but just doesn't heat the joint right.

Thanks,
I recently had a strip-board build of K's Fuzz Bender. It worked sort of well at first, albeit a little bit of glitch. Took it out and re heated the Fuzz pot wires. It worked well. Boxed it and some months later began behaving. Started to measure etc again and much to my surprise something gotten between strips that was conducting. Clear enough from the DMM. So I scraped that dividing trench (?) clear. And it is fine. So I am still surprised how this kind of bridge could develop over time. Was probably close enough from the start. But still a bit surprised.

I have a scope, 1-ch, so I will try out the pin bending you suggested. What should I be looking at on the scope though?

[duck_arse]

erk. that's one of the things, you just poke the cro probe here, see what is, then here, looks ok, etc etc. I'd be focused on the VB. observe the thumping, then do the pinbend exercise, observe the thumping again. and so on.

[matopotato]

erk. that's one of the things, you just poke the cro probe here, see what is, then here, looks ok, etc etc. I'd be focused on the VB. observe the thumping, then do the pinbend exercise, observe the thumping again. and so on.

Great, sounds like a solid plan.

[eh la bas ma]

"(...) setting the bottom of the sweep lower will result in a wider sweep but the sound may become too 'bouncy' "

In my experience, the sweep values from the instructions aren't always perfect for every Flintlock builds. For exemple, I lowered the highest point to 2.2 MHz instead of 2.6, in order to get rid of some background noises. I guess it is due to parts tolerance.

I wonder if increasing the lowest point of the sweep, let's say up to 80 KHz, or lowering the highest point has any impact on the noise ?

I guess you tried to calibrate it with a narrower sweep, and it didn't change anything ?

Maybe a sound sample of the " cycle thump" and the controls action (or lack of action) can help us to identify the issue ?

I think i might at least be able to recognize it if the noise comes from an issue with calibration, and i will be able to tell you if some control isn't working correctly. Maybe a more experienced forumite could even assess if it sounds like an MN3007 issue ?

It's also possible that there is a mistake with some value somewhere, I would check that 3,3k aren't 33k, 47k aren't 4,7k, etc... Sometimes musikding's labels are difficult to read. A resistor viewer software could be useful here :

http://www.atlence.com/resistor/index-en.html

[matopotato]

"(...) setting the bottom of the sweep lower will result in a wider sweep but the sound may become too 'bouncy' "

In my experience, the sweep values from the instructions aren't always perfect for every Flintlock builds. For exemple, I lowered the highest point to 2.2 MHz instead of 2.6, in order to get rid of some background noises. I guess it is due to parts tolerance.

I wonder if increasing the lowest point of the sweep, let's say up to 80 KHz, or lowering the highest point has any impact on the noise ?

I guess you tried to calibrate it with a narrower sweep, and it didn't change anything ?

Maybe a sound sample of the " cycle thump" and the controls action (or lack of action) can help us to identify the issue ?

I think i might at least be able to recognize it if the noise comes from an issue with calibration, and i will be able to tell you if some control isn't working correctly. Maybe a more experienced forumite could even assess if it sounds like an MN3007 issue ?

It's also possible that there is a mistake with some value somewhere, I would check that 3,3k aren't 33k, 47k aren't 4,7k, etc... Sometimes musikding's labels are difficult to read. A resistor viewer software could be useful here :

http://www.atlence.com/resistor/index-en.html

Sorry, I took a short break from this for a bit.

No, I did not narrow the frq (yet)..I am limited  to thebtime I can use DMM with Hz and hesitant to buy another DMM with it.

I think there is a link above with the thump, but I will try make a more elaborate one.

Yes, of course. One should always be humble about reading wrong values, swapping legs on polarity of caps and diodes.
Still, it did work, so I would be more than surprised.
However no excuse for not checking.
When energy returns I plan to do the scope and pin testing suggested above.
Then maybe go over each part. Perhaps resolder everything, although that can be double edged and sometimes cause new issues.
Thanks for the suggestions.

[eh la bas ma]

Found your recording, reply #33.

https://soundcloud.com/user-558594533/flintlock-flanger-with-click-noise-each-cycle-and-strange-unflangymodulation?si=cc4150584d8d4f59b650207f1c5e1f5e&utm_source=clipboard&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=social_sharing

Probably not a calibration issue, unless there is a mistake with trimmers values.

Could be a bad capacitor, a bad cap's connection, or one of them not being properly grounded. I'd check all ceramics values (C8, C11, C16, C26), then i'd try to replace electrolytics caps one by one in the circuit first, and those in the power section later, if the noise is still there. Maybe all at once, in the power section, to save some time.

