From don at till.com  Sun Nov  1 00:24:19 2015
From: don at till.com (Donald Tillman)
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 16:24:19 -0700
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <4E6ECCB2529949E8AF65B79274DDBBFA@RichiePC>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <4E6ECCB2529949E8AF65B79274DDBBFA@RichiePC>
Message-ID: <DA5124F4-0506-4CCC-8551-AFD957E2461F@till.com>


> On Oct 31, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Richie Burnett <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> In general we don't usually build filters like this because the lack of buffering causes loading effects that move the filter poles.

That's how the Roland Diode Ladder filter works.

And slight variations of simple RC ladders are used all over guitar amplifiers.  Like the "slope" control on the Marshall JCM 800 bass amp.  Or the weird tone controls in the Sound City amps.  The Gibson GA-40.  There are several other examples I'm not thinking of right now.

  -- Don

--
Don Tillman
Palo Alto, California
don at till.com
http://www.till.com






From rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk  Sun Nov  1 19:05:22 2015
From: rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk (Richie Burnett)
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2015 18:05:22 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <DA5124F4-0506-4CCC-8551-AFD957E2461F@till.com>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <4E6ECCB2529949E8AF65B79274DDBBFA@RichiePC>
 <DA5124F4-0506-4CCC-8551-AFD957E2461F@till.com>
Message-ID: <i2iebnu3e9jwt86p8dh7050x.1446401122851@email.android.com>

Yes, scale the impedances of the components by a factor of 10 for each successive stage...

1st stage: 1k with 100nF,
2nd stage: 10k with 10nF,
3rd stage: 100k with 1nF,
etc...

That will reduce the loading effect of each stage on the previous one, and help prevent the poles moving apart.

-Richie,

Sent from my Xperia SP on O2

---- Donald Tillman wrote ----

>
>> On Oct 31, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Richie Burnett <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
>> 
>> In general we don't usually build filters like this because the lack of buffering causes loading effects that move the filter poles.
>
>That's how the Roland Diode Ladder filter works.
>
>And slight variations of simple RC ladders are used all over guitar amplifiers.  Like the "slope" control on the Marshall JCM 800 bass amp.  Or the weird tone controls in the Sound City amps.  The Gibson GA-40.  There are several other examples I'm not thinking of right now.
>
>  -- Don
>
>--
>Don Tillman
>Palo Alto, California
>don at till.com
>http://www.till.com
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Synth-diy mailing list
>Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

From rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk  Sun Nov  1 19:23:19 2015
From: rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk (Richie Burnett)
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2015 18:23:19 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <DA5124F4-0506-4CCC-8551-AFD957E2461F@till.com>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <4E6ECCB2529949E8AF65B79274DDBBFA@RichiePC>
 <DA5124F4-0506-4CCC-8551-AFD957E2461F@till.com>
Message-ID: <xow1y0bjf9gpgm4xq6jmt9mu.1446402076658@email.android.com>

> That's how the Roland Diode Ladder filter works.

True, but it also has much additional circuitry that puts negative feedback around the sloppy un-buffered ladder to tighten up its response into something more musically usable.  (The poles of the 303 ladder are scattered over more than 3 octaves without resonance, due to the loading effects in the un-buffered ladder! That gives a really soft gradual transition from the passband into the stopband of the lowpass filter without resonance.) Fortunately a little bit of negative feedback around the filter makes the poles move together and tightens up the response to something that is much sharper.

> And slight variations of simple RC ladders are used all over guitar amplifiers.  Like the "slope" control on the Marshall JCM 800 bass amp.  Or the weird tone controls in the Sound City amps.  The Gibson GA-40.  There are several other examples I'm not thinking of right now.

Ok, perhaps unbuffered filters *are* useful in applications like guitar amps if you don't mind complex interactions between the various tone controls. Fender tone stack for example!

-Richie,

From don at till.com  Sun Nov  1 20:15:46 2015
From: don at till.com (Donald Tillman)
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2015 11:15:46 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <xow1y0bjf9gpgm4xq6jmt9mu.1446402076658@email.android.com>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <4E6ECCB2529949E8AF65B79274DDBBFA@RichiePC>
 <DA5124F4-0506-4CCC-8551-AFD957E2461F@till.com>
 <xow1y0bjf9gpgm4xq6jmt9mu.1446402076658@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <CFA6117D-6B07-42A8-BA0D-BA02A42A9138@till.com>


> On Nov 1, 2015, at 10:23 AM, Richie Burnett <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>> That's how the Roland Diode Ladder filter works.
> 
> True, but it also has much additional circuitry that puts negative feedback around the sloppy un-buffered ladder to tighten up its response into something more musically usable.

Not that much circuitry.  And an analysis of the Roland Diode Ladder filter requires the ability to do an analysis of the original RC ladder, Tom's original request.

I'm harping on this because electronic music has always had respect for both the abstract and the practical.  In the abstract an RC ladder does a crappy job of filtering, but in practice it finds many interesting musical uses.

> Ok, perhaps unbuffered filters *are* useful in applications like guitar amps if you don't mind complex interactions between the various tone controls. Fender tone stack for example!

Exactly.

The goals of hi-fi tone controls are: flat response at 12 o'clock, subtle adjustments at the ends of the spectrum, and no interaction between the controls.

It's the exact opposite in the guitar amplifier world; we don't care about flat response at 12 o'clock (and in fact the instrument sounds kind'a dull with a flat response), wild variations in timbre are a feature, and interaction makes it more interesting.

It's the difference between producing music and reproducing music.

  -- Don

--
Don Tillman
Palo Alto, California
don at till.com
http://www.till.com




From mr at analogue.org  Mon Nov  2 10:42:51 2015
From: mr at analogue.org (Mattias Rickardsson)
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 10:42:51 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Roland TB-303 filter responses graphed
In-Reply-To: <F2194CD869914D81A067FBA70491F817@RichiePC>
References: <08477C50F38A4B6FBC7D671FF1CAD666@RichiePC>
 <020921C1-1A7E-4743-A385-ACADD1D05BA8@audiobanshee.com>
 <488B0150-3DC9-474D-8873-DF3AA8E527B1@tpg.com.au>
 <F43B93956E5D4FB0B0E0A882345FE045@RichiePC>
 <CA+9GZUgwf-r10FbtZb9BtFWiNwb_DL_GHOEXHUBJfc6gjDh4oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1301A1C01D3940AABDB65B2B939B435D@RichiePC>
 <CAP92RBVLtr_zh-cyQou=bhPVQthMuXBP+ykFMt-VV7U7vpUg-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <F2194CD869914D81A067FBA70491F817@RichiePC>
Message-ID: <CAP92RBWyan4cNBouPmWx6j=roxFHkLML+tXUBeWmmfUK_2iJPA@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Richie for clarifying this.
I'm sorry for not getting it the first time. :-)

/mr  -  a bit weedy in his response


On 26 October 2015 at 16:42, Richie Burnett
<rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
> The weedy bass response of the 303 VCF is due to the under-sized capacitors
> C25 and C27 used to recover the signal from the top of the ladder network.
> (These are marked as section "2" on Tim's diagram that you linked to.)  They
> give an open-loop pole at around 60Hz, so that's a high-pass filter with a
> cutoff frequency of 60Hz when the resonance control is turned right down.
> (These poles move to a *much* lower frequency in the single hertz when the
> resonance is turned up and negative feedback is applied around the ladder.
> They only contribute audible high-pass "low-cut" action when resonance is
> near zero.)
>
> If you make C25 and C27 larger you get back most of the bass lost in the
> VCF, but loose the characteristic nasal sound from the filter.  (The other
> poles that Tim numbered on his diagram are all at much lower frequencies and
> don't contribute audible bass loss in the filer.  They are valid from a
> stability analysis point of view, and actually cause an alarming resonant
> peak at about 8Hz when resonance applied.)
>
> Capacitors C21 and C22 where the VCF feeds into the VCA are an additional
> source of major bass loss due to being undersized.  They result in a
> high-pass filter with two poles (and one zero) when the resonance is turned
> up.
>
> -Richie,
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Mattias Rickardsson
> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 3:09 PM
> To: Richie Burnett
> Cc: synth-diy
> Subject: Re: [sdiy] Roland TB-303 filter responses graphed
>
> On 26 October 2015 at 13:46, Richie Burnett
> <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> You can bring back much of the bass that has gone AWOL in the factory
>> build
>> TB-303 by making C21/C22 and C25/27 larger, but it destroys some of the
>> nasal character of the TB-303's sound.  You end up with something that
>> sounds a lot more like any other analogue synth.
>
>
> Not entirely. If you turn down the resonance, you still have the
> inherent nasal "weedy bass response" (TM) of the diode ladder
> topology:
>
> http://www.timstinchcombe.co.uk/index.php?pge=diode2
>
> /mr
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2014.0.4842 / Virus Database: 4447/10892 - Release Date: 10/26/15


From russell.mcclellan at gmail.com  Mon Nov  2 15:24:10 2015
From: russell.mcclellan at gmail.com (Russell McClellan)
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 09:24:10 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <DA5124F4-0506-4CCC-8551-AFD957E2461F@till.com>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <4E6ECCB2529949E8AF65B79274DDBBFA@RichiePC>
 <DA5124F4-0506-4CCC-8551-AFD957E2461F@till.com>
Message-ID: <CAELY0NRXKRWNz9WonQPzrZxSV8xx7LUK8vG7ChzXA+gMFyX1rg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Tom -

As Donald mentioned, these unbuffered filters are incredibly common in
synthesizers and music electronics in general, so it's a great thing
to be able to analyze painlessly.  For me, this is the perfect
application of a computer algebra package - these are simple equations
to solve for a computer, and as people have mentioned they are
error-prone to calculate by hand.  I have done a lot of these by hand,
and to be blunt, it's not a very enlightening activity.  Let the
computer do the drudgery.  I usually use SymPy, because, while a bit
limited, it's built into the python language so it fits into my
workflow, and it can be combined with numpy and matplotlib to make
pretty graphs.  A lot of people in the synth diy community use maxima
to great success, although I don't have much personal experience with
it.

For an example of how a computer algebra package helps with analyzing
these unbuffered filters, check out some work I did deriving transfer
functions for diode filters here (these are in "note to self" form -
please let me know if you have any questions about them - I hope to
expand them into a technical blog post in the near future)

https://gist.github.com/russellmcc/a6576721f2a394364bf2 - the
"plot_diode.py" file contains the approach you were starting down,
while "alternate_derivation.py" uses the kirkhoff's law approach.  It
turns out it's fewer lines of code to tell the computer to solve
kirkhoff's laws, but for me the impedance model is conceptually
similar.

Thanks,
-Russell

On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Donald Tillman <don at till.com> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 31, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Richie Burnett <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> In general we don't usually build filters like this because the lack of buffering causes loading effects that move the filter poles.
>
> That's how the Roland Diode Ladder filter works.
>
> And slight variations of simple RC ladders are used all over guitar amplifiers.  Like the "slope" control on the Marshall JCM 800 bass amp.  Or the weird tone controls in the Sound City amps.  The Gibson GA-40.  There are several other examples I'm not thinking of right now.
>
>   -- Don
>
> --
> Don Tillman
> Palo Alto, California
> don at till.com
> http://www.till.com
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


From quincas at gmail.com  Mon Nov  2 17:41:17 2015
From: quincas at gmail.com (Quincas Moreira)
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 10:41:17 -0600
Subject: [sdiy] PCB op-amp layout - 2x2 or 1x4
In-Reply-To: <CAP92RBWqNVDRajKcpfhaWpuZc7xX=LNcE7a_tK8bFz+fPRyZEA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5632506e.c918c20a.23a39.ffffdec2@mx.google.com>
 <2AF9F864-BE2B-4F93-B106-DE167B52A2E7@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAP92RBVVnJ9Fq0_Tm8292ETWc1LdQSmXL6YDJ6KMvKfM9Xr+jw@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.LNX.2.20.1510300140370.3627@localhost.localdomain>
 <CAP92RBWqNVDRajKcpfhaWpuZc7xX=LNcE7a_tK8bFz+fPRyZEA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+u0JtkG_1_Y8RBf8p9zy+RzqmFSKnG6_wqU7BW0CYfbpxTNMQ@mail.gmail.com>

I don't get the issue with the power being on the "wrong side" as these
chips are symmetrical, one could just turn it around and have the power
pins facing the "right direction."  What I do worry about is interaction
between opamps in the same package.  Depending on what you're doing it may
indeed be better to use a few duals rather than quads.  In the real world,
isolation between Opamps in the same package can be less ideal than the
specs say.

Cheers



On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Mattias Rickardsson <mr at analogue.org>
wrote:

> On 30 October 2015 at 07:42,  <mskala at ansuz.sooke.bc.ca> wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Oct 2015, Mattias Rickardsson wrote:
> >> For highest signal integrity, duals (or singles of course) could be
> >> preferred in some cases. For example when dealing with tiny signal
> levels,
> >
> >> I still haven't had such a problem with quads though.
> >
> > I have oscillators that lock because they share units of a quad, despite
> > my best efforts to keep them separate.  They don't lock *much*, but more
> > than I would prefer, and I'm likely to redesign the board with single op
> > amps instead.
>
> Have you tried different opamp types? Some of their datasheets brag a
> little bit more than others about how separated the internal power
> handling is between channels, so perhaps a change of opamp is all you
> need.
>
> /mr
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>



-- 
Quincas Moreira
Test Pilot at VBrazil Modular
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151102/32072cf0/attachment.htm>

From frey at radioles.com  Tue Nov  3 17:40:42 2015
From: frey at radioles.com (Joe Frey)
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2015 11:40:42 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] OT:High gain low noise amp for beheaded tape head
Message-ID: <5638E38A.9050208@radioles.com>

All, I am doing the tape loop on a bow passed across a tape head thing. 
The head came out of an old Grundig TK-23 and though I have saved the 
guts of this tube and transformer fishing weight I want to make 
something small and light(because I am hauling a double bass and a bunch 
synth modules already) to get the signal loud enough to go into a Roland 
Space Echo. Right now when I use a mxr gain pedal it is barely loud 
enough so I want to build some preamp. Can someone point to a project 
schem, kit or group that could help. Thanks.

-- 
    (">  <")
    / )   ( \
  ''/ |   / |``
  
"Anything worth doing, is worth doing badly, because it might make it better the next time." --anon

Joe Frey
A.K.A. Bitter Relic of a Bygone Era
joe.frey at radioles.com
http://radioles.com
Chez Judex
http://radioles.com/judex/
Radio Lu-Lu (Internet radio)
http://radioles.com/radiolulu/




From neil.johnson71 at gmail.com  Tue Nov  3 18:44:06 2015
From: neil.johnson71 at gmail.com (Neil Johnson)
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 17:44:06 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <30CFFB38-8810-40DB-91E2-3A6C21D7E13C@liivatera.com>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <2F9CB7DF-EA26-41C0-AE13-370D08F995F5@till.com>
 <30CFFB38-8810-40DB-91E2-3A6C21D7E13C@liivatera.com>
Message-ID: <CACZGMxLYE0+jXADujTdGGeaBctMkUrp6aE3SHfeuwp5Z1A+hRA@mail.gmail.com>

HI Phil,

An alternative that could be easier to get started with would be to use a
> series of ABCD matrices. That way you can solve for any number of stages
> too.
>

Thanks for stirring up some ancient memories!

After a quick refresher, e.g.,
http://www.engr.sjsu.edu/rkwok/EE172/Microwave_Network.pdf

and some fun with wxmaxima it is actually quite easy to bash in the
equation for the filter, and then you can flip it around to work out the
transfer function.  In this case the filter is represented as:

matrix([1,R1],[0,1]).matrix([1,0],[%i*w*C1,1]).matrix([1,R2],[0,1]).matrix([1,0],[%i*w*C2,1]).matrix([1,R3],[0,1]).matrix([1,0],[%i*w*C3,1]).matrix([1,0],[1/Rimp,1]);

and turns into something that has quite a few brackets, and as Murphy would
have it the A term has the most.

Cheers,
Neil
--
http://www.njohnson.co.uk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151103/93265404/attachment.htm>

From don at till.com  Tue Nov  3 19:03:30 2015
From: don at till.com (Donald Tillman)
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 10:03:30 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <xow1y0bjf9gpgm4xq6jmt9mu.1446402076658@email.android.com>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <4E6ECCB2529949E8AF65B79274DDBBFA@RichiePC>
 <DA5124F4-0506-4CCC-8551-AFD957E2461F@till.com>
 <xow1y0bjf9gpgm4xq6jmt9mu.1446402076658@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <10DB1A93-E611-4579-A34A-27760493B472@till.com>

[Reposting, for some reason it didn't seem to work the first time.  I don't see it on the retrosynth archive.]


> On Nov 1, 2015, at 10:23 AM, Richie Burnett <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>> That's how the Roland Diode Ladder filter works.
> 
> True, but it also has much additional circuitry that puts negative feedback around the sloppy un-buffered ladder to tighten up its response into something more musically usable.

Not that much circuitry.  And an analysis of the Roland Diode Ladder filter requires the ability to do an analysis of the original RC ladder, Tom's original request.

I'm harping on this because electronic music has always had respect for both the abstract and the practical.  In the abstract an RC ladder does a crappy job of filtering, but in practice it finds many interesting musical uses.

> Ok, perhaps unbuffered filters *are* useful in applications like guitar amps if you don't mind complex interactions between the various tone controls. Fender tone stack for example!

Exactly.

The goals of hi-fi tone controls are: flat response at 12 o'clock, subtle adjustments at the ends of the spectrum, and no interaction between the controls.

It's the exact opposite in the guitar amplifier world; we don't care about flat response at 12 o'clock (and in fact the instrument sounds kind'a dull with a flat response), wild variations in timbre are a feature, and interaction makes it more interesting.

It's the difference between producing music and reproducing music.

 -- Don

--
Don Tillman
Palo Alto, California
don at till.com
http://www.till.com




From don at till.com  Tue Nov  3 19:27:34 2015
From: don at till.com (Donald Tillman)
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 10:27:34 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <CACZGMxLYE0+jXADujTdGGeaBctMkUrp6aE3SHfeuwp5Z1A+hRA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <2F9CB7DF-EA26-41C0-AE13-370D08F995F5@till.com>
 <30CFFB38-8810-40DB-91E2-3A6C21D7E13C@liivatera.com>
 <CACZGMxLYE0+jXADujTdGGeaBctMkUrp6aE3SHfeuwp5Z1A+hRA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <803C5ACD-B1CA-4D84-89D6-F3FD3FE425CB@till.com>

Instead of turning to a symbolic math program, I think it's a lot more educational, self-reliant, and true to the DIY spirit to just do it yourself.  It's not difficult, and it's an important and useful skill to have.

