Yet another development topic by me. Well, development... It's just miniaturising an existing pedal, this time the Small Clone. The only mod incorporated so far is a depth pot. I might add a vibrato or intensity switch.
Again I need some help. Could anyone of you point me to more info about converting this circuit to accept MN3207 BBD's? I'd like to make it easily switchable like the Pork Barrel. Can that be done here?
(http://i.imgur.com/ltPUZZk.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/KRyeXUa.png)
Not much of a response here :-[. I get that, it's not really groundbreaking either to just miniaturise an existing pedal.
However, I went ahead and converted the SC to MN3207. This meant redesigning the power supply for the digital parts, which isn't as simple as on a CE-2 where the Egg for the BBD is provided by the clock. I'll let the schematics speak for themselves when it comes to the other changes.
The first schematic is the most basic one with a simple zener regulator and intended for 9V use, with 9V max provided to the BBD. Should be safe for the BBD and in the optimum working range of the MN3207 (IF I understand the datasheet correctly; minimum THD at around 8V operation).
(http://i.imgur.com/xKml1OG.png)
The second schematic is with a 7809 or 7805. Both should work, but when supplied 9V the 7809 will drop 2V and the BBD will run at a lower voltage.
(http://i.imgur.com/4OwhJ1R.png)
The third schematic incorporates other changes as well. The digital components aswel as the bias for them runs of a low noise LDO regulator. The LT1761 has a max voltage drop of just 150mV when loaded as lightly as in this application. I ditched D2, which only provides a unnecessary voltage drop after Q1. Not needed as I used a NPN here and not an PNP. More true to the original would to use a PNP for Q1 and use D2. I just can't seem to find the reason why it was done that way.
The biggest change however is in the parts surrounding IC1. The MN3207 has a fair bit less dynamic range when compared to the MN3007. The SC by default boosts the high frequencies in IC1a by as much as 18 dB and compensates for this in IC1b. The Boss CE-3 is much tamer at this point and boosts the highs around 10 to 12 dB. To me that seems more reasonable and get some of the headroom back. All was simulated in LTSpice and by the end of the signal chain, the frequency characteristics between my tamed and a stock SC are the same. Apart from an obvious noise penalty, is there any reason to tame the signal to the BBD?
(http://i.imgur.com/81OcOjE.png)
Cool! Subbed
Thanks wgc. What do you think about lowering the signal to the BBD as I did? Any other improvements to be made, especially to the mods I did?
I made a quick mockup. The board looks like this:
(http://i.imgur.com/u75UuIi.jpg)
That looks awesome, excited to see how all your 1590A SMD projects end up (and to hopefully build some of them ;D)
Small suggestion....
Put the trimmer on the opposite side of the PCB. So it can be adjusted without having to remove the entire guts from the enclosure.
EDIT: OR..... make previsions to use a trimmer that can be adjusted from both sides of the PCB and have an access hole for a trimming screwdriver. ;)
Quote from: dan.schumaker on September 19, 2016, 02:43:51 PM
That looks awesome, excited to see how all your 1590A SMD projects end up (and to hopefully build some of them ;D)
Thanks man! The boards for the micro sized Triple Wreck are on my way at the moment. Got an upgrade to swift service from the guys at OSHpark. Really nice. I want to see how that build is gonna work out. So that's the first one...
I'm not a huge theory guy, wish I knew more about bbd. But I can't fault your reasoning and the third approach is pretty interesting. Not sure what kind of noise you might get but to me a little grit might be cool in a flanger. Lowering the signal is an interesting approach too though personally I'm less inclined to do that vs make it loud and filter. :)
Also not sure why a pnp would be used vs npn. Might be they got the parts cheap and it was a good way to save some $$. Or personal preference..?
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on September 19, 2016, 03:58:36 PM
Small suggestion....
Put the trimmer on the opposite side of the PCB. So it can be adjusted without having to remove the entire guts from the enclosure.
EDIT: OR..... make previsions to use a trimmer that can be adjusted from both sides of the PCB and have an access hole for a trimming screwdriver. ;)
Good ideas here!
