Technical reason taptation won't work on the Zero Points?

[midwayfair]

I will, however, be working on a tap tempo analog delay. Or, at least integration to the Aquaboy, etc.

*twitch twitch*

p.s. I never meant for it to sound like I was begging for tap tempo on this project or even looking to add it to the deluxe. I was more interested in whether the current mirror was the problem or the modulation.

I've picked up some digipots and a couple tap tempo chips for experimentation, and one thing I've been amazed by is the community's reluctance (mine, too, I guess) to build with multiple PT2399s in series when they have the same "clean" delay length as an analog chip, which everyone seems content to use multiples of. So this was kind of being filed away for future reference.

[neiloler]

Thanks for the feedback guys, but I don't think I articulated what I was going for very well, I'm sorry. Let me try this one more time (again, sorry):

As stands now, the Taptation boards wouldn't work because they're setup to simply feed the digital clock through the SPI-controlled pot setup as a variable resistor. I understand why this won't work.

The question I had was more along the lines of designing my own PCB that uses the Taptation micro controller and the SPI-pot but that only uses the pot as a in-line replacement for the other one (thus feeding the modulated 5v stuff into the BJTs that control each PT2399's pin 6 path to ground).

I realize that this might not be the best, and I might be better of designing something from the ground up, or just going after a production pedal with tap tempo, I just like the idea of doing what would be tricky to do, and it seemed feasible to me to special-purpose the SPI-pot to sit in the circuit as a simple pot ONLY.

I hope that was a little clearer? Let me know what you guys think!

[jkokura]

That makes more sense.

I think what would make more sense would to just go the simple route and use the modulation already built into the taptation. It's really quite musical, and there's nothing wrong with it.

I think your method would work, and may even be valid, but it seems like you're hatching an egg to raise a chicken to get an egg to make your breakfast, when you already have an egg in your hand...

Jacob

[neiloler]

That makes more sense.

I think what would make more sense would to just go the simple route and use the modulation already built into the taptation. It's really quite musical, and there's nothing wrong with it.

I think your method would work, and may even be valid, but it seems like you're hatching an egg to raise a chicken to get an egg to make your breakfast, when you already have an egg in your hand...

Jacob

Haha! That's an awesome analogy. I totally agree. I just really miss having a good tap tempo delay. If this delay is nifty, I figured it be nice to have tap tempo. I've always been more a rhythmic delay kind of guy, the long ambient stuff is less accessible to me...which probably means I need to buck up and build this thing as intended and take it from there.

It's decided. I'll build it as the good Brian intended.

[plesur]

I'm really interested in adding tap tempo using a Taptation chip set to the ZPDD. If someone works out the details of how to do this, please let me know.

Thanks

[madbean]

I can look into that today, I think.

[neiloler]

I'd still be interested too!

[jasonstomps]

Just curious (anxious is probably more like it ) if anyone has had a chance to look into using the Taptation with the ZPDD?  I've got the Zero Point DD next up in my building queue.

[steveperiod]

I'll second that curiosity...anyone had the chance to take a look at getting the taptation into the ZPDD? I'm looking to add a tap tempo delay and I love the feature set of the DD.

[midwayfair]

Honestly, I think everyone's best bet if they want tap tempo with a dual-chip delay is to wire up a daughter board for a second digipot and sync the tap clocks. Then hook both digipots up to the pin 6s and omit the modulation and current mirror circuitry. Tayda carries the digipots now, for like $1, so it's not an expensive addition.

[steveperiod]

Pardon my thick-headedness, just trying to wrap my mind around the thing...

You're talking about syncing two digipots to one taptation chip, correct? If we're doing that what wouold be involved in getting both digipots running off the single taptation? At the risk of sounding foolish, it's not as simple as hooking both digipots (pins 1,2,3) up to the same spot on the taptation chip (pins 8,9,10) is it?

If I had the parts in front of me I would just jump in and try it, but I haven't ordered the tap stuff as I'm not sure if it will work the way I hope. The input we've received on this so far is definitely appreciated.

[midwayfair]

Pardon my thick-headedness, just trying to wrap my mind around the thing...

You're talking about syncing two digipots to one taptation chip, correct? If we're doing that what wouold be involved in getting both digipots running off the single taptation? At the risk of sounding foolish, it's not as simple as hooking both digipots (pins 1,2,3) up to the same spot on the taptation chip (pins 8,9,10) is it?

If I had the parts in front of me I would just jump in and try it, but I haven't ordered the tap stuff as I'm not sure if it will work the way I hope. The input we've received on this so far is definitely appreciated.

Chain clock outputs to clock inputs and it will sync the digipots.

Read 3.7 in the datasheet:
http://www.taydaelectronics.com/datasheets/A-928.pdf

[steveperiod]

Ah, I see. i was looking at the wrong digipot chip (MCP41100 instead of the MCP42100). I'm still looking through the datasheet, but would there be a reason both pots on the MCP42100 couldn't be used instead of chaining to another digipot chip? Again, apologies for the any dumb questions.

[midwayfair]

Ah, I see. i was looking at the wrong digipot chip (MCP41100 instead of the MCP42100). I'm still looking through the datasheet, but would there be a reason both pots on the MCP42100 couldn't be used instead of chaining to another digipot chip? Again, apologies for the any dumb questions.

not sure. I haven't messed with them much, just enough to know that it works to daisy chain them.

[neiloler]

I'm not sure it would be that simple, if it really is SPI output passed through the chip, you might still have to fiddle with the CS, and if the microcontroller expects an acknowledgement, you'd be out of luck.

I emailed the Tone God a while ago, be we heard anything back from him...