Here, I'll help get you started.  For the two pole circuit, let Va be the voltage at the junction of R1, R2, and C1.  The sum of the currents going into this junction must be zero.

(1/R1)(Vin - Va) - (1/sC1) Va + (1/R2)(Vo - Va) = 0

Rearrange that into the junction order, by the V's:

(1/R1)Vin + (-1/R1 - 1/R2 - 1/sC1)Va + (1/R2)Vo = 0

Next, do the same for junction Vo, and you're well on your way.

  -- Don

--
Don Tillman
Palo Alto, California
don at till.com
http://www.till.com






From abide at dmdrafting.com  Tue Nov  3 20:26:04 2015
From: abide at dmdrafting.com (Dave Magnuson)
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 14:26:04 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] OT:High gain low noise amp for beheaded tape head
In-Reply-To: <5638E38A.9050208@radioles.com>
References: <5638E38A.9050208@radioles.com>
Message-ID: <003b01d1166d$7bfab7d0$73f02770$@dmdrafting.com>

Hi Joe,

If I recall correctly, tape heads need a bit of filtering to sound right
(similar to a phono preamp).   Here's a simple looking one:

http://www.electronics-lab.com/project/tape-head-pre-amplifier/

I have never tried it, so YMMV

Dave Magnuson

-----Original Message-----
From: Synth-diy [mailto:synth-diy-bounces at dropmix.xs4all.nl] On Behalf Of
Joe Frey
Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2015 11:41 AM
To: Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
Subject: [sdiy] OT:High gain low noise amp for beheaded tape head

All, I am doing the tape loop on a bow passed across a tape head thing. 
The head came out of an old Grundig TK-23 and though I have saved the guts
of this tube and transformer fishing weight I want to make something small
and light(because I am hauling a double bass and a bunch synth modules
already) to get the signal loud enough to go into a Roland Space Echo. Right
now when I use a mxr gain pedal it is barely loud enough so I want to build
some preamp. Can someone point to a project schem, kit or group that could
help. Thanks.

-- 
    (">  <")
    / )   ( \
  ''/ |   / |``
  
"Anything worth doing, is worth doing badly, because it might make it better
the next time." --anon

Joe Frey
A.K.A. Bitter Relic of a Bygone Era
joe.frey at radioles.com
http://radioles.com
Chez Judex
http://radioles.com/judex/
Radio Lu-Lu (Internet radio)
http://radioles.com/radiolulu/


_______________________________________________
Synth-diy mailing list
Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



From timr at circuitabbey.com  Tue Nov  3 21:19:17 2015
From: timr at circuitabbey.com (Tim Ressel)
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 12:19:17 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] OT:High gain low noise amp for beheaded tape head
In-Reply-To: <5638E38A.9050208@radioles.com>
References: <5638E38A.9050208@radioles.com>
Message-ID: <563916C5.3040004@circuitabbey.com>

Yo,

What you want is an "NAB" amplifier. NAB being the emphasis, like RIAA 
but for tape. A lot of National Semi, er, TI datasheets show NAB 
amplifier circuits. The LM4562 datasheet has one on page 25 for instance.

--TimR

On 11/3/2015 8:40 AM, Joe Frey wrote:
> All, I am doing the tape loop on a bow passed across a tape head 
> thing. The head came out of an old Grundig TK-23 and though I have 
> saved the guts of this tube and transformer fishing weight I want to 
> make something small and light(because I am hauling a double bass and 
> a bunch synth modules already) to get the signal loud enough to go 
> into a Roland Space Echo. Right now when I use a mxr gain pedal it is 
> barely loud enough so I want to build some preamp. Can someone point 
> to a project schem, kit or group that could help. Thanks.
>

-- 
--Tim Ressel
Circuit Abbey
timr at circuitabbey.com



From tom at electricdruid.net  Tue Nov  3 23:38:15 2015
From: tom at electricdruid.net (Tom Wiltshire)
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 22:38:15 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <803C5ACD-B1CA-4D84-89D6-F3FD3FE425CB@till.com>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <2F9CB7DF-EA26-41C0-AE13-370D08F995F5@till.com>
 <30CFFB38-8810-40DB-91E2-3A6C21D7E13C@liivatera.com>
 <CACZGMxLYE0+jXADujTdGGeaBctMkUrp6aE3SHfeuwp5Z1A+hRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <803C5ACD-B1CA-4D84-89D6-F3FD3FE425CB@till.com>
Message-ID: <CF5EEB85-BF54-4B14-A35D-5EB7A5949668@electricdruid.net>

Hi Don,

Ok, you've picked the other approach - Kirchoff's law. I haven't tried that yet, but I'm willing to give it a go. Was there any particular reason you chose to do it that way rather than the simplify-the-impedances method I tried?

> Instead of turning to a symbolic math program, I think it's a lot more educational, self-reliant, and true to the DIY spirit to just do it yourself.  It's not difficult, and it's an important and useful skill to have.

Agreed. That was my motivation.

> Here, I'll help get you started.  For the two pole circuit, let Va be the voltage at the junction of R1, R2, and C1.  The sum of the currents going into this junction must be zero.
> 
> (1/R1)(Vin - Va) - (1/sC1) Va + (1/R2)(Vo - Va) = 0

This is just the application of Ohm's law with impedances around the junction, right? I get this part.

> Rearrange that into the junction order, by the V's:
> 
> (1/R1)Vin + (-1/R1 - 1/R2 - 1/sC1)Va + (1/R2)Vo = 0

Ok, I see what you've done here, and now you've done it, I see what you meant by "in junction order, by the V's", although I found it unintelligible on it's own!

> Next, do the same for junction Vo, and you're well on your way.

I think I can see how I'd do the same summing-the-currents process around Vo, which will presumably give me another equation somewhat similar to the one you've just derived. But then what?
My guess - they're both equal to zero, so I can set them either side of an equals sign (e.g. they're equal to each other). Then I start rearranging them until I finish up with Vo/Vin on one side and everything else (the transfer function) on the other side?

Thanks,
Tom



From don at till.com  Wed Nov  4 00:04:33 2015
From: don at till.com (Donald Tillman)
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 15:04:33 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <CF5EEB85-BF54-4B14-A35D-5EB7A5949668@electricdruid.net>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <2F9CB7DF-EA26-41C0-AE13-370D08F995F5@till.com>
 <30CFFB38-8810-40DB-91E2-3A6C21D7E13C@liivatera.com>
 <CACZGMxLYE0+jXADujTdGGeaBctMkUrp6aE3SHfeuwp5Z1A+hRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <803C5ACD-B1CA-4D84-89D6-F3FD3FE425CB@till.com>
 <CF5EEB85-BF54-4B14-A35D-5EB7A5949668@electricdruid.net>
Message-ID: <0472226C-A151-44D6-A82F-944AEF955F95@till.com>


> On Nov 3, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Tom Wiltshire <tom at electricdruid.net> wrote:
> 
> Ok, you've picked the other approach - Kirchoff's law. I haven't tried that yet, but I'm willing to give it a go. Was there any particular reason you chose to do it that way rather than the simplify-the-impedances method I tried?

Simplify-the-impedances is only useful for very simple circuits.  For anything more difficult, Kirchoff's Current Law is much easier, more straightforward, and can grow arbitrarily complex.


> 
>>  For the two pole circuit, let Va be the voltage at the junction of R1, R2, and C1.  The sum of the currents going into this junction must be zero.
>> 
>> (1/R1)(Vin - Va) - (1/sC1) Va + (1/R2)(Vo - Va) = 0
> 
> This is just the application of Ohm's law with impedances around the junction, right? I get this part.

Yes, the total current into a node should be zero.  That's the voltage difference divided by impedance, for every connection into the node.  The signs can be tricky.


> 
>> Rearrange that into the junction order, by the V's:
>> 
>> (1/R1)Vin + (-1/R1 - 1/R2 - 1/sC1)Va + (1/R2)Vo = 0
> 
> Ok, I see what you've done here, and now you've done it, I see what you meant by "in junction order, by the V's", although I found it unintelligible on it's own!

Yes.  You want to rearrange it into the form of parameters for each V, and they all sum to zero.


> 
>> Next, do the same for junction Vo, and you're well on your way.
> 
> I think I can see how I'd do the same summing-the-currents process around Vo, which will presumably give me another equation somewhat similar to the one you've just derived. But then what?

This first equation relates Vin, Va and Vo.

The second equation relates Va and Vo.  This lets you write Va in terms of Vo.

Substitute that into the first equation and you should be good to go.

  -- Don

--
Don Tillman
Palo Alto, California
don at till.com
http://www.till.com



From neil.johnson71 at gmail.com  Wed Nov  4 00:17:08 2015
From: neil.johnson71 at gmail.com (Neil Johnson)
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 23:17:08 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <CF5EEB85-BF54-4B14-A35D-5EB7A5949668@electricdruid.net>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <2F9CB7DF-EA26-41C0-AE13-370D08F995F5@till.com>
 <30CFFB38-8810-40DB-91E2-3A6C21D7E13C@liivatera.com>
 <CACZGMxLYE0+jXADujTdGGeaBctMkUrp6aE3SHfeuwp5Z1A+hRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <803C5ACD-B1CA-4D84-89D6-F3FD3FE425CB@till.com>
 <CF5EEB85-BF54-4B14-A35D-5EB7A5949668@electricdruid.net>
Message-ID: <CACZGMx+wRY3BqkgZZwOQyChCUmYGB0FONS1Evzvm1vqHh+ahJQ@mail.gmail.com>

Tom,

Don is right in promoting the virtue of learning the process by hand, both
to get a feel for the problem at hand, and to know how to drive the tools
later on.

To give you a taster, here are the expressions for the transfer function
for the three cases:
(%i = the imaginary operator or "j" as used by electrical/electronics
folks, %pi = PI)

1/ Single-pole R/C/R case:

Rimp/((2*%i*%pi*f*Rimp*C1+1)*R1+Rimp)

2/ Two-pole case:

Rimp/(((4*%pi^2*f^2*Rimp*C1*C2-2*%i*%pi*f*C1)*R1-2*%i*%pi*f*Rimp*C2-1)*R2+(-2*%i*%pi*f*Rimp*C2-2*%i*%pi*f*Rimp*C1-1)*R1-Rimp)

3/ Three-pole case:

-(Rimp)/(
(((8*%i*%pi^3*f^3*Rimp*C1*C2*C3+4*%pi^2*f^2*C1*C2)*R1+4*%pi^2*f^2*Rimp*C2*C3-2*%i*%pi*f*C2)*R2+((4*%pi^2*f^2*Rimp*C2+4*%pi^2*f^2*Rimp*C1)*C3-2*%i*%pi*f*C2-2*%i*%pi*f*C1)*R1-2*%i*%pi*f*Rimp*C3-1)*R3+
((4*%pi^2*f^2*Rimp*C1*C3+4*%pi^2*f^2*Rimp*C1*C2-2*%i*%pi*f*C1)*R1-2*%i*%pi*f*Rimp*C3-2*%i*%pi*f*Rimp*C2-1)*R2+(-2*%i*%pi*f*Rimp*C3-2*%i*%pi*f*Rimp*C2-2*%i*%pi*f*Rimp*C1-1)*R1-Rimp)

>From these expressions you can then extract the amplitude and phase
responses.  To find out where the poles are just work out the roots of the
denominators.  Things are much simpler without Rimp.

I would certainly recommend having a play with the ABCD matrix method - it
is very easy to do by hand for the 1-pole and 2-pole cases; it explodes for
the 3-pole case though (see above).

Although for simple designs follow Richie's advice and make each following
stage's resistor 10x the previous one, e.g., R1=1k,
R2=10k,R3=100k,Rimp=1Meg and scale the caps according to taste.

Good luck!

Neil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151103/85784930/attachment.htm>

From jdec at mindspring.com  Wed Nov  4 02:49:22 2015
From: jdec at mindspring.com (BrightBoy)
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 20:49:22 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
Message-ID: <32611127.1446601762584.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

>Don is right in promoting the virtue of learning the process by hand, 
>both to get a feel for the problem at hand, and to know how to drive the tools later on.

Wouldn't Mason's Gain formula method be another approach for deriving the
s-domain transfer function?

Cheers,

Jeff



From subjectivity at hotmail.com  Wed Nov  4 03:08:07 2015
From: subjectivity at hotmail.com (Dan Snazelle)
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 21:08:07 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] OT:High gain low noise amp for beheaded tape head
In-Reply-To: <563916C5.3040004@circuitabbey.com>
References: <5638E38A.9050208@radioles.com> <563916C5.3040004@circuitabbey.com>
Message-ID: <SNT405-EAS94147DD097BDBF5CF28D62C82A0@phx.gbl>


 for tape on a bow, I would think crazy eq could work well too as you aren't necessarily after "proper" reproduction 





Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 3, 2015, at 3:22 PM, Tim Ressel <timr at circuitabbey.com> wrote:
> 
> Yo,
> 
> What you want is an "NAB" amplifier. NAB being the emphasis, like RIAA but for tape. A lot of National Semi, er, TI datasheets show NAB amplifier circuits. The LM4562 datasheet has one on page 25 for instance.
> 
> --TimR
> 
>> On 11/3/2015 8:40 AM, Joe Frey wrote:
>> All, I am doing the tape loop on a bow passed across a tape head thing. The head came out of an old Grundig TK-23 and though I have saved the guts of this tube and transformer fishing weight I want to make something small and light(because I am hauling a double bass and a bunch synth modules already) to get the signal loud enough to go into a Roland Space Echo. Right now when I use a mxr gain pedal it is barely loud enough so I want to build some preamp. Can someone point to a project schem, kit or group that could help. Thanks.
> 
> -- 
> --Tim Ressel
> Circuit Abbey
> timr at circuitabbey.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


From andy at cytomic.com  Wed Nov  4 06:59:55 2015
From: andy at cytomic.com (Andrew Simper)
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 13:59:55 +0800
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <CFA6117D-6B07-42A8-BA0D-BA02A42A9138@till.com>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <4E6ECCB2529949E8AF65B79274DDBBFA@RichiePC>
 <DA5124F4-0506-4CCC-8551-AFD957E2461F@till.com>
 <xow1y0bjf9gpgm4xq6jmt9mu.1446402076658@email.android.com>
 <CFA6117D-6B07-42A8-BA0D-BA02A42A9138@till.com>
Message-ID: <CAAxOnzZkmZ5VYWA5zswOD81CUkwOcLOzgNutowqz2uGaNt=-7A@mail.gmail.com>

On 2 November 2015 at 03:15, Donald Tillman <don at till.com> wrote:
>
> The goals of hi-fi tone controls are: flat response at 12 o'clock, subtle adjustments at the ends of the spectrum, and no interaction between the controls.
>
> It's the exact opposite in the guitar amplifier world; we don't care about flat response at 12 o'clock (and in fact the instrument sounds kind'a dull with a flat response), wild variations in timbre are a feature, and interaction makes it more interesting.
>
> It's the difference between producing music and reproducing music.
>
>   -- Don

It seems to me that most guitar EQ sections are built to make a
"smiley face" when at neutral to somewhat counter the bandpass / mid
heavy nature of the speakers.

Andy


From mr at analogue.org  Wed Nov  4 12:30:53 2015
From: mr at analogue.org (Mattias Rickardsson)
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 12:30:53 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <i2iebnu3e9jwt86p8dh7050x.1446401122851@email.android.com>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <4E6ECCB2529949E8AF65B79274DDBBFA@RichiePC>
 <DA5124F4-0506-4CCC-8551-AFD957E2461F@till.com>
 <i2iebnu3e9jwt86p8dh7050x.1446401122851@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <CAP92RBWHLz8MHKRxUBzUc97GLJNbxk0G8Br8FVgUPQMhx2_FEA@mail.gmail.com>

On 31 October 2015 at 23:09, Mattias Rickardsson <mr at analogue.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > ..., a good way to reduce the un-wanted interactions is to make the
>> > impedance of each RC filter stage about 10 times greater than the impedance
>> > of the preceding stage.
>
> When saying the impedance, do you mean the resistance?
>
> x10 for R, and x0.1 for C?
>
> Otherwise the filter will be some opposite of a brickwall filter... Japanese
> sh?ji paper wall filter perhaps. :-)

On 1 November 2015 at 19:05, Richie Burnett
<rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Yes, scale the impedances of the components by a factor of 10 for each successive stage...
>
> 1st stage: 1k with 100nF,
> 2nd stage: 10k with 10nF,
> 3rd stage: 100k with 1nF,
> etc...

Sorry, I had a brain drop accident and briefly forgot that the
impedance of a capacitor goes like 1/C. :o)

Anyway - has this impedance scaling technique ever been used to full
extent in any ladder filters, using different capacitor values for all
stages?

/mr


From rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk  Wed Nov  4 22:16:04 2015
From: rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk (Richie Burnett)
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 21:16:04 -0000
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <CAP92RBWHLz8MHKRxUBzUc97GLJNbxk0G8Br8FVgUPQMhx2_FEA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <4E6ECCB2529949E8AF65B79274DDBBFA@RichiePC>
 <DA5124F4-0506-4CCC-8551-AFD957E2461F@till.com>
 <i2iebnu3e9jwt86p8dh7050x.1446401122851@email.android.com>
 <CAP92RBWHLz8MHKRxUBzUc97GLJNbxk0G8Br8FVgUPQMhx2_FEA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8DE51BA4EB4A41F99ADA07632AA94997@RichiePC>

> Anyway - has this impedance scaling technique ever been used to full
> extent in any ladder filters, using different capacitor values for all
> stages?

You mean used in diode or transistor ladders?  I suspect not, as usually all 
of the diodes or transistors operate at the same bias current, and would 
therefore exhibit *the same* incremental resistance.  Not a decade apart.

It works great for passive designs like what Tom W originally asked about 
though.  I've used fixed 2nd and 3rd-order un-buffered passive RC filters 
for things like cheap and dirty PWM control signal filtering and 100Hz/120Hz 
ripple removal from signals in electronic products.