That idea on the trimmer was clever! I should have thought of that and moved it to the other board side. Done that now.
I was thinking about lowering the signal because of the CE-3 from Boss. Much less signal to the BBD. Seemed to be a the way to go for a MN3207 with its lower dynamic range. Then I looked at the CS5 and CS9 from Ibanez. Both build around the MN3207 and in a very similar fashion to the others. The signal going to the BBD of the CS5/9 is at least as strong as in a stock Small Clone. Now those Ibanez chorusses are highly praised, right? I haven't read any mentions about noise and distortion.
The CS5/9 run the BBD regulated to 5 V. I think it's more logical to regulate the entire pedal to 9V instead, or regulate everything that is dc coupled to the BBD. The Pork Barrel has the BBD and clock regulated to 9.1V (zener) in case of using a MN3207, but the bias for the BBD is taken from the the main power supply. This means that when the pedal is powered from a 12V (for what ever reason you'd do that) supply the BBD still has 9V and is misbiased because the bias changed with the PS voltage. Not to mention you'd probably fry a dropping resistor and zener diode...
Conclusion: it's doable to fit a MN3207 in a Small Clone without altering the signal path to the BBD much (if my simulations and thinking are correct).
Quote from: Rootz on September 20, 2016, 02:29:49 PM
That idea on the trimmer was clever! I should have thought of that and moved it to the other board side. Done that now.
You might want to also consider putting the BBD on the opposite side (socketed of course) It would make for easy repairs as that is the most likely fail item.
Quote
I was thinking about lowering the signal because of the CE-3 from Boss. Much less signal to the BBD. Seemed to be a the way to go for a MN3207 with its lower dynamic range. Then I looked at the CS5 and CS9 from Ibanez. Both build around the MN3207 and in a very similar fashion to the others. The signal going to the BBD of the CS5/9 is at least as strong as in a stock Small Clone. Now those Ibanez chorusses are highly praised, right? I haven't read any mentions about noise and distortion.
The CS5/9 run the BBD regulated to 5 V. I think it's more logical to regulate the entire pedal to 9V instead, or regulate everything that is dc coupled to the BBD. The Pork Barrel has the BBD and clock regulated to 9.1V (zener) in case of using a MN3207, but the bias for the BBD is taken from the the main power supply. This means that when the pedal is powered from a 12V (for what ever reason you'd do that) supply the BBD still has 9V and is misbiased because the bias changed with the PS voltage. Not to mention you'd probably fry a dropping resistor and zener diode...
Conclusion: it's doable to fit a MN3207 in a Small Clone without altering the signal path to the BBD much (if my simulations and thinking are correct).
Don't forget that all of the other pedals you mention used the companion MN3102 for clocking which could figure into the reasoning as to why they went with the 5V powering scheme. The SC used the 4047 capable of a higher voltage tolerance.
Food for thought... Good luck with this, it looks fantastic! ;)
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on September 20, 2016, 04:56:25 PM
Quote from: Rootz on September 20, 2016, 02:29:49 PM
That idea on the trimmer was clever! I should have thought of that and moved it to the other board side. Done that now.
You might want to also consider putting the BBD on the opposite side (socketed of course) It would make for easy repairs as that is the most likely fail item.
Quote
I was thinking about lowering the signal because of the CE-3 from Boss. Much less signal to the BBD. Seemed to be a the way to go for a MN3207 with its lower dynamic range. Then I looked at the CS5 and CS9 from Ibanez. Both build around the MN3207 and in a very similar fashion to the others. The signal going to the BBD of the CS5/9 is at least as strong as in a stock Small Clone. Now those Ibanez chorusses are highly praised, right? I haven't read any mentions about noise and distortion.
The CS5/9 run the BBD regulated to 5 V. I think it's more logical to regulate the entire pedal to 9V instead, or regulate everything that is dc coupled to the BBD. The Pork Barrel has the BBD and clock regulated to 9.1V (zener) in case of using a MN3207, but the bias for the BBD is taken from the the main power supply. This means that when the pedal is powered from a 12V (for what ever reason you'd do that) supply the BBD still has 9V and is misbiased because the bias changed with the PS voltage. Not to mention you'd probably fry a dropping resistor and zener diode...
