Author Topic: The Worlsd smallest flangers....  (Read 72029 times)

gigimarga

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #100 on: May 23, 2010, 01:43:06 AM »
Thx a lot solderman!
I will try all the tests that you said...the strangest thing is that odd/even switch...I can't understand why it actys so strange :(
The trace from Q1 under R29 is cutted from the beginning...

gigimarga

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #101 on: May 23, 2010, 06:05:18 AM »
I have a pulsating voltage around 5V at pin 7 of IC1 :)

gigimarga

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #102 on: May 24, 2010, 03:08:19 AM »
I lost another 3 hours to debug it, with no great luck.
What I did:

1. I relinked the J201 with R36/R37 (I thought that the 1M resistor is important for the bias of IC1) and the strong noise that I had before was gone :)...anyway, the thresold pot doesn't seems to do something very serious :(
2. After that I was able to hear a very weak flanger-ish signal "behind" the dry signal (the same sound you can obtain with a BF-2 into an amp at a high volume and no guitar in the input of BF-2)...so I think that the LFO it's working...this sound can be altered using Speed/Manual/Depth/Enhance pots
3. With the Speed at maximum (or very close to) I can hear a very clear (and enough loud) "detuned chorus"-like sound...and I was able to identify it: it's the same sound that you can obtain disconnecting the dry signal from a chorus/phaser (I never built a flanger before, only choruses/phasers) ...let's say it's a "vibrato" sound...it's OK now to assume that MN3007 it's working (it's the only one that I have)?

Anyway, for my last try to debug it, can you solderman please tell me what I must to hear at the outputs of the opamps?

I made some tests and that's what I obtained:

0. all op-amps and MN3007 are OK (tested in clones of MXR Distortion+/Small Clone)
1. pins 1 and 7 of IC1: a strong clear dry signal
2. pins 8 and 14 of IC1: a strong distorsed signal
3. pins 1 and 7 of IC3: a strong clear/distorsed signal
4. pin 3 of BBD: a strong clear signal
5. pins 7/8 of BBD: a strong distorsed signal (with the Bias trimpot maximized)
6. pin 7 of IC4 (2b-2c): a strong signal (I don't remeber if it was clear or distorsed)
7. pin 1 of IC4 (2b-2c): a weak whistle signal (maybe this is a problem...)

Thank you very much!








« Last Edit: May 24, 2010, 05:23:35 AM by gigimarga »

gigimarga

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #103 on: May 24, 2010, 06:27:54 PM »
Another tests...and now it sounds like an alarm/machine gun/reverb with the odd/even switch on  :icon_eek:...I think I must to recheck all  :-\

solderman

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #104 on: May 25, 2010, 06:02:16 PM »
I lost another 3 hours to debug it, with no great luck.
What I did:

1. I relinked the J201 with R36/R37 (I thought that the 1M resistor is important for the bias of IC1) and the strong noise that I had before was gone :)...anyway, the thresold pot doesn't seems to do something very serious :(
2. After that I was able to hear a very weak flanger-ish signal "behind" the dry signal (the same sound you can obtain with a BF-2 into an amp at a high volume and no guitar in the input of BF-2)...so I think that the LFO it's working...this sound can be altered using Speed/Manual/Depth/Enhance pots
3. With the Speed at maximum (or very close to) I can hear a very clear (and enough loud) "detuned chorus"-like sound...and I was able to identify it: it's the same sound that you can obtain disconnecting the dry signal from a chorus/phaser (I never built a flanger before, only choruses/phasers) ...let's say it's a "vibrato" sound...it's OK now to assume that MN3007 it's working (it's the only one that I have)?

Anyway, for my last try to debug it, can you solderman please tell me what I must to hear at the outputs of the opamps?

I made some tests and that's what I obtained:

0. all op-amps and MN3007 are OK (tested in clones of MXR Distortion+/Small Clone)
1. pins 1 and 7 of IC1: a strong clear dry signal
2. pins 8 and 14 of IC1: a strong distorsed signal
3. pins 1 and 7 of IC3: a strong clear/distorsed signal
4. pin 3 of BBD: a strong clear signal
5. pins 7/8 of BBD: a strong distorsed signal (with the Bias trimpot maximized)
6. pin 7 of IC4 (2b-2c): a strong signal (I don't remeber if it was clear or distorsed)
7. pin 1 of IC4 (2b-2c): a weak whistle signal (maybe this is a problem...)

Thank you very much!










This sound OK
I think you have to sort out the odd/ even thing. It seams that you have a error some vere there
The only bad sounding stomp box is an unbuilt stomp box. ;-)
//Take Care and build with passion

www.soldersound.com
xSolderman@soldersound.com (exlude x to mail)

gigimarga

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #105 on: May 26, 2010, 02:04:07 AM »
Thank you solderman!