-Richie, 



From mr at analogue.org  Thu Nov  5 13:48:08 2015
From: mr at analogue.org (Mattias Rickardsson)
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 13:48:08 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <8DE51BA4EB4A41F99ADA07632AA94997@RichiePC>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <4E6ECCB2529949E8AF65B79274DDBBFA@RichiePC>
 <DA5124F4-0506-4CCC-8551-AFD957E2461F@till.com>
 <i2iebnu3e9jwt86p8dh7050x.1446401122851@email.android.com>
 <CAP92RBWHLz8MHKRxUBzUc97GLJNbxk0G8Br8FVgUPQMhx2_FEA@mail.gmail.com>
 <8DE51BA4EB4A41F99ADA07632AA94997@RichiePC>
Message-ID: <CAP92RBUkxEKVE9W6EFjDUUOCq2KVXm0DGS_ivO6tU3bpO3kvKQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 4 November 2015 at 22:16, Richie Burnett
<rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
>> Anyway - has this impedance scaling technique ever been used to full
>> extent in any ladder filters, using different capacitor values for all
>> stages?
>
> You mean used in diode or transistor ladders?  I suspect not, as usually all
> of the diodes or transistors operate at the same bias current, and would
> therefore exhibit *the same* incremental resistance.  Not a decade apart.

Perhaps double diodes could be used in series or parallel to get
double or half the resistance. Not a decade apart, but better than
nothing? :-)

/mr


From gordonjcp at gjcp.net  Thu Nov  5 14:15:47 2015
From: gordonjcp at gjcp.net (Gordonjcp)
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 13:15:47 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <CAP92RBUkxEKVE9W6EFjDUUOCq2KVXm0DGS_ivO6tU3bpO3kvKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <4E6ECCB2529949E8AF65B79274DDBBFA@RichiePC>
 <DA5124F4-0506-4CCC-8551-AFD957E2461F@till.com>
 <i2iebnu3e9jwt86p8dh7050x.1446401122851@email.android.com>
 <CAP92RBWHLz8MHKRxUBzUc97GLJNbxk0G8Br8FVgUPQMhx2_FEA@mail.gmail.com>
 <8DE51BA4EB4A41F99ADA07632AA94997@RichiePC>
 <CAP92RBUkxEKVE9W6EFjDUUOCq2KVXm0DGS_ivO6tU3bpO3kvKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20151105131547.GA13734@gjcp.net>

On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 01:48:08PM +0100, Mattias Rickardsson wrote:
> On 4 November 2015 at 22:16, Richie Burnett
> <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
> >> Anyway - has this impedance scaling technique ever been used to full
> >> extent in any ladder filters, using different capacitor values for all
> >> stages?
> >
> > You mean used in diode or transistor ladders?  I suspect not, as usually all
> > of the diodes or transistors operate at the same bias current, and would
> > therefore exhibit *the same* incremental resistance.  Not a decade apart.
> 
> Perhaps double diodes could be used in series or parallel to get
> double or half the resistance. Not a decade apart, but better than
> nothing? :-)

Aha, the voltage drop of the diodes is not down to actual "resistance" though so they don't behave in parallel the way that a variable resistor would.

-- 
Gordonjcp MM0YEQ



From rick.jansen at xs4all.nl  Thu Nov  5 15:26:59 2015
From: rick.jansen at xs4all.nl (Rick Jansen)
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 15:26:59 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <CAP92RBUkxEKVE9W6EFjDUUOCq2KVXm0DGS_ivO6tU3bpO3kvKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <4E6ECCB2529949E8AF65B79274DDBBFA@RichiePC>
 <DA5124F4-0506-4CCC-8551-AFD957E2461F@till.com>
 <i2iebnu3e9jwt86p8dh7050x.1446401122851@email.android.com>
 <CAP92RBWHLz8MHKRxUBzUc97GLJNbxk0G8Br8FVgUPQMhx2_FEA@mail.gmail.com>
 <8DE51BA4EB4A41F99ADA07632AA94997@RichiePC>
 <CAP92RBUkxEKVE9W6EFjDUUOCq2KVXm0DGS_ivO6tU3bpO3kvKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <92FBEB70-8463-4150-83DB-2D1AD4BEEC4A@xs4all.nl>

I have not studied the thread extensively, so sorry if I drop in with random noise, but I happened to run into a situation where I needed diodes with a small voltage drop in the pass-direction, as to not lower a digital logic level too much. Schottky diodes have that! 0.25V forward voltage drop, for small currents, instead of regular 0.7V.

r.

> On 05 Nov 2015, at 13:48, Mattias Rickardsson <mr at analogue.org> wrote:
> 
> On 4 November 2015 at 22:16, Richie Burnett
> <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Anyway - has this impedance scaling technique ever been used to full
>>> extent in any ladder filters, using different capacitor values for all
>>> stages?
>> 
>> You mean used in diode or transistor ladders?  I suspect not, as usually all
>> of the diodes or transistors operate at the same bias current, and would
>> therefore exhibit *the same* incremental resistance.  Not a decade apart.
> 
> Perhaps double diodes could be used in series or parallel to get
> double or half the resistance. Not a decade apart, but better than
> nothing? :-)
> 
> /mr
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


From don at till.com  Thu Nov  5 20:56:21 2015
From: don at till.com (Donald Tillman)
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 11:56:21 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <CAP92RBWHLz8MHKRxUBzUc97GLJNbxk0G8Br8FVgUPQMhx2_FEA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <97EB4921-3E15-44CF-A19A-40731583374B@electricdruid.net>
 <4E6ECCB2529949E8AF65B79274DDBBFA@RichiePC>
 <DA5124F4-0506-4CCC-8551-AFD957E2461F@till.com>
 <i2iebnu3e9jwt86p8dh7050x.1446401122851@email.android.com>
 <CAP92RBWHLz8MHKRxUBzUc97GLJNbxk0G8Br8FVgUPQMhx2_FEA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <81F4F2B8-5931-4CA5-8A88-B8F9A761A72F@till.com>


> On Nov 4, 2015, at 3:30 AM, Mattias Rickardsson <mr at analogue.org> wrote:
> 
> Anyway - has this impedance scaling technique ever been used to full
> extent in any ladder filters, using different capacitor values for all
> stages?

That's a very interesting question.  Okay, here is a research project:

Given a 4 pole RC ladder filter, intended to be used as a Diode Ladder VCF so all the R's are the same value, find which capacitor values minimize the ratio of highest to lowest pole frequencies.

Assume no second order effects such as input impedance and output impedance.  You'll probably want to keep the product of the capacitor values constant.

Go for it!

  -- Don

--
Don Tillman
Palo Alto, California
don at till.com
http://www.till.com






From cjuried at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  6 16:00:11 2015
From: cjuried at yahoo.com (Chris Juried)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 15:00:11 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <CACZGMxLYE0+jXADujTdGGeaBctMkUrp6aE3SHfeuwp5Z1A+hRA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACZGMxLYE0+jXADujTdGGeaBctMkUrp6aE3SHfeuwp5Z1A+hRA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1470154905.760623.1446822011733.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>

Hi all,
Is anyone using Matlab for computer based algebraic computation? ??Sincerely,???
??Chris Juried ?
Audio Engineering Society (AES)?Member? 
InfoComm-Recognized AV Technologist
http://www.juriedengineering.com 
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this email, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify me at (954) 478-4355 and permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any printout thereof.

      From: Neil Johnson <neil.johnson71 at gmail.com>
 To: Phil Macphail <phil.macphail at liivatera.com> 
Cc: synthdiy diy <synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl> 
 Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2015 12:44 PM
 Subject: Re: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
   
HI Phil,




An alternative that could be easier to get started with would be to use a series of ABCD matrices. That way you can solve for any number of stages too.


Thanks for stirring up some ancient memories!

After a quick refresher, e.g., http://www.engr.sjsu.edu/rkwok/EE172/Microwave_Network.pdf

and some fun with wxmaxima it is actually quite easy to bash in the equation for the filter, and then you can flip it around to work out the transfer function.? In this case the filter is represented as:

matrix([1,R1],[0,1]).matrix([1,0],[%i*w*C1,1]).matrix([1,R2],[0,1]).matrix([1,0],[%i*w*C2,1]).matrix([1,R3],[0,1]).matrix([1,0],[%i*w*C3,1]).matrix([1,0],[1/Rimp,1]);

and turns into something that has quite a few brackets, and as Murphy would have it the A term has the most.

Cheers,
Neil 
--
http://www.njohnson.co.uk


_______________________________________________
Synth-diy mailing list
Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151106/8bf9d93c/attachment.htm>

From neil.johnson71 at gmail.com  Fri Nov  6 18:04:40 2015
From: neil.johnson71 at gmail.com (Neil Johnson)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 17:04:40 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <1470154905.760623.1446822011733.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <CACZGMxLYE0+jXADujTdGGeaBctMkUrp6aE3SHfeuwp5Z1A+hRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1470154905.760623.1446822011733.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <CACZGMxJygZ4LZxiTyMrkT73tcVEe3ErS-XXg+QczE++0RYku1g@mail.gmail.com>

Chris Juried  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Is anyone using Matlab for computer based algebraic computation?
>
>
You can, but it's not Matlab's forte, and you end up using function calls
to do what should be natural from the command line.  Try wxmaxima, it's
significantly more powerful for algebraic manipulation.

Neil
--
http://www.njohnson.co.uk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151106/6a4b5d6e/attachment.htm>

From cjuried at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  6 18:45:41 2015
From: cjuried at yahoo.com (Chris Juried)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 17:45:41 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
In-Reply-To: <CACZGMxJygZ4LZxiTyMrkT73tcVEe3ErS-XXg+QczE++0RYku1g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACZGMxJygZ4LZxiTyMrkT73tcVEe3ErS-XXg+QczE++0RYku1g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <854039063.877882.1446831941757.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>

Thank you, Neil. I will give wxmaxima a run. ?Sincerely,???
??Chris Juried ?
Audio Engineering Society (AES)?Member? 
InfoComm-Recognized AV Technologist
http://www.juriedengineering.com 

      From: Neil Johnson <neil.johnson71 at gmail.com>
 To: Chris Juried <cjuried at yahoo.com> 
Cc: synthdiy diy <synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl> 
 Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 12:04 PM
 Subject: Re: [sdiy] Passive filters and impedances
   
Chris Juried? wrote:

Hi all,
Is anyone using Matlab for computer based algebraic computation? ?


You can, but it's not Matlab's forte, and you end up using function calls to do what should be natural from the command line.? Try wxmaxima, it's significantly more powerful for algebraic manipulation.



Neil 
--
http://www.njohnson.co.uk



  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151106/45739c9d/attachment.htm>

From patchell at cox.net  Sat Nov  7 00:33:37 2015
From: patchell at cox.net (Jim Patchell)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 15:33:37 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
Message-ID: <563D38D1.8040009@cox.net>

I have been looking for a breakout/header board for the ATSamD4E 
microcontroller.  For those who don't know, ths is an ARM Cortex M0+ 
processor.  I am interested in the one that has 64K of flash and 8KB 
ram.  But so far, I have found nothing, so, I am starting to think about 
designing my own.  The intended purpose is to use this in projects that 
need a MIDI interface, be it the traditional one using a serial port or 
a USB port (this part has USB).  Other features of the part are it has 
an I2S audio interface, I2C, SPI, UART, Non Maskable Interrupt.  The 
form factor I am thinking about is a Dip Header, and the price point I 
am going to target to is $20.  I should mention that you can get this 
part on an Atmel Explained Eval Board for $42, and the Arduino Zero for 
$38.  I was wondering if there was any interest in this project?


From patchell at cox.net  Sat Nov  7 00:39:17 2015
From: patchell at cox.net (Jim Patchell)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 15:39:17 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <ePa01r00R4AXc3W01Pa4YK>
References: <ePa01r00R4AXc3W01Pa4YK>
Message-ID: <563D3A25.1020602@cox.net>

I am sorry.  Not enough sleep lately.  The processor is actually the 
ATSAMD21, not D4.  Not even sure where the D4 came from in my brain.

On 11/6/2015 3:33 PM, Jim Patchell wrote:
> I have been looking for a breakout/header board for the ATSamD4E 
> microcontroller.  For those who don't know, ths is an ARM Cortex M0+ 
> processor.  I am interested in the one that has 64K of flash and 8KB 
> ram.  But so far, I have found nothing, so, I am starting to think 
> about designing my own.  The intended purpose is to use this in 
> projects that need a MIDI interface, be it the traditional one using a 
> serial port or a USB port (this part has USB).  Other features of the 
> part are it has an I2S audio interface, I2C, SPI, UART, Non Maskable 
> Interrupt.  The form factor I am thinking about is a Dip Header, and 
> the price point I am going to target to is $20.  I should mention that 
> you can get this part on an Atmel Explained Eval Board for $42, and 
> the Arduino Zero for $38.  I was wondering if there was any interest 
> in this project?
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>



From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Sat Nov  7 08:53:23 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 23:53:23 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <563D3A25.1020602@cox.net>
References: <ePa01r00R4AXc3W01Pa4YK> <563D3A25.1020602@cox.net>
Message-ID: <DD0AD9EC-AF4C-4BE4-834E-7B667396BD90@audiobanshee.com>

http://www.atmel.com/tools/ATSAMD21-XPRO.aspx

I'm currently very happy with the Texas Instruments TM4C1294, and working on my own design with 8 MIDI I/O ports. It's an ARM Cortex M4, so it might be more than you want.

I just finished a design based around the PIC18F24K50 (a Hammond drawbar controller), and although I'm not using the USB in the first release, it does have that on the board. Just a single MIDI I/O port on this one.

Brian Willoughby


On Nov 6, 2015, at 3:39 PM, Jim Patchell <patchell at cox.net> wrote:
> I am sorry.  Not enough sleep lately.  The processor is actually the ATSAMD21, not D4.  Not even sure where the D4 came from in my brain.
> 
> On 11/6/2015 3:33 PM, Jim Patchell wrote:
>> I have been looking for a breakout/header board for the ATSamD4E microcontroller.  For those who don't know, ths is an ARM Cortex M0+ processor.  I am interested in the one that has 64K of flash and 8KB ram.  But so far, I have found nothing, so, I am starting to think about designing my own.  The intended purpose is to use this in projects that need a MIDI interface, be it the traditional one using a serial port or a USB port (this part has USB).  Other features of the part are it has an I2S audio interface, I2C, SPI, UART, Non Maskable Interrupt.  The form factor I am thinking about is a Dip Header, and the price point I am going to target to is $20.  I should mention that you can get this part on an Atmel Explained Eval Board for $42, and the Arduino Zero for $38.  I was wondering if there was any interest in this project?



From dixon at mail.ubc.ca  Sat Nov  7 19:41:13 2015
From: dixon at mail.ubc.ca (David G Dixon)
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2015 10:41:13 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] PCB op-amp layout - 2x2 or 1x4
In-Reply-To: <CABacs=AwJQniNSbHZVuU0Zb9=BJuzhcFVGzVJ6XMDmEqyKQEMw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5632506e.c918c20a.23a39.ffffdec2@mx.google.com>
 <CABacs=AwJQniNSbHZVuU0Zb9=BJuzhcFVGzVJ6XMDmEqyKQEMw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E80EB2B3E0704BD0A24D268E8074F575@galvanox01>

> What I've seen on some boards is having all/most ICs lined up 
> in the middle of the board and the power traces going between 
> them. Then you have separate (sub)circuits on the left and 
> right side. This technique is of course especially useful if 
> you have two copies of the same circuit on one board, so you 
> can essentially mirror the circuit on either side.

This is exactly what I had to undo in my dual VCA to eliminate bleed,
although this is exactly how I do my Korgasmatron filter boards.



From patchell at cox.net  Sat Nov  7 23:48:54 2015
From: patchell at cox.net (Jim Patchell)
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2015 14:48:54 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <el5U1r00e1PJ7zD01l5UtR>
References: <el5U1r00e1PJ7zD01l5UtR>
Message-ID: <563E7FD6.3060104@cox.net>

I will take a looky see.  Sounds pretty good.  Looking forward to the 
release of a SAMD21 board.  I would really prefere to get something that 
was already done.

-Jim


On 11/7/2015 1:05 PM, Byron G. Jacquot wrote:
>> I am sorry.  Not enough sleep lately.  The processor is actually the
>> ATSAMD21, not D4.  Not even sure where the D4 came from in my brain.
> Offlist as I want to keep this a little bit quiet:
>
> I know of a small form factor SAMD21 board that's imminent - to be released in time for Black Friday.  I'll try to remember to point you to it when it comes out.
>
> In the meantime, take a look at the Teensy 3.2 and it's Audio shield.  Paul Stoffgren has the I2S DMA stuff working such that it's not hard to add DSP modules.  I'm working through an emulation of a Simmons drum with one right now, with plenty of horsepower left over.
>
> -Byron Jacquot
>



From ebrombaugh1 at cox.net  Sun Nov  8 00:11:37 2015
From: ebrombaugh1 at cox.net (Eric Brombaugh)
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2015 16:11:37 -0700
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <empP1r00V4AXc3W01mpUXL>
References: <el5U1r00e1PJ7zD01l5UtR> <empP1r00V4AXc3W01mpUXL>
Message-ID: <563E8529.4070209@cox.net>

Have you already decided to go with the Atmel SAMDxx parts or are you 
just looking for any old Cortex M0? I've done a little breakout done for 
the STM32F030F4 here:

http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/embedded/stm32f030breakout/index.html

The parts are really cheap ($0.57 ea in 20qty from Future) and they've 
got lots of useful features. I did a little DIY Euro-Rack module based 
on this part and a SPI DAC here:

http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/synth/cheep_mod/index.html

I've got wavetable oscillators, drum voices and LPC speech running on it.

I got a few of the Atmel SAMD21 parts a while back but the learning 
curve between them and the STM32 parts I'm used to is pretty steep so I 
shelved them. I suppose I should try again at some point.