Conclusion: it's doable to fit a MN3207 in a Small Clone without altering the signal path to the BBD much (if my simulations and thinking are correct).
Don't forget that all of the other pedals you mention used the companion MN3102 for clocking which could figure into the reasoning as to why they went with the 5V powering scheme. The SC used the 4047 capable of a higher voltage tolerance.
Food for thought... Good luck with this, it looks fantastic! ;)
Socketing the BBD, that's something I'd really like! Moving it to the other side would mean I've to relocate it between the pots as there's an output jack on the opposite side. That would mean a pretty big overhaul...
Maybe I should start looking into daughter board and or other jacks (smaller ones like the ones from Zwee) for complex designs. How nice would it be to shoehorn a flanger/chorus/vibrato hybrid into a 1590a? Or just clip all legs when the BBD is dead.Doesn't matter, it's dead already haha.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BBDs are not the most likely to die item as long as they're properly handled, while it should be socketed too, that crown actually goes to the 4047 and even they don't die that often.
The 4047 was chosen over the companion chip for its cheaper price and efficient driving only, it has nothing to do with voltages.
The 3207 is a lot less forgiving of bias shift than the 3007 hence the regulation, if you're only going to use the pedal with one power supply it doesn't matter but if you switch to one with slightly higher or lower voltage output the bias will be off.
The clock must see the same voltage as the BBD whatever happens and lowering the voltage of the entire pedal will effect the sweep range as the LFO can no longer go as high and low.
You could lift a 5V regulator with diodes up to 7.4V for a midway, remembering that the clock/BBD voltage buffer is dropping a diodes voltage.
BBDs 300X & 320X struggle mainly with bass frequencies which also tend to be the stronger p-p signal, the pre-emphasis reflects that.
A big thanks for that valuable information! Seems I was thinking in the right direction: take the bias for the BBD from the power that supplies it. Power CD4047 and BBD from the same point. Hence my (most recent) thoughts: either maximise the whole power supply to 9 volts via a LDO regulator or supply Q1, Q2, the BBD and the CD4047 from a regulated supply via a LDO. The latter gives the option to run the pedal as high a voltage as the other parts allow. The BBD will be safe and the bias will be steady. Last but not least, the LDO will have almost no drop when using a 9V supply.
Another option would be to regulate the clock, BBD, Q1 and Q2 (and the bias network for them) to 5V. Seems to be the sweet spot for the BBD according to some (or many, I don't know). Distortion in Q1 and Q2 will rapidly rise in this config, mainly 2nd and some 3rd. Not necessarily a bad thing... Is there a very good reason to run the aforementioned parts on 5V?
I always liked the idea of 9V over 5V better for the BBD and clock. For no apparent reasons whatsoever...
Brings me to the last point you note here: bass content to the BBD. In a CE-2 or CS9 e.g. the bass is greatly reduced by the 33n cap decoupling the first opamp to the pre-emphasis filter. Now that opamp is already unity gain at bass frequencies, the 33n cap drops even more lower bass (below 40 Hz IIRC). In that same place in the Small Clone is a 1u cap, which let everything pass (except DC off course). Other than that, I can't come up why a MN3207 would get more of a beating in a Small Clone than in a CS9 (5kHz at +18dB right before the BBD in the latter).
I'll post some simulations I made in LTspice, so you can better judge/see the ideas I had and the results of different filtering methods according to simulations. I know, simulations......
You'd have better luck giving the BBD a dedicated bias trimmer, it was just done through the 1st filter to save parts in the original design but you're going SMD so I doubt it'll cost you greatly. Bias Q1 with a 100k resistor to v.ref after the 1uF, add a 100nF after Q1 before the BBD and use your new 100k bias trim at the BBD to provide its Vgg voltage with a 6k8 resistor for close enough to 14/15th then add a cap at the output of the BBD with another biasing resistor, makes life a lot easier and gets you more headroom.
5V was chosen as the BBD operated happily off it and it meant a battery could be used in those old BOSS/Ibanez pedals, 8v2 is about the sweet spot for S/N & THD from past experience and from memory of the datasheets but they're good at 9V too and 5V is still fine just a little 'worse'.