[duck_arse]

I'll be quite unhelpful and say that sounds awful. I do notice that the thump watery modulates the sound, but don't know what this indicates.

[matopotato]

I'll be quite unhelpful and say that sounds awful. I do notice that the thump watery modulates the sound, but don't know what this indicates.

I'll try to set up better recording maybe try to mike up my amp. Then run through a few settings options.
Probably good to set the Auto and Mix trimmers now that I learned how to use the PC for this purpose.
Then we can see. I aldo want to try the scope and "pin around" as recommended.
I have a vague memory of either Flintlock or Countdown phaser had issues way back that were solved when lifting one R and checking with the scope and finding a square wave. Will have to revisit that one to see if still relevant.

[eh la bas ma]

When energy returns

Far from any form of criticism or fanaticism, i wish to underline the fact that Flintlock Flanger is such a wonderful circuit, near perfection really, that it seems rather illogical to wait for some mysterious "energy" to fix it.

If some divine intervention is needed, you got it right there, in the Flintlock itself.

If strength and focus are needed, the hidden  potential of your Flintlock build shall provide you all the necessary energy.

If there are any doubts on ICs, i'd suggest to stop eating, smoking, and paying the bills, until you save enough money to buy a whole new set of ICs : It would be well worth it, even a bargain compared to what this flanger can do... That's how great this circuit really is.

And so it is written :

"Commit your way to the Flintlock;
trust in It and It will do this:
It will make your righteous reward shine like the dawn,
your modulation like the noonday sun."

Psalm 37-5-6, from the Holy Diode Scriptures

[matopotato]

When energy returns

Far from any form of criticism or fanaticism, i wish to underline the fact that Flintlock Flanger is such a wonderful circuit, near perfection really, that it seems rather illogical to wait for some mysterious "energy" to fix it.

If some divine intervention is needed, you got it right there, in the Flintlock itself.

If strength and focus are needed, the hidden  potential of your Flintlock build shall provide you all the necessary energy.

If there are any doubts on ICs, i'd suggest to stop eating, smoking, and paying the bills, until you save enough money to buy a whole new set of ICs : It would be well worth it, even a bargain compared to what this flanger can do... That's how great this circuit really is.

And so it is written :

"Commit your way to the Flintlock;
trust in It and It will do this:
It will make your righteous reward shine like the dawn,
your modulation like the noonday sun."

Psalm 37-5-6, from the Holy Diode Scriptures

Merci, ^^^ This is what I needed.

[eh la bas ma]

An other old school trick from the ancient scriptures, about playing guitar to your flawed circuits, hoping to help them getting better :

"But when you play, go into your room, close the door and play to your Flintlock, which is unwell. Then your Flintlock, which sees what is done in secret, will reward you."

Electro' Matthew 6:6

[duck_arse]

well, clearly, Justin is having some sort of breakdown. must be from all that bomb talk.


anyway, I was thinking about yer oscilloscope question. it might be a thing to build on your breadboard the oscillator section, the part around IC4. use ANY type of dual opamp, any supply volts from 9 to 15V applied to VA, and add a pair of 68k [between VA and ground and 4u7] at the VB pin. then, probe with the scope, see what shapes of voltages appear where, see how shapes change when you twirl the pots. and then you can have some idea what the bad oscillator voltages should look like. cross check, like.

[matopotato]

Sorry for not progressing on this. I took out the scope and tried to read up on the suggestions above. Especially lifting pins and breadboarding parts. I will read through a few more times, but I think I am lacking in circuit experience overall to absorb and make good of the suggestions at this moment.
I put the scope to work and in reply to "Can you see anything?" I will have to say "Yes, strange things".
In many locations like the output there is a pulsating curve moving between the shape of a water wave and a three tier pyramid and at some point in the cycle it just gets all chaotic for a short while. I realize trying to describe this in text is a bit futile, so putting my PCB Holder to use backed up by William Shakespeare The Complete Works I filmed my scope tests.
I know @duck_arse likes pictures, but not sure how film clips will rate.

Clean: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zOLE34_sh6VmYliXeIOYSigkZs83xQFZ/view?usp=drive_link This is my Clean Tone at Input of Flintlock, from a tone generator, sine wave, 500Hz (sort of, I think), and then the Output signal from the Flanger. Including the glitchy sort of chaotic as I tried to describe in words above.

IC11: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1z_PkUCSbvkLEM8Uz2IZc7dXF2ILFyapz/view?usp=drive_link This is from IC11 pins 1,2,7 and 8. The others seemed to be less used. I am a bit surprised to see those shapes since I thought it was all DC in that part of the circuit. IC7 (not in the clip) seemed to be flatline though.