Eric

On 11/07/2015 03:48 PM, Jim Patchell wrote:
> I will take a looky see.  Sounds pretty good.  Looking forward to the
> release of a SAMD21 board.  I would really prefere to get something that
> was already done.
>
> -Jim
>
>
> On 11/7/2015 1:05 PM, Byron G. Jacquot wrote:
>>> I am sorry.  Not enough sleep lately.  The processor is actually the
>>> ATSAMD21, not D4.  Not even sure where the D4 came from in my brain.
>> Offlist as I want to keep this a little bit quiet:
>>
>> I know of a small form factor SAMD21 board that's imminent - to be
>> released in time for Black Friday.  I'll try to remember to point you
>> to it when it comes out.
>>
>> In the meantime, take a look at the Teensy 3.2 and it's Audio shield.
>> Paul Stoffgren has the I2S DMA stuff working such that it's not hard
>> to add DSP modules.  I'm working through an emulation of a Simmons
>> drum with one right now, with plenty of horsepower left over.
>>
>> -Byron Jacquot
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>



From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Sun Nov  8 00:49:06 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2015 15:49:06 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <563E7FD6.3060104@cox.net>
References: <el5U1r00e1PJ7zD01l5UtR> <563E7FD6.3060104@cox.net>
Message-ID: <EF62DBBB-B7F4-4BBC-887D-7ED9519E6FE8@audiobanshee.com>

So much for this staying quietly off-list.

Seriously, though, please point us all to the Black Friday release.

Brian


On Nov 7, 2015, at 2:48 PM, Jim Patchell <patchell at cox.net> wrote:
> I will take a looky see.  Sounds pretty good.  Looking forward to the release of a SAMD21 board.  I would really prefere to get something that was already done.
> 
> On 11/7/2015 1:05 PM, Byron G. Jacquot wrote:
>>> I am sorry.  Not enough sleep lately.  The processor is actually the
>>> ATSAMD21, not D4.  Not even sure where the D4 came from in my brain.
>> Offlist as I want to keep this a little bit quiet:
>> 
>> I know of a small form factor SAMD21 board that's imminent - to be released in time for Black Friday.  I'll try to remember to point you to it when it comes out.
>> 
>> In the meantime, take a look at the Teensy 3.2 and it's Audio shield.  Paul Stoffgren has the I2S DMA stuff working such that it's not hard to add DSP modules.  I'm working through an emulation of a Simmons drum with one right now, with plenty of horsepower left over.
>> 
>> -Byron Jacquot



From dixon at mail.ubc.ca  Sun Nov  8 06:46:13 2015
From: dixon at mail.ubc.ca (David G Dixon)
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2015 21:46:13 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] PCB op-amp layout - 2x2 or 1x4
In-Reply-To: <CA+u0JtkG_1_Y8RBf8p9zy+RzqmFSKnG6_wqU7BW0CYfbpxTNMQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5632506e.c918c20a.23a39.ffffdec2@mx.google.com>
 <2AF9F864-BE2B-4F93-B106-DE167B52A2E7@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAP92RBVVnJ9Fq0_Tm8292ETWc1LdQSmXL6YDJ6KMvKfM9Xr+jw@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.LNX.2.20.1510300140370.3627@localhost.localdomain>
 <CAP92RBWqNVDRajKcpfhaWpuZc7xX=LNcE7a_tK8bFz+fPRyZEA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+u0JtkG_1_Y8RBf8p9zy+RzqmFSKnG6_wqU7BW0CYfbpxTNMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3FE5C6246DFB4095B07FA104A9CD254A@galvanox01>

>> I don't get the issue with the power being on the "wrong side" as these
chips are symmetrical, one could just turn it around and have the power pins
facing the "right direction."  What I do worry about is interaction between
opamps in the same package.  Depending on what you're doing it may indeed be
better to use a few duals rather than quads.  In the real world, isolation
between Opamps in the same package can be less ideal than the specs say.

The quad power pin thing is an annoyance, but a bloody needless one.  Why
did they do it that way?  It just means all the quads need to be installed
upside-down.

The isolation thing is true.  "Crosstalk attenuation" for TL07X is rated at
120dB.  It ain't!  At least not at 2000 Hz.  120dB should be dead silence.
However, high-pitched squeals will happily slip from one opamp to another in
a TL074.



From j_wilco at hotmail.com  Sun Nov  8 14:02:59 2015
From: j_wilco at hotmail.com (josh wilkinson)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 23:02:59 +1000
Subject: [sdiy] Elektor Formant synth build
Message-ID: <DUB404-EAS7434137CEB4EA827C789F384160@phx.gbl>


Hello All,

My name is Josh Wilkinson, i am part of a Hackerspace in Brisbane Australia.

Myself and a group of electronics enthusiasts (ranging form electricians to programmers to mechatronics) are keen to build the Elektor Formant synth.
We have been reading book 1that was published with all the schematics and notes in it.
Has anyone had any experience building this synth?

Our main priority obviously is generating a proper PCB file that we can replicate for the modules. Has anyone already converted the PCB schematics in the book to Gerber files?
If anyone has and feels like sharing that would be incredibly helpful.

Also any leads on tracking down the tricky Fairchild chips?

Really any experience with this build would be appreciated.

Cheers,
Josh and HSBNE Crew.
Sent from my iPhone

From brazil.v at gmail.com  Sun Nov  8 15:43:22 2015
From: brazil.v at gmail.com (Vinicius Brazil)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 12:43:22 -0200
Subject: [sdiy] Elektor Formant synth build
In-Reply-To: <DUB404-EAS7434137CEB4EA827C789F384160@phx.gbl>
References: <DUB404-EAS7434137CEB4EA827C789F384160@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <CAF7fC2BqHVnFY334e837ZN3rmoaAoA2ou3QFpRGKpbrdSXmfzg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Josh,

I built this synth around 1979.
Sonically it is a very interesting synth.

Some chips are very difficult to be found nowadays and are very expensive.
One is the uA726C (as well as AD820).
As does not affect the sound directly, it can be replaced.

Another difficult item is the CA3080, one of the first OTA generations.
With some creativity the CA3080 may be replaced by another OTA without
significantly affecting the sound, since the CA3080 features perceptible
variations from one CI to another...

Apart from these details, it is an easily constructible synth.

Vinicius Brazil

VBrazil Systems


On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 11:02 AM, josh wilkinson <j_wilco at hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> Hello All,
>
> My name is Josh Wilkinson, i am part of a Hackerspace in Brisbane
> Australia.
>
> Myself and a group of electronics enthusiasts (ranging form electricians
> to programmers to mechatronics) are keen to build the Elektor Formant synth.
> We have been reading book 1that was published with all the schematics and
> notes in it.
> Has anyone had any experience building this synth?
>
> Our main priority obviously is generating a proper PCB file that we can
> replicate for the modules. Has anyone already converted the PCB schematics
> in the book to Gerber files?
> If anyone has and feels like sharing that would be incredibly helpful.
>
> Also any leads on tracking down the tricky Fairchild chips?
>
> Really any experience with this build would be appreciated.
>
> Cheers,
> Josh and HSBNE Crew.
> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151108/0686b752/attachment.htm>

From fanwander at mnet-online.de  Sun Nov  8 15:50:51 2015
From: fanwander at mnet-online.de (Florian Anwander)
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2015 15:50:51 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Elektor Formant synth build
In-Reply-To: <DUB404-EAS7434137CEB4EA827C789F384160@phx.gbl>
References: <DUB404-EAS7434137CEB4EA827C789F384160@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <563F614B.9020806@mnet-online.de>

Hello

The book is nicely written and transports a lot of understanding for 
synthesizer technology. But the Formant itself is based on ICs which are 
no longer in production since many years (is this good english?)

Especially the uA726 in the VCO and the VCF are extremely rare  (that 
rare, that it makes economically sense to produce fake chips). And also 
the CA3080 used for the VCF and the VCA obsolete.

I recommend some other project. For example the stuff from 
www.musicfromouterspace.com or something from www.cgs.synth.net.

Florian



On 08.11.15 14:02 , josh wilkinson wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> My name is Josh Wilkinson, i am part of a Hackerspace in Brisbane Australia.
>
> Myself and a group of electronics enthusiasts (ranging form electricians to programmers to mechatronics) are keen to build the Elektor Formant synth.
> We have been reading book 1that was published with all the schematics and notes in it.
> Has anyone had any experience building this synth?
>
> Our main priority obviously is generating a proper PCB file that we can replicate for the modules. Has anyone already converted the PCB schematics in the book to Gerber files?
> If anyone has and feels like sharing that would be incredibly helpful.
>
> Also any leads on tracking down the tricky Fairchild chips?
>
> Really any experience with this build would be appreciated.
>
> Cheers,
> Josh and HSBNE Crew.
> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



From Rob at gmsn.co.uk  Sun Nov  8 16:39:15 2015
From: Rob at gmsn.co.uk (Rob Spencer)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 15:39:15 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Elektor Formant synth build
In-Reply-To: <563F614B.9020806@mnet-online.de>
References: <DUB404-EAS7434137CEB4EA827C789F384160@phx.gbl>
 <563F614B.9020806@mnet-online.de>
Message-ID: <91F65A24-FDEC-4106-A610-6147A2F0AD90@gmsn.co.uk>

Hey Josh,

I run a hacker space in Glasgow called GMSN! I've got a range of modules that our members build which can be found at gmsn.co.uk.

Would love to do some partnership thing with you guys down under :)

Cheers

Rob

> On 8 Nov 2015, at 14:50, Florian Anwander <fanwander at mnet-online.de> wrote:
> 
> Hello
> 
> The book is nicely written and transports a lot of understanding for synthesizer technology. But the Formant itself is based on ICs which are no longer in production since many years (is this good english?)
> 
> Especially the uA726 in the VCO and the VCF are extremely rare  (that rare, that it makes economically sense to produce fake chips). And also the CA3080 used for the VCF and the VCA obsolete.
> 
> I recommend some other project. For example the stuff from www.musicfromouterspace.com or something from www.cgs.synth.net.
> 
> Florian
> 
> 
> 
>> On 08.11.15 14:02 , josh wilkinson wrote:
>> Hello All,
>> 
>> My name is Josh Wilkinson, i am part of a Hackerspace in Brisbane Australia.
>> 
>> Myself and a group of electronics enthusiasts (ranging form electricians to programmers to mechatronics) are keen to build the Elektor Formant synth.
>> We have been reading book 1that was published with all the schematics and notes in it.
>> Has anyone had any experience building this synth?
>> 
>> Our main priority obviously is generating a proper PCB file that we can replicate for the modules. Has anyone already converted the PCB schematics in the book to Gerber files?
>> If anyone has and feels like sharing that would be incredibly helpful.
>> 
>> Also any leads on tracking down the tricky Fairchild chips?
>> 
>> Really any experience with this build would be appreciated.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Josh and HSBNE Crew.
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


From terje.winther at wintherstormer.no  Sun Nov  8 17:06:42 2015
From: terje.winther at wintherstormer.no (Terje Winther)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 17:06:42 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Elektor Formant synth build
In-Reply-To: <DUB404-EAS7434137CEB4EA827C789F384160@phx.gbl>
References: <DUB404-EAS7434137CEB4EA827C789F384160@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <CE97CCBB-A962-4ED5-8F94-721B104CB773@wintherstormer.no>

Hi,
I have built the complete Formant modular ("standard 12 module  
combination") not too long ago (from some NOS boards and front panels  
I came across).
As some have said already: there are some parts that are difficult and/ 
or expensive to get hold of today. Some of them could easily be  
changed into newer parts, as I did; other parts are essential for the  
proper operation of a module, so you need to get hold of the correct  
part. I was able to get some old NOS parts, so I was able to build it  
mostly like it is described in the book.

As for building: for me it was much more work than modern modular DIY  
synths, because you need to select parts in a much more specific way  
then on modern modulars. For several of the modules I needed to build  
small test-circuits on veroboard so I could select correct  
transistors, diodes and ICs, and for some of the modules it is a  
fairly specific way of adjusting the trimmers or even finding the  
correct value of a resistor, involving desoldering parts, shorting out  
components and connections and the like. Quite doable, of course, and  
everything is very well explained in the book, so even though it is a  
little more work than on contemporary DIY modulars (which are easier  
to build and works pretty much straight away), it is mostly fairly  
easy to build these modules. The original PCBs are very spacious  
(probably because it was intended for old components that tended to be  
physically bigger thans parts today), so sometimes it feels that there  
is too much room between components. Makes it very easy to put in  
components and solder them.

Another interesting aspect is that the book recommends certain  
preconfigured connections on the rear of the modules (where the power  
is supported to the modules, making this modular a semi-modular (much  
in the same vein as the ARP 2600), and combined with the fact that  
much of the volume/amount pots are on the outputs of the modules (and  
not on inputs as is standard today), makes for some different  
approaches when using the modular.

Quite an interesting sound to it all, too. Sort of more mellow, more  
creamy and due to the fact that the sound always travels through two  
different filers and the resonant filters (unless you bypass by  
patching), it always sounds more "acoustic" than raw electronic. I  
used the recommended minijacks for the front panels, so it interfaces  
easily with other types of gear.

You do need a good measuring tool when building these modules, and you  
do need an oscilloscoop as well.

The books are a good read, and recommended for everyone into building  
synth modules, because of the was things are explained. The Formant  
modular is old, though, so as other have said: you might want to  
consider more contemporary DIY modulars. Quite a lot to choose from  
today.


Terje

Den 8. nov.. 2015 kl. 14.02 skrev josh wilkinson:

>
> Hello All,
>
> My name is Josh Wilkinson, i am part of a Hackerspace in Brisbane  
> Australia.
>
> Myself and a group of electronics enthusiasts (ranging form  
> electricians to programmers to mechatronics) are keen to build the  
> Elektor Formant synth.
> We have been reading book 1that was published with all the  
> schematics and notes in it.
> Has anyone had any experience building this synth?
>
> Our main priority obviously is generating a proper PCB file that we  
> can replicate for the modules. Has anyone already converted the PCB  
> schematics in the book to Gerber files?
> If anyone has and feels like sharing that would be incredibly helpful.
>
> Also any leads on tracking down the tricky Fairchild chips?
>
> Really any experience with this build would be appreciated.
>
> Cheers,
> Josh and HSBNE Crew.
> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

Terje Winther
terje.winther at wintherstormer.no
http://wintherstormer.no/





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151108/2e8b1bb3/attachment.htm>

From rick.jansen at xs4all.nl  Sun Nov  8 17:39:11 2015
From: rick.jansen at xs4all.nl (Rick Jansen)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 17:39:11 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Elektor Formant synth build
In-Reply-To: <CE97CCBB-A962-4ED5-8F94-721B104CB773@wintherstormer.no>
References: <DUB404-EAS7434137CEB4EA827C789F384160@phx.gbl>
 <CE97CCBB-A962-4ED5-8F94-721B104CB773@wintherstormer.no>
Message-ID: <24632B04-537B-4CA0-950C-517B403C0568@xs4all.nl>

Are you referring to the FET followers selections here?

They can be prevented by using the LF356 instead, as a high impedance follower, as described in book 2. I did that. Unfortunately LF356 itself is now obsolete I think, but you'll find another I'm sure. I used the metal can LF356, which can easily be bent to replace the  FET follower on the existing PCB.

As said by others, first find the parts you need, only then build it. But a more modern design may be preferrable.

rick

> On 08 Nov 2015, at 17:06, Terje Winther <terje.winther at wintherstormer.no> wrote:
> 
> As for building: for me it was much more work than modern modular DIY synths, because you need to select parts in a much more specific way then on modern modulars. For several of the modules I needed to build small test-circuits on veroboard so I could select correct transistors, diodes and ICs, and for some of the modules it is a fairly specific way of adjusting the trimmers or even finding the correct value of a resistor, involving desoldering parts, shorting out components and connections and the like. Quite doable, of course, and everything is very well explained in the book, so even though it is a little more work than on contemporary DIY modulars (which are easier to build and works pretty much straight away), it is mostly fairly easy to build these modules.


From terje.winther at wintherstormer.no  Sun Nov  8 17:42:33 2015
From: terje.winther at wintherstormer.no (Terje Winther)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 17:42:33 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Elektor Formant synth build
In-Reply-To: <24632B04-537B-4CA0-950C-517B403C0568@xs4all.nl>
References: <DUB404-EAS7434137CEB4EA827C789F384160@phx.gbl>
 <CE97CCBB-A962-4ED5-8F94-721B104CB773@wintherstormer.no>
 <24632B04-537B-4CA0-950C-517B403C0568@xs4all.nl>
Message-ID: <9B4BCCD6-39FE-45F1-97CE-BBB821705DE1@wintherstormer.no>

> Are you referring to the FET followers selections here?

Yes, among other things.

> They can be prevented by using the LF356 instead, as a high  
> impedance follower, as described in book 2. I did that.  
> Unfortunately LF356 itself is now obsolete I think, but you'll find  
> another I'm sure. I used the metal can LF356, which can easily be  
> bent to replace the  FET follower on the existing PCB.

Indeed! The PCB and front panel set I got came with some original NOS  
parts, so I used them where I could, meaning I had to do the necessary  
work to make them function properly. In other places I had to  
substitute newer parts, and the upgrades described in book 2 was  
really useful in that regard.

> As said by others, first find the parts you need, only then build  
> it. But a more modern design may be preferrable.

I think so too.


Terje


>> On 08 Nov 2015, at 17:06, Terje Winther <terje.winther at wintherstormer.no 
>> > wrote:
>>
>> As for building: for me it was much more work than modern modular  
>> DIY synths, because you need to select parts in a much more  
>> specific way then on modern modulars. For several of the modules I  
>> needed to build small test-circuits on veroboard so I could select  
>> correct transistors, diodes and ICs, and for some of the modules it  
>> is a fairly specific way of adjusting the trimmers or even finding  
>> the correct value of a resistor, involving desoldering parts,  
>> shorting out components and connections and the like. Quite doable,  
>> of course, and everything is very well explained in the book, so  
>> even though it is a little more work than on contemporary DIY  
>> modulars (which are easier to build and works pretty much straight  
>> away), it is mostly fairly easy to build these modules.

Terje Winther
terje.winther at wintherstormer.no
http://wintherstormer.no/





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151108/b9ddaa8e/attachment.htm>

From wonggster at gmail.com  Sun Nov  8 18:21:11 2015
From: wonggster at gmail.com (gino wong)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 12:21:11 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] Elektor Formant synth build
In-Reply-To: <9B4BCCD6-39FE-45F1-97CE-BBB821705DE1@wintherstormer.no>
References: <DUB404-EAS7434137CEB4EA827C789F384160@phx.gbl>
 <CE97CCBB-A962-4ED5-8F94-721B104CB773@wintherstormer.no>
 <24632B04-537B-4CA0-950C-517B403C0568@xs4all.nl>
 <9B4BCCD6-39FE-45F1-97CE-BBB821705DE1@wintherstormer.no>
Message-ID: <CAMZJ4e=41DbLra7U0WFuNXYZ_ttsPymhg9b4+_sEtyEGbnQt+Q@mail.gmail.com>

I think what you thinking of doing is a wonderful idea, do let the remark
below discourage you from your overall idea.