A 3207 should be fine in there with the current set up.
That would obviously be the better way to do the biasing; just like in the CS9, but with Small Clone values. CE-2 is done trough the first filter too. Any reason why the bias won't be stable when looking at the second image below? Anyway, I'm going back to the drawing board and see what I can come up with.
The LT1761 is adjustable and set for just above 8V. I saw in the datasheet that the sweet spot should be there ;-) and thank you for the confirmation!
All schematics in LTspice
(http://i.imgur.com/MagHWko.png)
LT1761 regulated Small clone
(http://i.imgur.com/y2fC3jS.png)
pre-emphasis outputs
(http://i.imgur.com/1UvpOHJ.png)
pedal outputs
(http://i.imgur.com/55eh723.png)
Please take a look at this. Q1 and Q2 run of the normal VCC line again, the BBD and clock are powered from a separate regulated supply. The bias for the BBD is taken from that power supply aswel and placed right in front of the BBD. More parts, but a better design. Bias is further stabilised by a 10uF cap. This should be pretty solid. After the BBD there is a coupling cap and Q2 gets its bias from the regular power supply again. In theory it should now be possible to safely run the pedal at 9, 12, 15 or 18 volts without having to adjust anything. I upped the first filter cap to 220uF/25V. The BBD is always safe at 8V2, as is the clock.
You can socket the BBD. I just confirmed that the total height of IC + socket is 8.5 mm, so there is 1.5 mm room left between the BBD and the enclosure.
Who wants to actually see me build this thing? ;D
(http://i.imgur.com/eqVOrAw.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/4xiCYEk.png)
Your new 10uF bias cap is forming an additional low pass filter and it's overkill anyway.
Otherwise, looks fine to me.
Double dog dare you.
Looks good to me.
Ahhh the pressure wgc! This will be the final design prior to board fabrication I think. That cap is overkill, but it won't hurt either right? An extra 30 DB filtering in the bias, is that bad?
To you both a big thanks for having a look at the design. I'm confident that there aren't any fatal mistakes. Stay tuned to see how the Triple Wreck turns out. If the concept is good, this board will also go to OSHpark.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Awesome layouts! I would love to buy some.. Especially if you attend to make Ce-2 :)
Also, are you using 0805 packages for resistors and caps?
Thanks Brejna! Everything that works satisfactory will be put on sale. When the time is ripe. I wasn't really planning to do a CE-2/3 as there are already a number of others (Pork Barrel, Ensemble King and derivates, etc.) and I have got a Pork Barrel already. Yes, it's a bit big to my liking ;D
The resistors are all 0603 as are most capacitors. Some caps are 0805, mainly the larger values. This way I can get a better voltage rating and usually a better capacitance/voltage behaviour (bigger ceramics seem to be better at that). Tantalums are either 3216 or 6032.
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160924/eae1eb6370caf0afd39185b69ef7b493.jpg)(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160924/d658c960fac58d6459a0ed63ba594e4d.jpg)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This is off topic and consider this a work in slow progress. Both schematics show a CE-2 with minor mods to the power supply. The BBD and clock on their own voltage so you can run for example the BBD on 5V and the rest of the pedal on 18 Volts.
The first schematic shows a basic compander circuit. I still very much learning how to design and use a compander in a chorus. If i understand the working correctly, using one would greatly improve the noise figures and slightly the dynamic range. Does the CE-2 need it? Might not be. The Peavey CMC-1 compander chorus uses one and is praised for its pristine chorus. So why not try and learn something new. I saw in a couple of schematics that the first and last op amp in the circuit are just used as buffers. Is there no need for a high end emphasis anymore too when using a compander? I also noted that the r3 input is not always used on the compressor side. Why would one do that? Again, I am still learning very much about compander. A link to informative stuff (application notes already read) would be very helpful.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oh on a side note: compander need at least 6v (sa571d to be specific), so the commanding chorus would obviously not work when the regulator is turned down to 5V. The other schematic will work.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Total overkill in a CE-2 (and in most choruses) at the cost of extra parts, board space & dynamics, if anything was needed which it isn't as the CE-2 isn't a noisy chorus by any means then a simple gate like the CE-1 would suffice.