Now it auto-oscillates like crazy when I alter the Enhance pot and trimpot, but when the odd/even switch is on!
Can you help me with some voltages around thresold/enhance/even/odd part and/or can you tell me what I must to have at the outputs of the op-amps/BBD?

Million thanks again!




gigimarga

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #106 on: May 26, 2010, 10:51:02 AM »
Between NE5532, TL072, RC4558 and LM833, which are the most suitable op-amps for ADA Flanger?

solderman

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #107 on: May 26, 2010, 02:12:11 PM »
Thank you solderman!

Now it auto-oscillates like crazy when I alter the Enhance pot and trimpot, but when the odd/even switch is on!
Can you help me with some voltages around thresold/enhance/even/odd part and/or can you tell me what I must to have at the outputs of the op-amps/BBD?

Million thanks again!





Sorry Mine is at a frien but chech voltage in erlier posts. I used TL 072 for dual and LM324 for 4X
The only bad sounding stomp box is an unbuilt stomp box. ;-)
//Take Care and build with passion

www.soldersound.com
xSolderman@soldersound.com (exlude x to mail)

gigimarga

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #108 on: May 26, 2010, 04:15:59 PM »
OK...thx again :)

gigimarga

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #109 on: June 05, 2010, 10:59:39 PM »
I've made another tries to debug it, but with no luck, so I'm waiting for someone to post some good voltages...

Thank you all!

Puguglybonehead

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #110 on: June 07, 2010, 08:52:17 PM »
The FL3 looks like it would be a good candidate for a through-zero mod. I quite like the sound of it, from the samples posted. I'm pretty lost with building anything more complicated than a fuzz, but I was wondering about doing a version of this flanger as an expression pedal? (eliminating the LFO) I have always wanted a footpedal-controlled flange, after trying a foot-controlled phase pedal back in the mid `70s.
That, and I'd like to add a second board, to achieve TZF. What part of the FL3 schematic can I omit to lose the LFO portion? I'm a bit lost, looking at it.

solderman

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #111 on: June 08, 2010, 11:32:44 AM »
Everything surrounding U5 is LFO territory
The only bad sounding stomp box is an unbuilt stomp box. ;-)
//Take Care and build with passion

www.soldersound.com
xSolderman@soldersound.com (exlude x to mail)

gigimarga

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #112 on: June 08, 2010, 03:45:54 PM »
Sorry solderman for bothering you again, but can you help me little posting some voltages?

Thank you million times!

solderman

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #113 on: June 08, 2010, 04:57:15 PM »
Hi
No problem the only problem is that the thing still is at my friens.

By your description I don't think that you are far from the sulotion. Try to cut out the Threshold part and check the area around the od/even There are voltage for the BBD some pages back in this thread
  
« Last Edit: June 08, 2010, 04:59:19 PM by solderman »
The only bad sounding stomp box is an unbuilt stomp box. ;-)
//Take Care and build with passion

www.soldersound.com
xSolderman@soldersound.com (exlude x to mail)

gigimarga

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #114 on: June 09, 2010, 08:05:16 AM »
Hi
No problem the only problem is that the thing still is at my friens.

By your description I don't think that you are far from the sulotion. Try to cut out the Threshold part and check the area around the od/even There are voltage for the BBD some pages back in this thread
  

The voltages for the BBD are close to the ones posted in this topic :(
I think that the problem is the Enhance part...but without the Thresold part it sounds horrible. I think that the 1M resitor between source and drain of the FET influences the bias of the opamp above.

Thank you very much again!

solderman

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #115 on: June 11, 2010, 09:06:28 AM »
Check This

Dave has posted Voltage of a working unit although its a different layout the cicuit is tha same so the voltage will be tha same as long as you can indentify the correct pin.

http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=74367.msg710840#msg710840
The only bad sounding stomp box is an unbuilt stomp box. ;-)
//Take Care and build with passion

www.soldersound.com
xSolderman@soldersound.com (exlude x to mail)

Mark Hammer

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #116 on: June 11, 2010, 10:02:13 AM »
Between NE5532, TL072, RC4558 and LM833, which are the most suitable op-amps for ADA Flanger?
For which portion of the circuit?  NE5532/LM833 provide less noise when used with smaller-value input/feedback resistances.  TL072 provide less noise when used with higher values.  NE5532/LM833 good for delivering lots of current where needed, but susceptible to ticking when used on LFO.

gigimarga

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #117 on: June 30, 2010, 12:30:43 AM »
Between NE5532, TL072, RC4558 and LM833, which are the most suitable op-amps for ADA Flanger?
For which portion of the circuit?  NE5532/LM833 provide less noise when used with smaller-value input/feedback resistances.  TL072 provide less noise when used with higher values.  NE5532/LM833 good for delivering lots of current where needed, but susceptible to ticking when used on LFO.