I would suggest that you go for a more modern system.  The scarcity of
obsolete parts along with the lack of modern conventions like routing for
headers and power ports on the original boards would make this a labour of
love for a few and a rats nest for everyone else.

On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Terje Winther <
terje.winther at wintherstormer.no> wrote:

> Are you referring to the FET followers selections here?
>
>
> Yes, among other things.
>
> They can be prevented by using the LF356 instead, as a high impedance
> follower, as described in book 2. I did that. Unfortunately LF356 itself is
> now obsolete I think, but you'll find another I'm sure. I used the metal
> can LF356, which can easily be bent to replace the  FET follower on the
> existing PCB.
>
>
> Indeed! The PCB and front panel set I got came with some original NOS
> parts, so I used them where I could, meaning I had to do the necessary work
> to make them function properly. In other places I had to substitute newer
> parts, and the upgrades described in book 2 was really useful in that
> regard.
>
> As said by others, first find the parts you need, only then build it. But
> a more modern design may be preferrable.
>
>
> I think so too.
>
>
> Terje
>
>
> On 08 Nov 2015, at 17:06, Terje Winther <terje.winther at wintherstormer.no>
> wrote:
>
>
> As for building: for me it was much more work than modern modular DIY
> synths, because you need to select parts in a much more specific way then
> on modern modulars. For several of the modules I needed to build small
> test-circuits on veroboard so I could select correct transistors, diodes
> and ICs, and for some of the modules it is a fairly specific way of
> adjusting the trimmers or even finding the correct value of a resistor,
> involving desoldering parts, shorting out components and connections and
> the like. Quite doable, of course, and everything is very well explained in
> the book, so even though it is a little more work than on contemporary DIY
> modulars (which are easier to build and works pretty much straight away),
> it is mostly fairly easy to build these modules.
>
>
> Terje Winther
> terje.winther at wintherstormer.no
> http://wintherstormer.no/
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>


-- 
*Gino Wong Birgelo  *BSComm, BSEE, PhP

ReRed Recording
Girard Hall Studios (ReRed Treehouse)
*527 W. Girard Avenue *
*Philadelphia, PA 19123 USA   *
*215 717 7059*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151108/d3c8f816/attachment.htm>

From djthomaswhite at gmail.com  Sun Nov  8 21:39:21 2015
From: djthomaswhite at gmail.com (Thomas White)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 12:39:21 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] 5U MOTM Wood Cabinets - Sale/Trade SoCal Area
Message-ID: <4102640A-1F3B-44AA-AB51-A01EE28563B8@gmail.com>

Hey guys, I have 3 birch wood, stained MOTM cabinets I'm parting with in the South Orange County area. They are custom built and very sturdy. They have machined brass inserts for modules which can easily be covered with Bridechamber MOTM rails if you desire. Each cabinet is two rows of 20U wide. The lower cabinet has a slightly title front panel going down to a 2U cutout for Furman, Spring Reverb, etc. I've used them for years and space requirements mean I have to move to a vertical server rack. I'm selling them for $50 each but would gladly trade them each for a set of MOTM rack rails so I can move my modules to the server rack. 

I have a third one, same size as above with no cutout at bottom. It is filled with the Bridechamber rails. Due to that extra investment I'd ask $100 or two sets (pairs) of MOTM rails for that cabinet. It is the nicest of the 3. 

There are pictures of the first two listed on my Flickr account. https://www.flickr.com/photos/26485243 at N06/

These have the power supplies shown removed now. 

You can email me personally here about them. Local pickup only, but I can drive them as far north as Long Beach this week. Let me know if you're interested. Thanks!

Thomas White
Orange County, CA
Natural Rhythm Music
www.naturalrhythmmusic.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151108/85afae44/attachment.htm>

From billbigrig at yahoo.com  Sun Nov  8 23:30:16 2015
From: billbigrig at yahoo.com (bill bigrig)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 22:30:16 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [sdiy] 5U MOTM Wood Cabinets - Sale/Trade SoCal Area
References: <279183940.1695500.1447021816413.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <279183940.1695500.1447021816413.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>

What are MOTM rails? I have some 6 or 7 foot tall "rack-mount rails" lying about in the garage, (same story as my Electronotes, health says I'll probably never use them). Is the screw spacing the same as MOTM rails? If so, drop me a line.
Rig
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 11/8/15, Thomas White <djthomaswhite at gmail.com> wrote:

 Subject: [sdiy] 5U MOTM Wood Cabinets - Sale/Trade SoCal Area
 To: synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl, analogue at hyperreal.org
 Date: Sunday, November 8, 2015, 12:39 PM
 
 Hey
 guys, I have 3 birch wood, stained MOTM cabinets I'm
 parting with in the South Orange County area. They are
 custom built and very sturdy. They have machined brass
 inserts for modules which can easily be covered with
 Bridechamber MOTM rails if you desire. Each cabinet is two
 rows of 20U wide. The lower cabinet has a slightly title
 front panel going down to a 2U cutout for Furman, Spring
 Reverb, etc. I've used them for years and space
 requirements mean I have to move to a vertical server rack.
 I'm selling them for $50 each but would gladly trade
 them each for a set of MOTM rack rails so I can move my
 modules to the server rack.?
 I have a third one, same size as above with no
 cutout at bottom. It is filled with the Bridechamber rails.
 Due to that extra investment I'd ask $100 or two sets
 (pairs) of MOTM rails for that cabinet. It is the nicest of
 the 3.?
 There are pictures of the first two listed on my
 Flickr account.?https://www.flickr.com/photos/26485243 at N06/
 These have the power supplies shown removed
 now.?
 You can email me personally here about them.
 Local pickup only, but I can drive them as far north as Long
 Beach this week. Let me know if you're interested.
 Thanks!
 
 Thomas WhiteOrange County, CA
 Natural Rhythm Musicwww.naturalrhythmmusic.com
 -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
 
 _______________________________________________
 Synth-diy mailing list
 Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
 http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


From quincas at gmail.com  Sun Nov  8 23:34:50 2015
From: quincas at gmail.com (Quincas Moreira)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 16:34:50 -0600
Subject: [sdiy] PCB op-amp layout - 2x2 or 1x4
In-Reply-To: <3FE5C6246DFB4095B07FA104A9CD254A@galvanox01>
References: <5632506e.c918c20a.23a39.ffffdec2@mx.google.com>
 <2AF9F864-BE2B-4F93-B106-DE167B52A2E7@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAP92RBVVnJ9Fq0_Tm8292ETWc1LdQSmXL6YDJ6KMvKfM9Xr+jw@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.LNX.2.20.1510300140370.3627@localhost.localdomain>
 <CAP92RBWqNVDRajKcpfhaWpuZc7xX=LNcE7a_tK8bFz+fPRyZEA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+u0JtkG_1_Y8RBf8p9zy+RzqmFSKnG6_wqU7BW0CYfbpxTNMQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3FE5C6246DFB4095B07FA104A9CD254A@galvanox01>
Message-ID: <CA+u0JtkvwhSNiga3Hw36i2s6tFqwcfm94u+ixgCe9mJUK224qw@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks David.  I noticed the crosstalk issue in a Module I was testing for
production. Voltages in the buffer for the multiplexer was affecting the
one for the CV input.  Our designer has since changed it to avoid the
problem.

On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 11:46 PM, David G Dixon <dixon at mail.ubc.ca> wrote:

> >> I don't get the issue with the power being on the "wrong side" as these
> chips are symmetrical, one could just turn it around and have the power
> pins
> facing the "right direction."  What I do worry about is interaction between
> opamps in the same package.  Depending on what you're doing it may indeed
> be
> better to use a few duals rather than quads.  In the real world, isolation
> between Opamps in the same package can be less ideal than the specs say.
>
> The quad power pin thing is an annoyance, but a bloody needless one.  Why
> did they do it that way?  It just means all the quads need to be installed
> upside-down.
>
> The isolation thing is true.  "Crosstalk attenuation" for TL07X is rated at
> 120dB.  It ain't!  At least not at 2000 Hz.  120dB should be dead silence.
> However, high-pitched squeals will happily slip from one opamp to another
> in
> a TL074.
>
>


-- 
Quincas Moreira
Test Pilot at VBrazil Modular
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151108/f27feb50/attachment.htm>

From quincas at gmail.com  Mon Nov  9 01:03:29 2015
From: quincas at gmail.com (Quincas Moreira)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 18:03:29 -0600
Subject: [sdiy] Productionisation Service for the SDIY community
In-Reply-To: <EDCBAE8A-D8F7-4F01-A791-638E702355B6@gmsn.co.uk>
References: <5A8BEB21-4571-456B-9777-0819B0E7FD8A@gmsn.co.uk>
 <DUB123-W40DC9AF57198E87EB9BB7897460@phx.gbl>
 <DUB123-W109F4A329DB6E45E868EC797460@phx.gbl>
 <0B656B86-E167-4507-A5D5-11450088E7ED@gmsn.co.uk>
 <C4CB2B64-9401-4953-B38A-156CC138D47D@gmail.com>
 <DEC75640-F6FE-4C96-8187-09874F73B7F9@synthcube.com>
 <EDCBAE8A-D8F7-4F01-A791-638E702355B6@gmsn.co.uk>
Message-ID: <CA+u0JtmnhdNkpLu4Fkvh2L4S+tfRAHi0tjsRwJyiTSO0VA=iTA@mail.gmail.com>

Excelent Rob, I may indeed take you up on this at some point :)

Quincas

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 1:42 PM, Rob Spencer <Rob at gmsn.co.uk> wrote:

> Yes, Ian Fritz pointed out yourselves, Bridechamber and Elby but we have
> precious few in the UK and Europe.
>
> Someone else was asking what I would bring to the table, so I thought I'd
> give a bit of background. I'm currently a Senior Project Manger a large
> banking group here in Scotland. I was recently managing the Infrastructure
> element of the new ApplePay service rolled out in the UK. So I've got a
> good understanding of facilitating technical teams to get new products into
> production. Before I got into IT, I spent 12 years in the Army as an
> Electronics Technician working on Challenger tanks and MILAN rocket
> launchers. Lots of box changing but it gave me a good insight into the
> logistics machine and support structures that sit behind the front line,
> all the way back to manufacturers. It also taught me what good technical
> documentation looks like. I spent many cold nights on top of tanks reading
> through huge folders of docs trying to fault find. Basic trade training was
> 2 years and I left with a BTEC in Electronic Engineering, we then returned
> to training after 3 years in the field to complete Class 1, which I think
> gave us 2 modules short of a degree. They didn't like to give us to many
> qualifications in case we've used them to get jobs elsewhere!
>
> In my spare time I run Glasgow, Make Some Noise, which is a Synth Building
> community in the West of Scotland. It started off as a Saturday afternoon
> meet up to build kits and very quickly escalated into a design, build and
> repair shop. I recently repaired Slam's SH-101 which appeared in DJ
> Magazine.
>
> I've got accounts at RS and Avnet to spice components at wholesale prices
> and through the repair service am building up relationships with some of
> the vintage spares guys.
>
> In terms of software, I regularly use Autocad and Adobe Illustrator for
> panel design. I use RS DesignSpark for schematics and PCB layout. I have
> used Eagle but I prefer to be able to look up parts using RS part numbers
> so I can be sure of getting a good supply of components. I also have a CNC
> Router which is used for prototyping panels.
>
> In terms of assisting people with getting designs to a certain standard I
> have loads of guys who come to the build workshops who concentrate on
> getting their design to do the function but right, but haven't necessarily
> thought about the non-functional parts like protection diodes, etc.
>
> I'm not saying this service is for everyone, but if you've got designs
> you'd like to get out there, but don't want to be tied down with the boring
> stuff, then please give me a shout :)
>
> Cheers
>
> Rob
>
> On 21 Sep 2015, at 15:59, Synthcube <info at synthcube.com> wrote:
>
> That's similar to what we do for circuit designers as well-- with some
> success improving access for DIY. We try and pick up those aspects of the
> value chain that are least interesting or hardest for designers, engineers
> and musicians. Panel design, production, kitting, documentation,
> distribution, etc... Whichever parts of the process a designer doesn't want
> to take on.
>  Thonk in the UK does to a degree as well. There's very little money in it
> of course because you need some scale and velocity to avoid getting chewed
> up by fixed costs but it's a great deal of fun and a service to DIY.
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 21, 2015, at 4:21 AM, DeclareUpdate <declareupdate at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Howdy Rob,
>
> Assuming the procedure was all worked out, and it sounds like you?ve got a
> fine start, I think this is a great idea. I have a few designs that I?d
> love to offer as kits, but have little to no time to do so, as well as past
> kits that I don?t have much time to support or re-run.
>
> For instance, the CEM3328 Filter module that pops up on muffwiggler is my
> design, and people dig the filter, but I had a hell of a time getting the
> documentation and BOMs up to date, and don?t have the time to re-run, bag
> up, or sell the kits any more. Maybe that?d be a fine place to test the
> waters with your service, even :)
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> On Sep 21, 2015, at 6:10 PM, Rob Spencer <Rob at gmsn.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi Jack,
>
> I see there being a few stages of testing starting with a review of the
> design. At a minimum there would be polarity protection diodes, bypass caps
> at IC, etc. I could put together a design standards doc, which we could
> circulate here to get some kind of quorum on. I'm by no means an expert on
> design, far from it, but happy to facilitate. The info at dintree.com is
> fantastic.
>
> This would help get designs to a minimum standard and protect people's
> kit. Obviously there's people who know far more than me about Synth designs
> so I'll probably be asking most of the dumb questions.
>
> PCBs would then be ordered and test builds completed. The build docs would
> also be written at this point. The build would then be fully tested by both
> the designer and myself so we agree it's doing what it should. Together
> with calibration and test routines.
>
> A further test build would then be completed by a third person using the
> build docs.
>
> On successful completion of the final build, the design would be classed
> as productionised and go on the website.
>
> With regards to the figures, these would be agreed on a case by case basis
> depending how much effort each party has put in to ensure everyone gets a
> fair deal.
>
> Cheers
>
> Rob
>
> On 21 Sep 2015, at 09:30, Jack Jackson <jackdamery at hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> It sounds like a good idea. I'm just wondering how would you ensure
> quality of the designs when receiving them from people of different levels
> of experience and different points of view on design? Perhaps some
> QA/testing procedure?
>
> I definitely think that clear documentation and explanation of the designs
> would go a long way to help the newcomers to the community.
>
> Best Regards,
> Jack Jackson
>
>
> > From: Rob at gmsn.co.uk
> > Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 09:16:04 +0100
> > To: synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> > Subject: [sdiy] Productionisation Service for the SDIY community
> >
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I've been toying with the idea of launching a service for people who
> want to share their designs with the wider community but don't want the
> hassle that comes with sorting out kits and dealing with all the shipping.
> >
> > I know most people on this list have no problems etching PCBs and
> sourcing components, but there's a lot of others out there who would
> benefit greatly from this sort of thing.
> >
> > It wouldn't be a get rich quick scheme, purely a service for the SDIY
> community.
> >
> > GMSN would handle pretty much everything from sourcing the PCBs and
> components. Putting kits together and all the shipping. Panel design could
> either be done by the designer or could be done by GMSN.
> >
> > Modules would be offered as PCBs, PCB and Panel, Full kits or Prebuilt
> Modules. I would also put together the build docs and it would be up to the
> designer on whether they wish to include schematics.
> >
> > Example build docs can be found at gmsn.co.uk/support.
> >
> > Like I said earlier this isn't a get rich quick scheme, it's a service
> to the SDIY community. There would be a mark up of, say 20% for GMSN and
> the same for the designer.
> >
> > The whole ethos of GMSN is to make SDIY more accessible to beginners and
> help grow the community. Giving the community somewhere to share their
> designs, not just in schematic form but also in actual kits they can build
> would be a huge help.
> >
> > What do people think? Would people just getting into SDIY benefit from
> this sort of thing? Are the figures ridiculous? Does this sort of service
> exist elsewhere?
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Rob
> > _______________________________________________
> > Synth-diy mailing list
> > Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> > http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>


-- 
Quincas Moreira
Test Pilot at VBrazil Modular
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151108/754984bd/attachment.htm>

From quincas at gmail.com  Mon Nov  9 02:04:12 2015
From: quincas at gmail.com (Quincas Moreira)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 19:04:12 -0600
Subject: [sdiy] coolaudio chips
In-Reply-To: <EB1DE123-5DCA-4942-9F3A-C818085A240E@synthcube.com>
References: <D90C4CEE-D06E-46B5-A1A5-F6B62808FD38@xs4all.nl>
 <560B99EC.1020004@go2.pl>
 <7fe46e2533bc58a00bd5fc8e99967346.squirrel@webmail.blacet.com>
 <CACodTR-nSfBv0mFEUXbvOXeDx-ynkekQowBUwSj-yHUQrEr0YA@mail.gmail.com>
 <EB1DE123-5DCA-4942-9F3A-C818085A240E@synthcube.com>
Message-ID: <CA+u0JtkTJZhoFUqRUJ=Yz6pk=0-4eF6ZAOCO11yjJaRw7=0UiA@mail.gmail.com>

They also do Sample purchases with a minimum order of 10 units.  I found
this out when I naively asked them for some free samples to try out.  They
don't do free, but they'll do small orders for developers.