If you want 'pristine' chorus you may as well go digital anyway.
Valid points, thanks. Using that commander was really just out of curiosity.
Back to the Small Clone clone after a very busy week. The idea of making it accept MN3007 and MN3207 BBD's crossed my mind again, so I just had to look into that idea better. As Vgg for the BBD is not taken from the clock chip, it wasn't as simple as in for example a CE-2 clone like the Pork Barrel. What I did is "flip" the Vgg supply around when you move the jumpers to select the chip. When you jumper for a MN3207 Vgg is 14/15 Vdd, when you jumper for MN3007 Vgg is 1/15 Vdd. At least in my brain this sounds logical. In a regular SC Vgg is grounded, but I can't figure out a way to do that with just two jumpers. Now the question: does the foregoing sound logical and does the updated schematic look okay to you guys? On a side note: all P points in the schematic connect to each other, as do the G points to each other. both jumpers are either horizontal (MN3007) or vertical (MN3207). The rest of the schematic is unaltered.
(http://i.imgur.com/zSryWPN.png)
Look at the Lectric FX - Celeste for how to flip VGG and power with just 2 jumpers, incorporating the bias trim/vgg set up I mentioned earlier.
You could also just flip it from ground (3007) to Vdd (3207) it's not imperative that it be used.
You don't want everything to share power and ground directly, you need to learn proper layout techniques, the clock is effectively digital.
Edit: Scratch that, the Celeste build document doesn't actually show it in action, anyway, you have your 68k & 4k7 resistors, if they're connected directly to the BBD power and ground pins, when you switch the jumpers they'll get switched too and if you invert the divider it does the job for you, just make sure the stabilizing cap doesn't switch and is always connected to ground.
Double scratch, on a reread of your post I see what you're asking, if you want to flip it from ground (as in the original SC) to 9v from switching for 3007 to 3207 just connect it directly to the corresponding power pin that is being flipped with the jumpers, so if Vgg is connected to pin 5 for the 3007 so ground, when the power and ground are flipped with the jumpers, it'll now be at 9V for the 3207 as it should be.
Thanks Scruffle, for your time and ideas again. You are a bit more knowledgable about this than me, so it seems.
Vgg is grounded in a regular Small Clone indeed, while the datasheet states it should be at 14/15 Vdd. I guessed both work like you say. I went for a simple solution, because it has a small foot print. Even 4mm trimmers are big on such a small board :o The Vgg stabilising cap is always grounded and doesn't switch like you say. What you mention after the double scratch is what I initially wanted. I'm afraid my post wasn't very clear... As both solutions work, either is fine to me. I probably shouldn't expect a difference in sound, right? I've read somewhere it might influence the gain of the BBD though... Decisions, decisions...
And you partly nailed it when you said I need to work on layout techniques. BBD and clock are on the same power (Vdd) which is separated from the main power through an LDO, but the BBD is not digital. I assumed this gives enough separation between Vcc and Vdd. Wrong? Ground is shared through the whole board. That's not the best way, but I thought I'd get away with that and just use some massive ground planes instead. Clock is very close to it's own supply. Would you suggest to star ground the DGND at the AGND at the first filter cap or power inlet of the board? How does EH do this? Do they separate A and D grounds? So many questions, sorry Scruffle... I'll research a bit more about separation D and A supplies (Google is a close friend of mine).
To clarify where I'm in the design proces of the boards (I could probably lose 'a couple' of ground plane via's):
Top side
(http://i.imgur.com/9bNKCcB.png)
Bottom side
(http://i.imgur.com/HcWW3hX.png)
It's been a while since I played with the Vgg pin but I don't think it has much effect on gain or much of anything really, it's more just good practice for optimal operation but seeing as it was already tied to ground in the original... The source resistor on the small clone is only 39k anyway, if there was any drop in gain from it you could easily compensate by increasing that.
You'll be fine having the clock and BBD on the same power rail (they were in the original after all) but you'll have to be careful with grounds.