Thank you Mark!
I asked about IC2 from the audio part, but solderman said that it's a TL072 :)


gigimarga

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #118 on: June 30, 2010, 12:33:09 AM »
I copied this post from the thread "MN3007 ADA Flanger clone" to avoid confusions and to keep all the thing clean!

Hello oldschoolanalog,

I had a break at my job, so I had sometime to measure the voltages on my ADA clone...and it's a disaster!
The main problem was/is that I built using solderman's layout:
1. Audio: http://solderman.fatabur.se/ada/ADA%20Audio.jpg
2. LFO: http://solderman.fatabur.se/ada/ADA%20LFO.jpg
3. PSU: http://solderman.fatabur.se/ada/ADA%20%20PSU.jpg

 He made some mods on the ICs and I am not sure if I understood what he did,  so I post my voltages as in his layout:

MN3007
1. 14.65
2.  7.05
3.  8.60
4.   0.90   
5.  0.00
6.  7.05
7.  7.63
8.  7.66

CD4007
10. 5.66
11. 7.33
12. 0.09
14. 14.35

CD4047
 1. 14.05
 2.  0.09
 3.  7.37
 4. 14.05   
 5. 14.05
 6. 14.05
 7.  0.00
 8.  0.00
 9.  0.00
10.  7.05
11.  7.05
12.  0.00
13. 14.08
14. 14.20

CD4049
 All seems as yours, with the only difference that pin 16 is NC on solderman's layout.

IC1 from the LFO part
 1.  5.00 - 8.15
 2.  7.35
 3.  7.00 - 9.70
 4. 13.70   
 5.  6.80
 6.  6.70
 7.  8.10 - 11.00
 8. 12.40
 9.  4.00
10. 10.00
11.  0.00
12. 13.50   
13. 12.30
14. 12.30
 
IC2 from the LFO part
1.  5.50
2.  6.90
3.  6.90
4.   0.00   
5.  6.80
6.  6.80
7.  6.80
8. 13.60

IC1 from the AUDIO part
 1.  8.50
 2.  8.50
 3.  8.50
 4. 14.10   
 5.  7.50 - 8.10
 6.  8.00 - 9.30
 7.  7.00 - 9.80
 8.  8.80 - 10.00
 9.  8.80 - 10.00
10.  3.64
11.  0.00
12. 7.10 - 7.60   
13. 12.40
14. 12.40
 
IC2 from the AUDIO part
1.  NC
2.  NC
3.  NC
4.   0.00   
5.  7.14
6.  8.80 - 10.00
7.  8.80 - 10.00
8. 14.35

IC3 A-B from the AUDIO part
1.  9.00 -  9.80
2.  9.00 - 10.00
3.  8.80 - 10.00
4.   0.00   
5.  9.00 - 10.00
6.  8.00 -  8.80
7.  8.80 - 10.00
8. 14.30

IC4 2b-2c from the AUDIO part
1.  8.40 - 10.00
2.  8.40 - 10.00
3.  8.40 - 10.00
4.   0.00   
5.  8.40 - 10.00
6.  8.40 - 10.00
7.  8.40 - 10.00
8. 14.30

I don't have many expectations to debug it, but I give it a try!

Thank you very very very much oldschoolanalog!





« Last Edit: June 30, 2010, 12:38:16 AM by gigimarga »

gigimarga

Re: The Worlsd smallest flangers....
« Reply #119 on: June 30, 2010, 12:36:57 AM »
I copied this post of oldschoolanalog from the thread "MN3007 ADA Flanger clone" to avoid confusions and to keep all the thing clean!

OK, first things first.
1: Would somebody/anybody please take the schematic this is based on (Charlie's) and relabel all the IC's & pin #'s (where applicable) to match the solderman layout designations? I'm sorry, but I don't have the time to rev. engineer the layout into schematic form. Having a properly designated schematic would go a long way to assist troubleshooting. Thank You.
2: IC2 Audio board. Pins 1, 2 & 3 should not be left floating. That op amp should be disabled. (Use the search function ;))
3: To avoid mass confusion at a later date I respectfully request that the troubleshooting posts for the solderman unit in this thread be moved to the "Worlsd Smallest Flangers" thread. Nice to keep all the info in it's proper place. Plus, there is already some good troubleshooting info there. :icon_cool:
The good news (without knowing how your controls are set) is your 4007, 4047, 4049 & 3007 are all within an acceptable range as compared to a working unit.
The bad news is I started to get a headache and had to stop for now. (See #1 above)
I'll have another go at it tomorrow.
All the Best!