On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 8:22 AM, Synthcube <info at synthcube.com> wrote:

>
> We did look at the cool audio chips for the TM but it would require
> reworking the PcB. Smallbear also offer an add on to use 2 MN3008 to
> replicate the MN3005. We will be anxious to see if the new one is a drop in
> replacement for the 3005.
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 30, 2015, at 8:07 AM, Pete Hartman <pete.hartman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I wouldn't imagine the Time Machine would be able to use these, since the
> Coolaudio chips are the 3200 series BBDs not the 3000 series -- lower
> voltage range.
>
> However, it is very interesting to see that these folks also say:
> September 24, 2015 - Xvive Audio MN3005
>
> We are please to announce that starting today we are taking pre-sale
> orders for the new Xvive Audio MN3005
> <http://cabintechglobal.com/index.html?tab=semi&prod=MN3005> analog BBD
> delay. This is a modern remake of the classic Panasonic part that achieves
> the same level of performance as the original. Xvive has invested heavily
> in new development and production of this part that is the heart of their
> new W3 Memory Analog Delay Pedal
> <http://www.xviveaudio.com/productInfo.asp?id=251>. Shipments of presale
> orders are expected to begin the first week of November, presale orders
> will have guaranteed stock reserved.
>
> Thanks
>
> Pete
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 8:02 AM, <blacet at blacet.com> wrote:
>
>> Looks like Small Bear is also going to stock.
>>
>> I got an email inquiring about Time Machine pcbs.
>>
>>
>> > I just found out about this,
>> > Coolaudio chips including BBD, VCA, OTA, DSP and ADAT are available in
>> > single quantities from US based reseller:
>> > http://cabintechglobal.com/?tab=semi&prod=V2164M
>> >
>> > Roman
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Synth-diy mailing list
>> > Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> > http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>> >
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>


-- 
Quincas Moreira
Test Pilot at VBrazil Modular
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151108/e846a475/attachment.htm>

From patchell at cox.net  Mon Nov  9 04:59:08 2015
From: patchell at cox.net (Jim Patchell)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 19:59:08 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <enBw1r0124AXc3W01nBzkh>
References: <el5U1r00e1PJ7zD01l5UtR> <empP1r00V4AXc3W01mpUXL>
 <enBw1r0124AXc3W01nBzkh>
Message-ID: <56401A0C.5070905@cox.net>

Hey Eric!

The main reason I picked the Atmel part is because of Atmel Studio. I 
did receive in the mail just yesterday the D21 Explained board, so at 
least I have something to play with.  But that board is not suitable for 
projects.  Something like your breakout is really needed.  Also, it has 
the DAC on board, as well as USB.  I do have some STM Cortex M3 boards I 
also want to play with.  But the 57 each (I am assuming 1000 units here) 
is a very attractive price. Because of my visual handicap I am trying to 
stay away from as much building as possible.  I was hoping to find a 
ready made solution.

Sounds encouraging the amount of stuff you managed to squeeze into a 
cortex M0.

On 11/7/2015 3:11 PM, Eric Brombaugh wrote:
> Have you already decided to go with the Atmel SAMDxx parts or are you 
> just looking for any old Cortex M0? I've done a little breakout done 
> for the STM32F030F4 here:
>
> http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/embedded/stm32f030breakout/index.html
>
> The parts are really cheap ($0.57 ea in 20qty from Future) and they've 
> got lots of useful features. I did a little DIY Euro-Rack module based 
> on this part and a SPI DAC here:
>
> http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/synth/cheep_mod/index.html
>
> I've got wavetable oscillators, drum voices and LPC speech running on it.
>
> I got a few of the Atmel SAMD21 parts a while back but the learning 
> curve between them and the STM32 parts I'm used to is pretty steep so 
> I shelved them. I suppose I should try again at some point.
>
> Eric
>
> On 11/07/2015 03:48 PM, Jim Patchell wrote:
>> I will take a looky see.  Sounds pretty good.  Looking forward to the
>> release of a SAMD21 board.  I would really prefere to get something that
>> was already done.
>>
>> -Jim
>>
>>
>> On 11/7/2015 1:05 PM, Byron G. Jacquot wrote:
>>>> I am sorry.  Not enough sleep lately. The processor is actually the
>>>> ATSAMD21, not D4.  Not even sure where the D4 came from in my brain.
>>> Offlist as I want to keep this a little bit quiet:
>>>
>>> I know of a small form factor SAMD21 board that's imminent - to be
>>> released in time for Black Friday.  I'll try to remember to point you
>>> to it when it comes out.
>>>
>>> In the meantime, take a look at the Teensy 3.2 and it's Audio shield.
>>> Paul Stoffgren has the I2S DMA stuff working such that it's not hard
>>> to add DSP modules.  I'm working through an emulation of a Simmons
>>> drum with one right now, with plenty of horsepower left over.
>>>
>>> -Byron Jacquot
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>



From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Mon Nov  9 05:24:41 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 20:24:41 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] PCB op-amp layout - 2x2 or 1x4
In-Reply-To: <CA+u0JtkvwhSNiga3Hw36i2s6tFqwcfm94u+ixgCe9mJUK224qw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5632506e.c918c20a.23a39.ffffdec2@mx.google.com>
 <2AF9F864-BE2B-4F93-B106-DE167B52A2E7@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAP92RBVVnJ9Fq0_Tm8292ETWc1LdQSmXL6YDJ6KMvKfM9Xr+jw@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.LNX.2.20.1510300140370.3627@localhost.localdomain>
 <CAP92RBWqNVDRajKcpfhaWpuZc7xX=LNcE7a_tK8bFz+fPRyZEA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+u0JtkG_1_Y8RBf8p9zy+RzqmFSKnG6_wqU7BW0CYfbpxTNMQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3FE5C6246DFB4095B07FA104A9CD254A@galvanox01>
 <CA+u0JtkvwhSNiga3Hw36i2s6tFqwcfm94u+ixgCe9mJUK224qw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <EB72BBE7-0E5F-4259-AB75-F395BDD83551@audiobanshee.com>

Did your designer only switch from quad to dual or single op-amps? ? or were other changes needed to reduce the crosstalk?

Brian

On Nov 8, 2015, at 2:34 PM, Quincas Moreira <quincas at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks David.  I noticed the crosstalk issue in a Module I was testing for production. Voltages in the buffer for the multiplexer was affecting the one for the CV input.  Our designer has since changed it to avoid the problem.
> 
> On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 11:46 PM, David G Dixon <dixon at mail.ubc.ca> wrote:
>> >> I don't get the issue with the power being on the "wrong side" as these
>> chips are symmetrical, one could just turn it around and have the power pins
>> facing the "right direction."  What I do worry about is interaction between
>> opamps in the same package.  Depending on what you're doing it may indeed be
>> better to use a few duals rather than quads.  In the real world, isolation
>> between Opamps in the same package can be less ideal than the specs say.
>> 
>> The quad power pin thing is an annoyance, but a bloody needless one.  Why
>> did they do it that way?  It just means all the quads need to be installed
>> upside-down.
>> 
>> The isolation thing is true.  "Crosstalk attenuation" for TL07X is rated at
>> 120dB.  It ain't!  At least not at 2000 Hz.  120dB should be dead silence.
>> However, high-pitched squeals will happily slip from one opamp to another in
>> a TL074.



From quincas at gmail.com  Mon Nov  9 05:28:56 2015
From: quincas at gmail.com (Quincas)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 22:28:56 -0600
Subject: [sdiy] PCB op-amp layout - 2x2 or 1x4
In-Reply-To: <EB72BBE7-0E5F-4259-AB75-F395BDD83551@audiobanshee.com>
References: <5632506e.c918c20a.23a39.ffffdec2@mx.google.com>
 <2AF9F864-BE2B-4F93-B106-DE167B52A2E7@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAP92RBVVnJ9Fq0_Tm8292ETWc1LdQSmXL6YDJ6KMvKfM9Xr+jw@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.LNX.2.20.1510300140370.3627@localhost.localdomain>
 <CAP92RBWqNVDRajKcpfhaWpuZc7xX=LNcE7a_tK8bFz+fPRyZEA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+u0JtkG_1_Y8RBf8p9zy+RzqmFSKnG6_wqU7BW0CYfbpxTNMQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3FE5C6246DFB4095B07FA104A9CD254A@galvanox01>
 <CA+u0JtkvwhSNiga3Hw36i2s6tFqwcfm94u+ixgCe9mJUK224qw@mail.gmail.com>
 <EB72BBE7-0E5F-4259-AB75-F395BDD83551@audiobanshee.com>
Message-ID: <3B79B813-35B6-4556-A5D9-1861BC7F3D4B@gmail.com>

Good question, I'll ask him :)

Sent from my iPad

> On 08/11/2015, at 10:24 p.m., rsdio at audiobanshee.com wrote:
> 
> Did your designer only switch from quad to dual or single op-amps? ? or were other changes needed to reduce the crosstalk?
> 
> Brian
> 
>> On Nov 8, 2015, at 2:34 PM, Quincas Moreira <quincas at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thanks David.  I noticed the crosstalk issue in a Module I was testing for production. Voltages in the buffer for the multiplexer was affecting the one for the CV input.  Our designer has since changed it to avoid the problem.
>> 
>> On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 11:46 PM, David G Dixon <dixon at mail.ubc.ca> wrote:
>>>>> I don't get the issue with the power being on the "wrong side" as these
>>> chips are symmetrical, one could just turn it around and have the power pins
>>> facing the "right direction."  What I do worry about is interaction between
>>> opamps in the same package.  Depending on what you're doing it may indeed be
>>> better to use a few duals rather than quads.  In the real world, isolation
>>> between Opamps in the same package can be less ideal than the specs say.
>>> 
>>> The quad power pin thing is an annoyance, but a bloody needless one.  Why
>>> did they do it that way?  It just means all the quads need to be installed
>>> upside-down.
>>> 
>>> The isolation thing is true.  "Crosstalk attenuation" for TL07X is rated at
>>> 120dB.  It ain't!  At least not at 2000 Hz.  120dB should be dead silence.
>>> However, high-pitched squeals will happily slip from one opamp to another in
>>> a TL074.
> 


From ebrombaugh1 at cox.net  Mon Nov  9 05:38:34 2015
From: ebrombaugh1 at cox.net (Eric Brombaugh)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 21:38:34 -0700
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <fFzd1r00e4AXc3W01Fzg3t>
References: <el5U1r00e1PJ7zD01l5UtR> <empP1r00V4AXc3W01mpUXL>
 <enBw1r0124AXc3W01nBzkh> <fFzd1r00e4AXc3W01Fzg3t>
Message-ID: <E441E443-9EB9-437C-9D2F-1197BE43A9A3@cox.net>

Jim,

Atmel Studio has a good reputation as a development environment. I must admit that I've never tried it - perhaps if I did it would allow me to get up to speed on the SAMD parts more easily. I do most of my ARM MCU work in a very stripped down development toolchain - editor / GCC / GDB downloader and I don't typically use IDEs. The STM32 parts work well in this simplified flow and the vendor peripheral library is easy to use.

There are some very inexpensive development boards for STM32, including the F03x family. Here's a small form factor one that's close to what you're asking for:

http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/NUCLEO-F031K6/497-15979-ND/5428803

The main downside of going with ST parts is that they don't have a well supported free IDE at the moment. They're working on one - there are beta releases available, but it's still a bit glitchy. Worth a look though.

Eric

On Nov 8, 2015, at 8:59 PM, Jim Patchell wrote:

> Hey Eric!
> 
> The main reason I picked the Atmel part is because of Atmel Studio. I did receive in the mail just yesterday the D21 Explained board, so at least I have something to play with.  But that board is not suitable for projects.  Something like your breakout is really needed.  Also, it has the DAC on board, as well as USB.  I do have some STM Cortex M3 boards I also want to play with.  But the 57 each (I am assuming 1000 units here) is a very attractive price. Because of my visual handicap I am trying to stay away from as much building as possible.  I was hoping to find a ready made solution.
> 
> Sounds encouraging the amount of stuff you managed to squeeze into a cortex M0.
> 
> On 11/7/2015 3:11 PM, Eric Brombaugh wrote:
>> Have you already decided to go with the Atmel SAMDxx parts or are you just looking for any old Cortex M0? I've done a little breakout done for the STM32F030F4 here:
>> 
>> http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/embedded/stm32f030breakout/index.html
>> 
>> The parts are really cheap ($0.57 ea in 20qty from Future) and they've got lots of useful features. I did a little DIY Euro-Rack module based on this part and a SPI DAC here:
>> 
>> http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/synth/cheep_mod/index.html
>> 
>> I've got wavetable oscillators, drum voices and LPC speech running on it.
>> 
>> I got a few of the Atmel SAMD21 parts a while back but the learning curve between them and the STM32 parts I'm used to is pretty steep so I shelved them. I suppose I should try again at some point.
>> 
>> Eric
>> 
>> On 11/07/2015 03:48 PM, Jim Patchell wrote:
>>> I will take a looky see.  Sounds pretty good.  Looking forward to the
>>> release of a SAMD21 board.  I would really prefere to get something that
>>> was already done.
>>> 
>>> -Jim
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 11/7/2015 1:05 PM, Byron G. Jacquot wrote:
>>>>> I am sorry.  Not enough sleep lately. The processor is actually the
>>>>> ATSAMD21, not D4.  Not even sure where the D4 came from in my brain.
>>>> Offlist as I want to keep this a little bit quiet:
>>>> 
>>>> I know of a small form factor SAMD21 board that's imminent - to be
>>>> released in time for Black Friday.  I'll try to remember to point you
>>>> to it when it comes out.
>>>> 
>>>> In the meantime, take a look at the Teensy 3.2 and it's Audio shield.
>>>> Paul Stoffgren has the I2S DMA stuff working such that it's not hard
>>>> to add DSP modules.  I'm working through an emulation of a Simmons
>>>> drum with one right now, with plenty of horsepower left over.
>>>> 
>>>> -Byron Jacquot
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Synth-diy mailing list
>>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



From maohelin at gmail.com  Mon Nov  9 09:18:08 2015
From: maohelin at gmail.com (Mikko Helin)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 10:18:08 +0200
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <E441E443-9EB9-437C-9D2F-1197BE43A9A3@cox.net>
References: <E441E443-9EB9-437C-9D2F-1197BE43A9A3@cox.net>
Message-ID: <CAJ5nAj5+aDg_a-kFQwfjrioa8xTn4sE0K7v0MoUH0iGrQ8LNoQ@mail.gmail.com>

You can get some STM32F030 board almost for nothing:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/STM32F030F4P6-ARM-CORTEX-M0-Core-Minimum-System-Dev-Board-for-Arduino-/291577503424?hash=item43e35f9ec0:g:asgAAOSw9r1WC3ec

Not all 030's come with I2S though.

As a development environment I use STM32CubeMX tool for pinning and
generating project files together with Eclipse CDT IDE with ARM GCC Eclipse
plugin toolchain.
https://github.com/gnuarmeclipse

Some manual copying was required last time but may be the integration of
CubeMX and Eclipse CDT has been improved in the meantime (got to check the
latest versions, Keil and Atollic and some other IDE's are properly
supported but not plain CDT).

-Mikko


On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 6:38 AM, Eric Brombaugh <ebrombaugh1 at cox.net> wrote:

> Jim,
>
> Atmel Studio has a good reputation as a development environment. I must
> admit that I've never tried it - perhaps if I did it would allow me to get
> up to speed on the SAMD parts more easily. I do most of my ARM MCU work in
> a very stripped down development toolchain - editor / GCC / GDB downloader
> and I don't typically use IDEs. The STM32 parts work well in this
> simplified flow and the vendor peripheral library is easy to use.
>
> There are some very inexpensive development boards for STM32, including
> the F03x family. Here's a small form factor one that's close to what you're
> asking for:
>
> http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/NUCLEO-F031K6/497-15979-ND/5428803
>
> The main downside of going with ST parts is that they don't have a well
> supported free IDE at the moment. They're working on one - there are beta
> releases available, but it's still a bit glitchy. Worth a look though.
>
> Eric
>
> On Nov 8, 2015, at 8:59 PM, Jim Patchell wrote:
>
> > Hey Eric!
> >
> > The main reason I picked the Atmel part is because of Atmel Studio. I
> did receive in the mail just yesterday the D21 Explained board, so at least
> I have something to play with.  But that board is not suitable for
> projects.  Something like your breakout is really needed.  Also, it has the
> DAC on board, as well as USB.  I do have some STM Cortex M3 boards I also
> want to play with.  But the 57 each (I am assuming 1000 units here) is a
> very attractive price. Because of my visual handicap I am trying to stay
> away from as much building as possible.  I was hoping to find a ready made
> solution.
> >
> > Sounds encouraging the amount of stuff you managed to squeeze into a
> cortex M0.
> >
> > On 11/7/2015 3:11 PM, Eric Brombaugh wrote:
> >> Have you already decided to go with the Atmel SAMDxx parts or are you
> just looking for any old Cortex M0? I've done a little breakout done for
> the STM32F030F4 here:
> >>
> >>
> http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/embedded/stm32f030breakout/index.html
> >>
> >> The parts are really cheap ($0.57 ea in 20qty from Future) and they've
> got lots of useful features. I did a little DIY Euro-Rack module based on
> this part and a SPI DAC here:
> >>
> >> http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/synth/cheep_mod/index.html
> >>
> >> I've got wavetable oscillators, drum voices and LPC speech running on
> it.
> >>
> >> I got a few of the Atmel SAMD21 parts a while back but the learning
> curve between them and the STM32 parts I'm used to is pretty steep so I
> shelved them. I suppose I should try again at some point.
> >>
> >> Eric
> >>
> >> On 11/07/2015 03:48 PM, Jim Patchell wrote:
> >>> I will take a looky see.  Sounds pretty good.  Looking forward to the
> >>> release of a SAMD21 board.  I would really prefere to get something
> that
> >>> was already done.
> >>>
> >>> -Jim
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 11/7/2015 1:05 PM, Byron G. Jacquot wrote:
> >>>>> I am sorry.  Not enough sleep lately. The processor is actually the
> >>>>> ATSAMD21, not D4.  Not even sure where the D4 came from in my brain.
> >>>> Offlist as I want to keep this a little bit quiet:
> >>>>
> >>>> I know of a small form factor SAMD21 board that's imminent - to be
> >>>> released in time for Black Friday.  I'll try to remember to point you
> >>>> to it when it comes out.
> >>>>
> >>>> In the meantime, take a look at the Teensy 3.2 and it's Audio shield.
> >>>> Paul Stoffgren has the I2S DMA stuff working such that it's not hard
> >>>> to add DSP modules.  I'm working through an emulation of a Simmons
> >>>> drum with one right now, with plenty of horsepower left over.
> >>>>
> >>>> -Byron Jacquot
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Synth-diy mailing list
> >>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> >>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Synth-diy mailing list
> >> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> >> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Synth-diy mailing list
> > Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> > http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151109/863d5ded/attachment.htm>

From rick.jansen at xs4all.nl  Mon Nov  9 10:09:48 2015
From: rick.jansen at xs4all.nl (Rick Jansen)
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2015 10:09:48 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Elektor Formant synth build
In-Reply-To: <563F614B.9020806@mnet-online.de>
References: <DUB404-EAS7434137CEB4EA827C789F384160@phx.gbl>
 <563F614B.9020806@mnet-online.de>
Message-ID: <564062DC.10201@xs4all.nl>

On 08/11/2015 15:50, Florian Anwander wrote:
> Especially the uA726 in the VCO and the VCF are extremely rare  (that

Luckily the Formant VCF does not use the uA726, but the CA3084 transistor array.
Altghough, "luckily"... I don't seem to find the 3084 available anywhere really.
But the building instructions also tell you to just stick two regular PNP transistors 
together; for a VCF I guess it does not matter *that* much.

rick


From bafonso at gmail.com  Mon Nov  9 21:21:00 2015
From: bafonso at gmail.com (Bruno Afonso)
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2015 20:21:00 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <CAJ5nAj5+aDg_a-kFQwfjrioa8xTn4sE0K7v0MoUH0iGrQ8LNoQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E441E443-9EB9-437C-9D2F-1197BE43A9A3@cox.net>
 <CAJ5nAj5+aDg_a-kFQwfjrioa8xTn4sE0K7v0MoUH0iGrQ8LNoQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+z2k4sJvG4ybOmjLAoGyReAwduVrku1ZPo4vrL1NqnVYY9s4Q@mail.gmail.com>

How to these compare with the teensy 3.x?

