Hi
This looks interesting, anyone know the circuit or workalike?
http://elevationboutiques.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/eqdtonejob.html
Thanks
Raulduke's Tonemeister was a similar concept: 3 band eq (Baxandall topology, wich I find better than a pasive configuration) and active volume (with 11dB boost if I remember right).
I don't know if he is going to do more pcbs, but you can find the schematic in the build instructions that he kindly posted in the forum.
EDIT: and Raulduke's circuit runs at 18v vía charge-pump !
Quote from: micromegas on September 08, 2013, 09:08:07 AM
Raulduke's Tonemeister was a similar concept: 3 band eq (Baxandall topology, wich I find better than a pasive configuration) and active volume (with 11dB boost if I remember right).
I don't know if he is going to do more pcbs, but you can find the schematic in the build instructions that he kindly posted in the forum.
EDIT: and Raulduke's circuit runs at 18v vía charge-pump !
See here: http://www.madbeanpedals.com/forum/index.php?topic=6905.0 (SJEffects_Tonmeister_BuildGuide.zip)
thanks guys
Interesting!
Replied to your PM Ian ;)
The tonmeister is very usefull, and is operationally similar to the EQD (I've no idea whats 'inside the box' with the EQD though).
I am also working on the V2 of the Tonmeister, which will feature adjustable mid frequency (makes it a lot more usefull IMO).
I'll keep you guys updated.
Quote from: raulduke on September 09, 2013, 01:49:15 PM
Replied to your PM Ian ;)
The tonmeister is very usefull, and is operationally similar to the EQD (I've no idea whats 'inside the box' with the EQD though).
I am also working on the V2 of the Tonmeister, which will feature adjustable mid frequency (makes it a lot more usefull IMO).
I'll keep you guys updated.
Man, this sounds terrific, I lost the chance of getting one frome the first bach and I was thinking about puting it together myself, but if you're going to release another version count me in for it!!
Cool; glad you like the sound of it!
I have the proto PCB's in my workshop. Just need to build the buggars up and check everything is hunky dory!
Hey, that new version sounds interesting, would like to hear more about it. Has it parametric mids with a SVF?
The mid band is not fully parametric (ie. you cannot change the Q). It is a version of the Wien middle band circuit.
The circuit uses a TC/MAX1044 bipolar supply to get +9 and -9V for the headroom and boost/cut range required.
The signal path goes INPUT ->Input Buffer -> Mid Band EQ -> Baxandall Treble+Bass EQ -> Output Preamp -> OUTPUT
All the stages are Opamp based (no transistors).
I have a few other builds to complete but it shouldn't be long till I have it going!
OK, I see. Thanks for the info!
Has anyone tried to build this, maybe even made a board layout?
It has treble, bass, and parametric mids with variable bandwidth using a state variable filter.
http://hem1.passagen.se/robin2/im/giteq.gif
http://hem1.passagen.se/robin2/txt/giteq.txt
(http://hem1.passagen.se/robin2/effects.htm)
I had a look into variable Q eq circuits, but I don't really think they are as usefull for guitar/bass purposes as they are in mixing/recording scenarios. A wide/mid Q value is usually more 'musical' sounding for most guitar tone applications.
Also, these circuits (including the one above) usually require stereo/dual potentiometers that need to have a low tolerance to ensure optimal operation.
Interesting, so your Wien bridge bandpass filter doesn't need a dual pot for the frequency?
I think you're right about Q for regular mids (say around 700Hz) but for high mids (say above 1200Hz) I find a more narrow bandwith usually better.
But I never found the tolerance of the dual gang frequency pot on a SVF really critical.
Quote from: kothoma on September 10, 2013, 11:47:28 AM
Interesting, so your Wien bridge bandpass filter doesn't need a dual pot for the frequency?
I think you're right about Q for regular mids (say around 700Hz) but for high mids (say above 1200Hz) I find a more narrow bandwith usually better.
But I never found the tolerance of the dual gang frequency pot on a SVF really critical.
No it uses a single gang pot which makes things much easier.
The Q changes slightly (gets narrower) as you increase boost/cut, but this behaviour also occurs in some of the old school EQ's and sounds 'musical' for want of a better word.
Quote from: raulduke on September 10, 2013, 11:56:08 AM
No it uses a single gang pot which makes things much easier.
Yeah, that's nice.
Quote from: raulduke on September 10, 2013, 11:56:08 AM
The Q changes slightly (gets narrower) as you increase boost/cut, but this behaviour also occurs in some of the old school EQ's and sounds 'musical' for want of a better word.
That's nice, too.
BTW I just remember, the Nathan East eq has switchable Q. I think it's mostly for notches.
Quote from: raulduke on September 09, 2013, 01:49:15 PM
I am also working on the V2 of the Tonmeister, which will feature adjustable mid frequency (makes it a lot more usefull IMO).
Any news on the new Tonmeister?
I'm still getting round to building the PCB up unfortunately.
Sorry for the delay. Not much building time at the moment!
Thanks for the update. No need for apologies, take your time.
Quote from: raulduke on September 10, 2013, 11:56:08 AM
Quote from: kothoma on September 10, 2013, 11:47:28 AM
Interesting, so your Wien bridge bandpass filter doesn't need a dual pot for the frequency?
No it uses a single gang pot which makes things much easier.
Hm. I'm still trying to get my head around this. :-[
An active Wien bridge bandpass has a R-C pair in series at the negative input and a R|C pair in parallel in the feedback loop, right?
And the center frequency is calculated by the usual 1/2piRC. Aren't both Rs (and Cs) supposed to have the same value? So wouldn't I need a dual pot?
What am I missing? Pardon my ignorance :-[
You spent a long time thinking!
Joking aside, I'm also very interested on the tonmeister. I was supposed to get a pcb, which I never received and am waiting for the V2. Any updates?
I still remember this v2 in my nightly prayers.
A pcb of me when I first sold them?
I don't remember selling you one, but if I did and it didn't get to you please let me know.
Still not got round to building v2, but it is getting to the top of the pile.
Quote from: kothoma on August 18, 2014, 02:51:31 PM
Quote from: raulduke on September 10, 2013, 11:56:08 AM
Quote from: kothoma on September 10, 2013, 11:47:28 AM
Interesting, so your Wien bridge bandpass filter doesn't need a dual pot for the frequency?
No it uses a single gang pot which makes things much easier.
Hm. I'm still trying to get my head around this. :-[
An active Wien bridge bandpass has a R-C pair in series at the negative input and a R|C pair in parallel in the feedback loop, right?
And the center frequency is calculated by the usual 1/2piRC. Aren't both Rs (and Cs) supposed to have the same value? [...]
Finally, yeah, of course, I think I got it! It's really simple if one looks at the more general formulas. 8)
And you could similarly use a multiple feedback bandpass filter with a single pot instead, I think. :)
Quote from: raulduke on August 19, 2014, 12:21:53 AM
A pcb of me when I first sold them?
I don't remember selling you one, but if I did and it didn't get to you please let me know.
Still not got round to building v2, but it is getting to the top of the pile.
No, you never sold me one. I only started building last autumn. I (and some others I know of) where supposed to get parts from ColesBD, one was the toneister V1 pcb. I never saw neither my parts, nor my money. I think the others didn't either. :-\