As for how to do the grounds, you'll do better learning from experience than me telling you what to do ;) it's a rite of passage to have a bum PCB and work out where you went wrong anyway.
Quote from: Rootz on September 22, 2016, 08:23:27 PM
Thanks Brejna! Everything that works satisfactory will be put on sale. When the time is ripe. I wasn't really planning to do a CE-2/3 as there are already a number of others (Pork Barrel, Ensemble King and derivates, etc.) and I have got a Pork Barrel already. Yes, it's a bit big to my liking ;D
The resistors are all 0603 as are most capacitors. Some caps are 0805, mainly the larger values. This way I can get a better voltage rating and usually a better capacitance/voltage behaviour (bigger ceramics seem to be better at that). Tantalums are either 3216 or 6032.
That is great, I thought you would do ce2 too.. :)
Anyway I am interested in this project, but I hope I will find dealer for the 0603 components
Thanks. I'll leave the Vgg supply as it is at the moment. It should work as intended.
I did take a look at the Celeste. Very interesting and I took notice about the separated supplies in that design.
I started reading more about grounding (TI papers on that matter for example). It is much more complicated than bypassing. I usually place bypass caps as close as possible to the ic needing them, thus hopefully taking out switching from the power supply at the source of the problem.
It looks like in the original SC all grounds are shared too. As far as I can see a very simplistic design, pcb wise. I designed the VDD supply very close to the clock and BBD. Not separated. Not the best solution, but the return paths are short and the ground planes petty solid. For 30 bucks I can take the gamble and see if it works. I hope I have better luck than I usually do in a casino.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: brejna on October 01, 2016, 09:16:24 AM
Quote from: Rootz on September 22, 2016, 08:23:27 PM
Thanks Brejna! Everything that works satisfactory will be put on sale. When the time is ripe. I wasn't really planning to do a CE-2/3 as there are already a number of others (Pork Barrel, Ensemble King and derivates, etc.) and I have got a Pork Barrel already. Yes, it's a bit big to my liking ;D
The resistors are all 0603 as are most capacitors. Some caps are 0805, mainly the larger values. This way I can get a better voltage rating and usually a better capacitance/voltage behaviour (bigger ceramics seem to be better at that). Tantalums are either 3216 or 6032.
That is great, I thought you would do ce2 too.. :)
Anyway I am interested in this project, but I hope I will find dealer for the 0603 components
Let me begin with your last sentence: you can get 0603 part from virtually anywhere. If I'm not mistaken, 0805, 0604 and 0402 are the most common and cheap SmD parts you'll find. No, not at Tayda or Smallbear, but anywhere from Aliexpress to Mouser.
I am working on a small CE-2. It is using a double decker pcb (clock, BBD and power supply on a small board on top of the main board), but it's a lot of work and time is scarce... I've made a start designing it, but no idea when I'll finish it. Eventually I will.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You can do a CE-2 with 0603 without any issues. I did a 1590a layout with 0603 for the caps and resistors and through-hole ICs and Transistors and it fit fine.
Of a CE-2 you mean?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Rootz on October 01, 2016, 09:59:27 PM
Of a CE-2 you mean?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yep, the CE-2
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v158/pickdropper/Guitar%20Pedals/Aquanet%204_zpsh9lsxnod.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/pickdropper/media/Guitar%20Pedals/Aquanet%204_zpsh9lsxnod.jpg.html)
Good lord that's gorgeous! Definitely my benchmark for clean work. Just everything looks shiny. How do you get that board so clean? Isopropanol?
Could you please share the layout for that board with me? Not for copying as I will mount all pots (depth, rate, mix), jumper blocks, switch (chorus/vib) and jacks on the same pcb. The way you made your layout would sure give me some clues how I should or could do mine.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Got some more work done on the Small Clone; added a charge pump board to it. It accepts a wide variety of it's and offers options for boost (solder jumper) and clock speed cap. Nothing new for the rest, just a digital test fit. It should fit, albeit some small margins.
I get the ic's for the Triple Wreck tomorrow, so this on is on the verge of being fabbed at OSHPark.