On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 3:19 AM Mikko Helin <maohelin at gmail.com> wrote:

> You can get some STM32F030 board almost for nothing:
>
> http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/STM32F030F4P6-ARM-CORTEX-M0-Core-Minimum-System-Dev-Board-for-Arduino-/291577503424?hash=item43e35f9ec0:g:asgAAOSw9r1WC3ec
>
> Not all 030's come with I2S though.
>
> As a development environment I use STM32CubeMX tool for pinning and
> generating project files together with Eclipse CDT IDE with ARM GCC Eclipse
> plugin toolchain.
> https://github.com/gnuarmeclipse
>
> Some manual copying was required last time but may be the integration of
> CubeMX and Eclipse CDT has been improved in the meantime (got to check the
> latest versions, Keil and Atollic and some other IDE's are properly
> supported but not plain CDT).
>
> -Mikko
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 6:38 AM, Eric Brombaugh <ebrombaugh1 at cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Jim,
>>
>> Atmel Studio has a good reputation as a development environment. I must
>> admit that I've never tried it - perhaps if I did it would allow me to get
>> up to speed on the SAMD parts more easily. I do most of my ARM MCU work in
>> a very stripped down development toolchain - editor / GCC / GDB downloader
>> and I don't typically use IDEs. The STM32 parts work well in this
>> simplified flow and the vendor peripheral library is easy to use.
>>
>> There are some very inexpensive development boards for STM32, including
>> the F03x family. Here's a small form factor one that's close to what you're
>> asking for:
>>
>>
>> http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/NUCLEO-F031K6/497-15979-ND/5428803
>>
>> The main downside of going with ST parts is that they don't have a well
>> supported free IDE at the moment. They're working on one - there are beta
>> releases available, but it's still a bit glitchy. Worth a look though.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>> On Nov 8, 2015, at 8:59 PM, Jim Patchell wrote:
>>
>> > Hey Eric!
>> >
>> > The main reason I picked the Atmel part is because of Atmel Studio. I
>> did receive in the mail just yesterday the D21 Explained board, so at least
>> I have something to play with.  But that board is not suitable for
>> projects.  Something like your breakout is really needed.  Also, it has the
>> DAC on board, as well as USB.  I do have some STM Cortex M3 boards I also
>> want to play with.  But the 57 each (I am assuming 1000 units here) is a
>> very attractive price. Because of my visual handicap I am trying to stay
>> away from as much building as possible.  I was hoping to find a ready made
>> solution.
>> >
>> > Sounds encouraging the amount of stuff you managed to squeeze into a
>> cortex M0.
>> >
>> > On 11/7/2015 3:11 PM, Eric Brombaugh wrote:
>> >> Have you already decided to go with the Atmel SAMDxx parts or are you
>> just looking for any old Cortex M0? I've done a little breakout done for
>> the STM32F030F4 here:
>> >>
>> >>
>> http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/embedded/stm32f030breakout/index.html
>> >>
>> >> The parts are really cheap ($0.57 ea in 20qty from Future) and they've
>> got lots of useful features. I did a little DIY Euro-Rack module based on
>> this part and a SPI DAC here:
>> >>
>> >> http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/synth/cheep_mod/index.html
>> >>
>> >> I've got wavetable oscillators, drum voices and LPC speech running on
>> it.
>> >>
>> >> I got a few of the Atmel SAMD21 parts a while back but the learning
>> curve between them and the STM32 parts I'm used to is pretty steep so I
>> shelved them. I suppose I should try again at some point.
>> >>
>> >> Eric
>> >>
>> >> On 11/07/2015 03:48 PM, Jim Patchell wrote:
>> >>> I will take a looky see.  Sounds pretty good.  Looking forward to the
>> >>> release of a SAMD21 board.  I would really prefere to get something
>> that
>> >>> was already done.
>> >>>
>> >>> -Jim
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 11/7/2015 1:05 PM, Byron G. Jacquot wrote:
>> >>>>> I am sorry.  Not enough sleep lately. The processor is actually the
>> >>>>> ATSAMD21, not D4.  Not even sure where the D4 came from in my brain.
>> >>>> Offlist as I want to keep this a little bit quiet:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I know of a small form factor SAMD21 board that's imminent - to be
>> >>>> released in time for Black Friday.  I'll try to remember to point you
>> >>>> to it when it comes out.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> In the meantime, take a look at the Teensy 3.2 and it's Audio shield.
>> >>>> Paul Stoffgren has the I2S DMA stuff working such that it's not hard
>> >>>> to add DSP modules.  I'm working through an emulation of a Simmons
>> >>>> drum with one right now, with plenty of horsepower left over.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -Byron Jacquot
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> >>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> >>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Synth-diy mailing list
>> >> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> >> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>> >>
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Synth-diy mailing list
>> > Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> > http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151109/88c54eea/attachment.htm>

From ebrombaugh1 at cox.net  Mon Nov  9 21:28:57 2015
From: ebrombaugh1 at cox.net (Eric Brombaugh)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 13:28:57 -0700
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <fZ121r00T3gswE901ZM9x4>
References: <E441E443-9EB9-437C-9D2F-1197BE43A9A3@cox.net>
 <CAJ5nAj5+aDg_a-kFQwfjrioa8xTn4sE0K7v0MoUH0iGrQ8LNoQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <fZ121r00T3gswE901ZM9x4>
Message-ID: <56410209.4080700@cox.net>

The ebay breakout boards that Mikko linked don't have the ST-Link 
programmer on the board while the Nucleo boards from ST do - that means 
all you need to program & debug them is a USB cable, and the ST-Link 
interface also provides a serial port that's handy for interfacing with 
the running system.

The Teensy boards use a Freescale Kinetis MCU that's based on a Cortex 
M4 core. That's considerably more feature-ful than the Coretx M0, with 
more memory, more peripherals and faster clock speed than the low-end 
STM32 and SAMD parts we were discussing, but it's also a fair bit more 
expensive.

Eric

On 11/09/2015 01:21 PM, Bruno Afonso wrote:
> How to these compare with the teensy 3.x?
>
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 3:19 AM Mikko Helin <maohelin at gmail.com
> <mailto:maohelin at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     You can get some STM32F030 board almost for nothing:
>     http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/STM32F030F4P6-ARM-CORTEX-M0-Core-Minimum-System-Dev-Board-for-Arduino-/291577503424?hash=item43e35f9ec0:g:asgAAOSw9r1WC3ec
>
>     Not all 030's come with I2S though.
>
>     As a development environment I use STM32CubeMX tool for pinning and
>     generating project files together with Eclipse CDT IDE with ARM GCC
>     Eclipse plugin toolchain.
>     https://github.com/gnuarmeclipse
>
>     Some manual copying was required last time but may be the
>     integration of CubeMX and Eclipse CDT has been improved in the
>     meantime (got to check the latest versions, Keil and Atollic and
>     some other IDE's are properly supported but not plain CDT).
>
>     -Mikko



From maohelin at gmail.com  Mon Nov  9 22:17:31 2015
From: maohelin at gmail.com (Mikko Helin)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 23:17:31 +0200
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <56410209.4080700@cox.net>
References: <E441E443-9EB9-437C-9D2F-1197BE43A9A3@cox.net>
 <CAJ5nAj5+aDg_a-kFQwfjrioa8xTn4sE0K7v0MoUH0iGrQ8LNoQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <56410209.4080700@cox.net>
Message-ID: <CAJ5nAj6UYGW-yz2u6Y-yYQK1Qi9Gx9aZcas2Yan6WkLhsJ1DSQ@mail.gmail.com>

Also the Ebay boards have the STM32F030 chip which doesn't have I2S
support. However, you could get some STM32F031F6 chips from Mouser or
Farnell and replace the one on the board with it.  There's already one FM
synth project for the 031 (guess they are using the board Eric designed, at
least the page has a link to it):

http://mutable-instruments.net/forum/discussion/7472/custom-fm-synth-with-stm32f031/p1

STM32F373 is another one about the same level as Teensy 3.x are. Example
here:
http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/embedded/stm32f373breakout/index.html

-Mikko

On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 10:28 PM, Eric Brombaugh <ebrombaugh1 at cox.net> wrote:

> The ebay breakout boards that Mikko linked don't have the ST-Link
> programmer on the board while the Nucleo boards from ST do - that means all
> you need to program & debug them is a USB cable, and the ST-Link interface
> also provides a serial port that's handy for interfacing with the running
> system.
>
> The Teensy boards use a Freescale Kinetis MCU that's based on a Cortex M4
> core. That's considerably more feature-ful than the Coretx M0, with more
> memory, more peripherals and faster clock speed than the low-end STM32 and
> SAMD parts we were discussing, but it's also a fair bit more expensive.
>
> Eric
>
> On 11/09/2015 01:21 PM, Bruno Afonso wrote:
>
>> How to these compare with the teensy 3.x?
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 3:19 AM Mikko Helin <maohelin at gmail.com
>> <mailto:maohelin at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     You can get some STM32F030 board almost for nothing:
>>
>> http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/STM32F030F4P6-ARM-CORTEX-M0-Core-Minimum-System-Dev-Board-for-Arduino-/291577503424?hash=item43e35f9ec0:g:asgAAOSw9r1WC3ec
>>
>>     Not all 030's come with I2S though.
>>
>>     As a development environment I use STM32CubeMX tool for pinning and
>>     generating project files together with Eclipse CDT IDE with ARM GCC
>>     Eclipse plugin toolchain.
>>     https://github.com/gnuarmeclipse
>>
>>     Some manual copying was required last time but may be the
>>     integration of CubeMX and Eclipse CDT has been improved in the
>>     meantime (got to check the latest versions, Keil and Atollic and
>>     some other IDE's are properly supported but not plain CDT).
>>
>>     -Mikko
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151109/b25b9d24/attachment.htm>

From maohelin at gmail.com  Mon Nov  9 22:20:57 2015
From: maohelin at gmail.com (Mikko Helin)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 23:20:57 +0200
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <CAJ5nAj6UYGW-yz2u6Y-yYQK1Qi9Gx9aZcas2Yan6WkLhsJ1DSQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E441E443-9EB9-437C-9D2F-1197BE43A9A3@cox.net>
 <CAJ5nAj5+aDg_a-kFQwfjrioa8xTn4sE0K7v0MoUH0iGrQ8LNoQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <56410209.4080700@cox.net>
 <CAJ5nAj6UYGW-yz2u6Y-yYQK1Qi9Gx9aZcas2Yan6WkLhsJ1DSQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJ5nAj5T-f7z4ATDEeg9A2AK4+2hWe7dhOJMeekZ43SJZYfDzA@mail.gmail.com>

Btw. Here you can find a nice tutorial if you want to start using STM
CubeMX with Eclipse CDT and ARM toolchain plugin:

https://github.com/hefanbo/STM32-IDE


On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Mikko Helin <maohelin at gmail.com> wrote:

> Also the Ebay boards have the STM32F030 chip which doesn't have I2S
> support. However, you could get some STM32F031F6 chips from Mouser or
> Farnell and replace the one on the board with it.  There's already one FM
> synth project for the 031 (guess they are using the board Eric designed, at
> least the page has a link to it):
>
>
> http://mutable-instruments.net/forum/discussion/7472/custom-fm-synth-with-stm32f031/p1
>
> STM32F373 is another one about the same level as Teensy 3.x are. Example
> here:
> http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/embedded/stm32f373breakout/index.html
>
> -Mikko
>
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 10:28 PM, Eric Brombaugh <ebrombaugh1 at cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>> The ebay breakout boards that Mikko linked don't have the ST-Link
>> programmer on the board while the Nucleo boards from ST do - that means all
>> you need to program & debug them is a USB cable, and the ST-Link interface
>> also provides a serial port that's handy for interfacing with the running
>> system.
>>
>> The Teensy boards use a Freescale Kinetis MCU that's based on a Cortex M4
>> core. That's considerably more feature-ful than the Coretx M0, with more
>> memory, more peripherals and faster clock speed than the low-end STM32 and
>> SAMD parts we were discussing, but it's also a fair bit more expensive.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>> On 11/09/2015 01:21 PM, Bruno Afonso wrote:
>>
>>> How to these compare with the teensy 3.x?
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 3:19 AM Mikko Helin <maohelin at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:maohelin at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     You can get some STM32F030 board almost for nothing:
>>>
>>> http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/STM32F030F4P6-ARM-CORTEX-M0-Core-Minimum-System-Dev-Board-for-Arduino-/291577503424?hash=item43e35f9ec0:g:asgAAOSw9r1WC3ec
>>>
>>>     Not all 030's come with I2S though.
>>>
>>>     As a development environment I use STM32CubeMX tool for pinning and
>>>     generating project files together with Eclipse CDT IDE with ARM GCC
>>>     Eclipse plugin toolchain.
>>>     https://github.com/gnuarmeclipse
>>>
>>>     Some manual copying was required last time but may be the
>>>     integration of CubeMX and Eclipse CDT has been improved in the
>>>     meantime (got to check the latest versions, Keil and Atollic and
>>>     some other IDE's are properly supported but not plain CDT).
>>>
>>>     -Mikko
>>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151109/e389e1e0/attachment.htm>

From ebrombaugh1 at cox.net  Mon Nov  9 22:32:00 2015
From: ebrombaugh1 at cox.net (Eric Brombaugh)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 14:32:00 -0700
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <fZEp1r00B3qCjS901ZHWAY>
References: <E441E443-9EB9-437C-9D2F-1197BE43A9A3@cox.net>
 <CAJ5nAj5+aDg_a-kFQwfjrioa8xTn4sE0K7v0MoUH0iGrQ8LNoQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <56410209.4080700@cox.net> <fZEp1r00B3qCjS901ZHWAY>
Message-ID: <564110D0.8000704@cox.net>

Yeah, the project discussed on the MI forum is using my F030 breakout 
with an F031 mounted - the author contacted me about that one a while 
back. They're pin-compatible and the F031 has a few extra goodies for 
not much more money.

The F3xx parts with the Cortex M4F core are my current favorite MCUs in 
the whole world :) They're *specifically* designed for analog processing 
and the ADCs & DACs on them are much nicer than those on other STM32s 
because they're quieter (less noisy). They've got a full hardware 
floating point unit that does all the basic functions plus sqrt() really 
fast so they're good for high speed, high resolution processing.

The F373 has on-chip 16-bit sigma-delta ADCs that run up to 50kHz, work 
fine for audio and costs less than $5 if you shop carefully. I've got a 
Euro-rack module designed around that one which uses the on-chip 12-bit 
DACs to test feasibility of a one-chip audio DSP solution. It works fine 
but the 12-bit output might be limiting in some situations. I've got 
many of the effects algorithms from prior synth projects running on that.

http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/synth/f373_mod/index.html

There's a new F302 part out that costs less than $4 in quantity and has 
enough on-chip resources for some fairly complex processing. Worth a 
look if you're into that sort of thing.

Eric

On 11/09/2015 02:17 PM, Mikko Helin wrote:
> Also the Ebay boards have the STM32F030 chip which doesn't have I2S
> support. However, you could get some STM32F031F6 chips from Mouser or
> Farnell and replace the one on the board with it.  There's already one
> FM synth project for the 031 (guess they are using the board Eric
> designed, at least the page has a link to it):
>
> http://mutable-instruments.net/forum/discussion/7472/custom-fm-synth-with-stm32f031/p1
>
> STM32F373 is another one about the same level as Teensy 3.x are. Example
> here:
> http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/embedded/stm32f373breakout/index.html



From nvawter at media.mit.edu  Mon Nov  9 23:06:43 2015
From: nvawter at media.mit.edu (nvawter)
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2015 17:06:43 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <564110D0.8000704@cox.net>
References: <E441E443-9EB9-437C-9D2F-1197BE43A9A3@cox.net>
 <CAJ5nAj5+aDg_a-kFQwfjrioa8xTn4sE0K7v0MoUH0iGrQ8LNoQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <56410209.4080700@cox.net> <fZEp1r00B3qCjS901ZHWAY>
 <564110D0.8000704@cox.net>
Message-ID: <f238447c76e705006fb185a80e887da3@media.mit.edu>

On 2015-11-09 16:32, Eric Brombaugh wrote:
> It works fine but the 12-bit output might be limiting in some 
> situations.


IIRC this app note correctly:     
http://www.atmel.com/Images/doc8003.pdf

It shows how N bit sampling can be turned into N+M bit samples through 
oversampling at (4^M) times.  I think this would work well for DACs, 
too.

That (4^M) sounds very expensive to do, but there is a sweet spot in 
turning 12-bit into 14-bit by upsampling 16x.  14-bit = 12-bit * (2^2).  
That would mean a 44 kHz output routine would have to run a 705 kHz 
routine to upsample and synthesize a new sample every 16 times (@44kHz), 
but I believe the oversampling math is nearly the same as linear 
interpolation.  (you don't have to re-synth the whole synth loop at 705 
kHz, only do the interp).

Something to think about!  I'd love to try it sometime...   could be an 
easy experiment even with something like my Teensy 3.1....


Also on the topic STM and oversampling: I took a seminar on the STM32L4 
(low-power STM32F4) last month...  The newer parts have *built-in* 
oversampling on the ADC side!  I think it went up to 256x?  I haven't 
researched what other parts have this as well, but I wouldn't be 
surprise to see it propagate into others.  It also has a built-in 
convolution for up to 1024x sigma-delta samples!  amazing age we live 
in...