IC4: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zZ0uifeF0kMwtocwaSCFujd5uC3qDZVw/view?usp=drive_link Here I tried with pins 1,2,3 and 5,6,7

IC10: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zUFA-VEGl9VUIVehoc7LKVCdHBGd_TuL/view?usp=drive_link Again pins 1,2,3 and 5, 6 (square), 7 ("double vision")

IC5: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zSEYCo1oHxMAFGKoDpZcE4NVG2OTmH8c/view?usp=drive_link Here (I think) pins 9,10,11,12

I also checked IC9 and most were squarish
IC1 pins 1,2,3 show very nice sine wave and amplified as it should be on pin 1. Pins 5,6 and 7 have the Wave, pyramid, glitch cycle similar as in the first clip, the output. With pin7 being amplified as expected.
IC2 seemed mostly flatlined.

No idea if this is of any use or not.

[matopotato]

I then did an audio test and realized I had not dialed in the "thump". So the previous post is probably quite useless.
Here is a clip of what the Input and Output look like https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zubgcm0uN1Oa_oPp8JIa6zTmBrTr6ogi/view?usp=drive_link
I did  a few probes on some of the pins but it seems quite messy to be honest, so I'll wait to see if there are any suggestions on what to focus on, what signal to use etc.

[eh la bas ma]

5 pages on the thread, 97 replies and still no clue about the thump issue. Even the audio-probe couldn't narrow it down.

At this point I would suspect a mistake with some component value, a problem with the pcb itself (bad trace, etc.) or something almost impossible to find... Even if the circuit seemed to work briefly at some point, without some new discovery it doesn't seem likely to get better anytime soon.

I would buy a new pcb and new IC sockets, desolder every capacitors and resistors from this first build, measure them carefully before resoldering them with extreme caution on a brand new board. Without covering the new pcb with flux residue, if possible.

It costs 17$ or 15.50 euros at Lectric fx :

https://lectric-fx.com/product/flintlock-flanger-v-1-3/

An original A/DA Flanger unit costs 1000$ on used market.

I had to start over like that with an Echo Base kit. I bought a new pcb and used the old parts from the first attempt : it worked.
Desoldering and resoldering process is tedious, but it can be a pleasure if you like to build things, and it is certainly better than wasting this expensive project.

After all, Flintlock is the final diy answer to the great "best flanger" quest...

[matopotato]

5 pages on the thread, 97 replies and still no clue about the thump issue. Even the audio-probe couldn't narrow it down.

At this point I would suspect a mistake with some component value, a problem with the pcb itself (bad trace, etc.) or something almost impossible to find... Even if the circuit seemed to work briefly at some point, without some new discovery it doesn't seem likely to get better anytime soon.

I would buy a new pcb and new IC sockets, desolder every capacitors and resistors from this first build, measure them carefully before resoldering them with extreme caution on a brand new board. Without covering the new pcb with flux residue, if possible.

It costs 17$ or 15.50 euros at Lectric fx :

https://lectric-fx.com/product/flintlock-flanger-v-1-3/

An original A/DA Flanger unit costs 1000$ on used market.

I had to start over like that with an Echo Base kit. I bought a new pcb and used the old parts from the first attempt : it worked.
Desoldering and resoldering process is tedious, but it can be a pleasure if you like to build things, and it is certainly better than wasting this expensive project.

After all, Flintlock is the final diy answer to the great "best flanger" quest...

Thanks!

Yes, I am getting nearer to that conclusion myself.
I fear that when boxing I managed to short something. One of the 40xx *did* get fried. So if that spilled over to the MN3007 as well, it might be the remaining problem. They cost a bit and I would like to know it would solve the problem before taking a chance on it.
Similar thoughts for getting a new PCB, only the effort of desoldering all and build again is bigger. And without knowing it is the pcb, might result in current situation anyway.
So getting a new kit might be a way forward. If that comes out proper I could then compare them closer and figure out what was wrong.
For the learning experience, and possibly repairing no 1. Or cut it up for spare parts. (Not so great if I don't  know where the fault is/was).

Still I feel I want to try the suggestions made by @duck-arse with som pin bending.
Not sure I understand enough to make some breakout build on breadboard and hook back into circuit. For me it is a bit of a challenge and my understanding is probably not deep enough. But on the other hand, that is how we learn. And this thought is a stronger motivator than one might think even if it requires more energy each attempt to get started. But thanks for reading, following, suggesting and replying. Nice to not be alone on this.