(http://i.imgur.com/E0lX1AQ.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/ysTVANp.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/0adX5rt.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/mQL7pax.jpg)
Those 3D models look the mutts nuts, looks like i'll have to learn yet another bit of CAD software!
wow, looks very good! And I agree, those 3D renderings are great. Would be more than awesome if you ever find the time to do a little tutorial about that part.
Haha thanks guys. I think making these 3D models works great as a tool to see if everything is going to fit like I want (and it looks cool). I just found out that the MN3007 socket is fine and doesn't touch the underside of the jack. The jumper block on the other hand... I'll have to move that one around a little.
The biggest drawback of Sketchup is that the models that you can download are not very accurate most of the times. I used a 9mm pot from the 3D Warehouse (where you get the models), but it was pretty different from the metal shaft 9mm Alpha's I made. The last ones are very specific to the models of pots I use though. It always a good habit to check the models against the data sheets and real life components.
Sketchup has got a bit of a learning curve, but it's very intuitive. Good thing is there are countless tutorials online. I'm a bit short on time lately, so I might take me a while to write a tutorial. That's less than awesome ;D. If you want to read into some of the existing guides, search for EagleUp on the internet. That will get you started and there are great tutorials for installing Sketchup and EagleUp. I'm on a Mac and installing was far less easy than it is on Windows. Installing on Windows should be very convenient.
You could always try an online 3D (Eagle) board viewer (search for it). It's nowhere as extensive in the possibilities as Sketchup, but very good for a quick mockup.
I think Diptrace has a 3D library too, which you can export into a 3D cad program and do some nice renders with. Gotta mess with that soon.
So, it's finally going to happen: I ordered the boards for the SC, foot switch and the charge pump. Let's hope it works right away. Fingers crossed...
Boards are in! But guess what: I'm on a vacation coming week, so soldering time starts first week of December...
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161122/bc678de0fe1567ddb85b4f9d1d0ea161.jpg)(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161122/4c8d806a6e86611ca6b75a1f130da61f.jpg)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Rootz on November 22, 2016, 12:34:59 PM
Boards are in! But guess what: I'm on a vacation coming week, so soldering time starts first week of December...
you make going on vacation sounding like a bad thing... ;D
Haha not a bad thing, just lousy timing...
Looks great! paypal on yellow alert...
Haha sure, I'll keep one reserved for you wgc. Any news on the Triple Wreck I sent you yet?
Quote from: Rootz on November 22, 2016, 12:34:59 PM
Boards are in! But guess what: I'm on a vacation coming week, so soldering time starts first week of December...
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161122/bc678de0fe1567ddb85b4f9d1d0ea161.jpg)(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161122/4c8d806a6e86611ca6b75a1f130da61f.jpg)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If you have any of those laying around when you're done I'll be glad to take them off your hands.
Sure! But first let's see if they actually work and how everything fits together outside Sketchup ;)
You know I"m in on one too :)
I should have ordered more :o
Had to order a few parts but they haven't arrived yet. So Triple wreck is next build after the two other builds in process, but it looks really great and can't wait to put it together.
I also have a remake pcb on order for a dan miner build that has been in process for quite some time- worked great outside of the box, but had to modify to get it to fit and then it oscillated. It will bump the triple wreck if it shows up soon, but that's a quick build. Hasn't been quick to do the crammage and troubleshooting into the enclosure though.
Regardless, I'm really excited about the stuff in process and in cue right now...
Finally had time and all parts that were still missing. Finished this small small clone clone tonight and guess what: it works perfectly from the first power on! Of course I first tested the voltage doubler board alone and in combination with the main board without BBD after that. Voltages were as expected: 19.5 V for the main board and 14 V regulated for the clock and MN3007.
I only made one very stupid mistake. The pots are both backwards. Good grief, why didn't I simulate the pot orientation in ltspice...
It was already pretty late when I tested the SC, so tomorrow I will turn up the volume a bit to hear how this one sounds. I really really liked what I heard even on low volume.
Now time to box this one up and work on a revised version with the pots in the right orientation. This remains a WIP...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Awwww, yeah. 8)