> http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/synth/f373_mod/index.html

oh my god, Eric, knocked it out of the park again.  we're getting closer 
and closer to Lego synth modules/max/msp in a Eurorack module all the 
time....




From patchell at cox.net  Tue Nov 10 06:10:53 2015
From: patchell at cox.net (Jim Patchell)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 21:10:53 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <E441E443-9EB9-437C-9D2F-1197BE43A9A3@cox.net>
References: <el5U1r00e1PJ7zD01l5UtR> <empP1r00V4AXc3W01mpUXL>
 <enBw1r0124AXc3W01nBzkh> <fFzd1r00e4AXc3W01Fzg3t>
 <E441E443-9EB9-437C-9D2F-1197BE43A9A3@cox.net>
Message-ID: <56417C5D.4020306@cox.net>

Eric,

Thanks for pointing me at those.  ST has a whole slew of them depending 
on what you may want/need.  Really cool.  And the price is excellent.  I 
will have to see if I can get CODE::BLOCKS set up for 
programming/debugging these.

:)
-Jim

On 11/8/2015 8:38 PM, Eric Brombaugh wrote:
> Jim,
>
> Atmel Studio has a good reputation as a development environment. I must admit that I've never tried it - perhaps if I did it would allow me to get up to speed on the SAMD parts more easily. I do most of my ARM MCU work in a very stripped down development toolchain - editor / GCC / GDB downloader and I don't typically use IDEs. The STM32 parts work well in this simplified flow and the vendor peripheral library is easy to use.
>
> There are some very inexpensive development boards for STM32, including the F03x family. Here's a small form factor one that's close to what you're asking for:
>
> http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/NUCLEO-F031K6/497-15979-ND/5428803
>
> The main downside of going with ST parts is that they don't have a well supported free IDE at the moment. They're working on one - there are beta releases available, but it's still a bit glitchy. Worth a look though.
>
> Eric
>
> On Nov 8, 2015, at 8:59 PM, Jim Patchell wrote:
>
>> Hey Eric!
>>
>> The main reason I picked the Atmel part is because of Atmel Studio. I did receive in the mail just yesterday the D21 Explained board, so at least I have something to play with.  But that board is not suitable for projects.  Something like your breakout is really needed.  Also, it has the DAC on board, as well as USB.  I do have some STM Cortex M3 boards I also want to play with.  But the 57 each (I am assuming 1000 units here) is a very attractive price. Because of my visual handicap I am trying to stay away from as much building as possible.  I was hoping to find a ready made solution.
>>
>> Sounds encouraging the amount of stuff you managed to squeeze into a cortex M0.
>>
>> On 11/7/2015 3:11 PM, Eric Brombaugh wrote:
>>> Have you already decided to go with the Atmel SAMDxx parts or are you just looking for any old Cortex M0? I've done a little breakout done for the STM32F030F4 here:
>>>
>>> http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/embedded/stm32f030breakout/index.html
>>>
>>> The parts are really cheap ($0.57 ea in 20qty from Future) and they've got lots of useful features. I did a little DIY Euro-Rack module based on this part and a SPI DAC here:
>>>
>>> http://ebrombaugh.studionebula.com/synth/cheep_mod/index.html
>>>
>>> I've got wavetable oscillators, drum voices and LPC speech running on it.
>>>
>>> I got a few of the Atmel SAMD21 parts a while back but the learning curve between them and the STM32 parts I'm used to is pretty steep so I shelved them. I suppose I should try again at some point.
>>>
>>> Eric
>>>
>>> On 11/07/2015 03:48 PM, Jim Patchell wrote:
>>>> I will take a looky see.  Sounds pretty good.  Looking forward to the
>>>> release of a SAMD21 board.  I would really prefere to get something that
>>>> was already done.
>>>>
>>>> -Jim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/7/2015 1:05 PM, Byron G. Jacquot wrote:
>>>>>> I am sorry.  Not enough sleep lately. The processor is actually the
>>>>>> ATSAMD21, not D4.  Not even sure where the D4 came from in my brain.
>>>>> Offlist as I want to keep this a little bit quiet:
>>>>>
>>>>> I know of a small form factor SAMD21 board that's imminent - to be
>>>>> released in time for Black Friday.  I'll try to remember to point you
>>>>> to it when it comes out.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the meantime, take a look at the Teensy 3.2 and it's Audio shield.
>>>>> Paul Stoffgren has the I2S DMA stuff working such that it's not hard
>>>>> to add DSP modules.  I'm working through an emulation of a Simmons
>>>>> drum with one right now, with plenty of horsepower left over.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Byron Jacquot
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Synth-diy mailing list
>>>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>>>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Synth-diy mailing list
>>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>



From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Tue Nov 10 07:51:59 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 22:51:59 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <f238447c76e705006fb185a80e887da3@media.mit.edu>
References: <E441E443-9EB9-437C-9D2F-1197BE43A9A3@cox.net>
 <CAJ5nAj5+aDg_a-kFQwfjrioa8xTn4sE0K7v0MoUH0iGrQ8LNoQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <56410209.4080700@cox.net> <fZEp1r00B3qCjS901ZHWAY>
 <564110D0.8000704@cox.net> <f238447c76e705006fb185a80e887da3@media.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <3ADFD179-7B48-469A-B845-9DA1D7C3F377@audiobanshee.com>


On Nov 9, 2015, at 2:06 PM, nvawter <nvawter at media.mit.edu> wrote:
> On 2015-11-09 16:32, Eric Brombaugh wrote:
>> It works fine but the 12-bit output might be limiting in some situations.
> 
> IIRC this app note correctly:     http://www.atmel.com/Images/doc8003.pdf
> 
> It shows how N bit sampling can be turned into N+M bit samples through oversampling at (4^M) times.  I think this would work well for DACs, too.
> 
> That (4^M) sounds very expensive to do, but there is a sweet spot in turning 12-bit into 14-bit by upsampling 16x.  14-bit = 12-bit * (2^2).  That would mean a 44 kHz output routine would have to run a 705 kHz routine to upsample and synthesize a new sample every 16 times (@44kHz), but I believe the oversampling math is nearly the same as linear interpolation.  (you don't have to re-synth the whole synth loop at 705 kHz, only do the interp).
> 
> Something to think about!  I'd love to try it sometime...   could be an easy experiment even with something like my Teensy 3.1....
This is a great technique when you need to scan faders and knobs at 100 Hz, and have the headroom to bump that up to 1.6 kHz. However, I strongly recommend against trying to run samples through a tiny processor at 705.6 kHz. It's just not very efficient to handle things at that high of a rate with a general-purpose CPU. Far better to just bite the bullet and get an I2S CODEC that can handle 16-bit at 44.1 kHz. You'll probably find that the 12-bit ADC can't handle those rates anyway. By the time you find a 12-bit CODEC that can handle those rates - I've designed with Texas Instruments chips that handle 1 MHz sampling - you're already external to the CPU and should probably just switch to a 16-bit native chip. There are drawbacks to oversampling.


> Also on the topic STM and oversampling: I took a seminar on the STM32L4 (low-power STM32F4) last month...  The newer parts have *built-in* oversampling on the ADC side!  I think it went up to 256x?  I haven't researched what other parts have this as well, but I wouldn't be surprise to see it propagate into others.  It also has a built-in convolution for up to 1024x sigma-delta samples!  amazing age we live in?
In this case, hardware oversampling is much more efficient, and simply delivers the down-sampled to your CPU. Most audio CODEC chips these days operate in delta-sigma mode with serious oversampling to increase the bit depth. In fact, all 24-bit chips operate with oversampling.

Brian



From maohelin at gmail.com  Tue Nov 10 10:23:14 2015
From: maohelin at gmail.com (Mikko Helin)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 11:23:14 +0200
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <3ADFD179-7B48-469A-B845-9DA1D7C3F377@audiobanshee.com>
References: <E441E443-9EB9-437C-9D2F-1197BE43A9A3@cox.net>
 <CAJ5nAj5+aDg_a-kFQwfjrioa8xTn4sE0K7v0MoUH0iGrQ8LNoQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <56410209.4080700@cox.net> <564110D0.8000704@cox.net>
 <f238447c76e705006fb185a80e887da3@media.mit.edu>
 <3ADFD179-7B48-469A-B845-9DA1D7C3F377@audiobanshee.com>
Message-ID: <CAJ5nAj60YRsp_bwU+S8UKkXCm6NAHUK38zux+n2vvmShGDoKVQ@mail.gmail.com>

Regarding STM32 and related IDE's Atollic has just removed the code size
limitation from Truestudio Lite, so it is now easier to use it with CubeMX
tool than mess with the Eclipse CDT & plugins route:

http://timor.atollic.com/truestudio/

-Mikko

On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 8:51 AM, <rsdio at audiobanshee.com> wrote:

>
> On Nov 9, 2015, at 2:06 PM, nvawter <nvawter at media.mit.edu> wrote:
> > On 2015-11-09 16:32, Eric Brombaugh wrote:
> >> It works fine but the 12-bit output might be limiting in some
> situations.
> >
> > IIRC this app note correctly:
> http://www.atmel.com/Images/doc8003.pdf
> >
> > It shows how N bit sampling can be turned into N+M bit samples through
> oversampling at (4^M) times.  I think this would work well for DACs, too.
> >
> > That (4^M) sounds very expensive to do, but there is a sweet spot in
> turning 12-bit into 14-bit by upsampling 16x.  14-bit = 12-bit * (2^2).
> That would mean a 44 kHz output routine would have to run a 705 kHz routine
> to upsample and synthesize a new sample every 16 times (@44kHz), but I
> believe the oversampling math is nearly the same as linear interpolation.
> (you don't have to re-synth the whole synth loop at 705 kHz, only do the
> interp).
> >
> > Something to think about!  I'd love to try it sometime...   could be an
> easy experiment even with something like my Teensy 3.1....
> This is a great technique when you need to scan faders and knobs at 100
> Hz, and have the headroom to bump that up to 1.6 kHz. However, I strongly
> recommend against trying to run samples through a tiny processor at 705.6
> kHz. It's just not very efficient to handle things at that high of a rate
> with a general-purpose CPU. Far better to just bite the bullet and get an
> I2S CODEC that can handle 16-bit at 44.1 kHz. You'll probably find that the
> 12-bit ADC can't handle those rates anyway. By the time you find a 12-bit
> CODEC that can handle those rates - I've designed with Texas Instruments
> chips that handle 1 MHz sampling - you're already external to the CPU and
> should probably just switch to a 16-bit native chip. There are drawbacks to
> oversampling.
>
>
> > Also on the topic STM and oversampling: I took a seminar on the STM32L4
> (low-power STM32F4) last month...  The newer parts have *built-in*
> oversampling on the ADC side!  I think it went up to 256x?  I haven't
> researched what other parts have this as well, but I wouldn't be surprise
> to see it propagate into others.  It also has a built-in convolution for up
> to 1024x sigma-delta samples!  amazing age we live in?
> In this case, hardware oversampling is much more efficient, and simply
> delivers the down-sampled to your CPU. Most audio CODEC chips these days
> operate in delta-sigma mode with serious oversampling to increase the bit
> depth. In fact, all 24-bit chips operate with oversampling.
>
> Brian
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151110/711ca9cc/attachment.htm>

From maohelin at gmail.com  Wed Nov 11 15:14:44 2015
From: maohelin at gmail.com (Mikko Helin)
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 16:14:44 +0200
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <CAJ5nAj60YRsp_bwU+S8UKkXCm6NAHUK38zux+n2vvmShGDoKVQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E441E443-9EB9-437C-9D2F-1197BE43A9A3@cox.net>
 <CAJ5nAj5+aDg_a-kFQwfjrioa8xTn4sE0K7v0MoUH0iGrQ8LNoQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <56410209.4080700@cox.net> <564110D0.8000704@cox.net>
 <f238447c76e705006fb185a80e887da3@media.mit.edu>
 <3ADFD179-7B48-469A-B845-9DA1D7C3F377@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAJ5nAj60YRsp_bwU+S8UKkXCm6NAHUK38zux+n2vvmShGDoKVQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJ5nAj7A3KFvMaiYLfwGJtL3aZ=UGhbfM1wndQsL8_LUpbJrtw@mail.gmail.com>

Forgot the AC6 System Workbench for STM32, also an Eclipse based IDE by
AC6/ OpenSTM32 community:

http://www.openstm32.org/System+Workbench+for+STM32

This supports also Linux, and is supported by the CubeMX tool which can
generate code (using HAL drivers which may or may not be what you want) for
the SW4STM.

-Mikko




On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Mikko Helin <maohelin at gmail.com> wrote:

> Regarding STM32 and related IDE's Atollic has just removed the code size
> limitation from Truestudio Lite, so it is now easier to use it with CubeMX
> tool than mess with the Eclipse CDT & plugins route:
>
> http://timor.atollic.com/truestudio/
>
> -Mikko
>
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 8:51 AM, <rsdio at audiobanshee.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Nov 9, 2015, at 2:06 PM, nvawter <nvawter at media.mit.edu> wrote:
>> > On 2015-11-09 16:32, Eric Brombaugh wrote:
>> >> It works fine but the 12-bit output might be limiting in some
>> situations.
>> >
>> > IIRC this app note correctly:
>> http://www.atmel.com/Images/doc8003.pdf
>> >
>> > It shows how N bit sampling can be turned into N+M bit samples through
>> oversampling at (4^M) times.  I think this would work well for DACs, too.
>> >
>> > That (4^M) sounds very expensive to do, but there is a sweet spot in
>> turning 12-bit into 14-bit by upsampling 16x.  14-bit = 12-bit * (2^2).
>> That would mean a 44 kHz output routine would have to run a 705 kHz routine
>> to upsample and synthesize a new sample every 16 times (@44kHz), but I
>> believe the oversampling math is nearly the same as linear interpolation.
>> (you don't have to re-synth the whole synth loop at 705 kHz, only do the
>> interp).
>> >
>> > Something to think about!  I'd love to try it sometime...   could be an
>> easy experiment even with something like my Teensy 3.1....
>> This is a great technique when you need to scan faders and knobs at 100
>> Hz, and have the headroom to bump that up to 1.6 kHz. However, I strongly
>> recommend against trying to run samples through a tiny processor at 705.6
>> kHz. It's just not very efficient to handle things at that high of a rate
>> with a general-purpose CPU. Far better to just bite the bullet and get an
>> I2S CODEC that can handle 16-bit at 44.1 kHz. You'll probably find that the
>> 12-bit ADC can't handle those rates anyway. By the time you find a 12-bit
>> CODEC that can handle those rates - I've designed with Texas Instruments
>> chips that handle 1 MHz sampling - you're already external to the CPU and
>> should probably just switch to a 16-bit native chip. There are drawbacks to
>> oversampling.
>>
>>
>> > Also on the topic STM and oversampling: I took a seminar on the STM32L4
>> (low-power STM32F4) last month...  The newer parts have *built-in*
>> oversampling on the ADC side!  I think it went up to 256x?  I haven't
>> researched what other parts have this as well, but I wouldn't be surprise
>> to see it propagate into others.  It also has a built-in convolution for up
>> to 1024x sigma-delta samples!  amazing age we live in?
>> In this case, hardware oversampling is much more efficient, and simply
>> delivers the down-sampled to your CPU. Most audio CODEC chips these days
>> operate in delta-sigma mode with serious oversampling to increase the bit
>> depth. In fact, all 24-bit chips operate with oversampling.
>>
>> Brian
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151111/d1442852/attachment.htm>

From nitro2k01 at gmail.com  Fri Nov 13 03:35:22 2015
From: nitro2k01 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?T3ZlIFJpZMOp?=)
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 03:35:22 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] =?utf-8?q?Polivoks=E2=80=99_33rd_anniversary_album_fundrai?=
	=?utf-8?q?ser?=
Message-ID: <CABacs=CEp3zg_y4tfZcUfsHCn7dz8jpNoWgaiPQTp58mrzoh7g@mail.gmail.com>

The inventor of the synth is looking to raise $2500 for releasing a 13
track album with music made with the synth.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-polivoks-33rd-anniversary

-- 
/Ove

Blog: <http://blog.gg8.se/>

"Here is Evergreen City. Evergreen? is the color of green forever."


From patchell at cox.net  Fri Nov 13 16:33:04 2015
From: patchell at cox.net (Jim Patchell)
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 07:33:04 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
In-Reply-To: <ePfk1r00J4AXc3W01PfnA6>
References: <ePa01r00R4AXc3W01Pa4YK> <ePfk1r00J4AXc3W01PfnA6>
Message-ID: <564602B0.9020403@cox.net>

As if an answer to a prayer, Sparkfun has come through.

https://www.sparkfun.com/products/13664

That solves that.

-Jim


On 11/6/2015 3:39 PM, Jim Patchell wrote:
> I am sorry.  Not enough sleep lately.  The processor is actually the 
> ATSAMD21, not D4.  Not even sure where the D4 came from in my brain.
>
> On 11/6/2015 3:33 PM, Jim Patchell wrote:
>> I have been looking for a breakout/header board for the ATSamD4E 
>> microcontroller.  For those who don't know, ths is an ARM Cortex M0+ 
>> processor.  I am interested in the one that has 64K of flash and 8KB 
>> ram.  But so far, I have found nothing, so, I am starting to think 
>> about designing my own.  The intended purpose is to use this in 
>> projects that need a MIDI interface, be it the traditional one using 
>> a serial port or a USB port (this part has USB).  Other features of 
>> the part are it has an I2S audio interface, I2C, SPI, UART, Non 
>> Maskable Interrupt.  The form factor I am thinking about is a Dip 
>> Header, and the price point I am going to target to is $20.  I should 
>> mention that you can get this part on an Atmel Explained Eval Board 
>> for $42, and the Arduino Zero for $38.  I was wondering if there was 
>> any interest in this project?
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>



From thescum at surfree.com  Fri Nov 13 19:05:53 2015
From: thescum at surfree.com (Byron G. Jacquot)
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 11:05:53 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
Subject: [sdiy] ATSamD4 Breakout Board
Message-ID: <18751347.1447437953547.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

>As if an answer to a prayer, Sparkfun has come through.
>
>https://www.sparkfun.com/products/13664
>
>That solves that.


And that's indeed the one I couldn't mention by name last week.

Enjoy!

-BGJ


From w.james.meagher at gmail.com  Fri Nov 13 21:46:22 2015
From: w.james.meagher at gmail.com (James Meagher)
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 14:46:22 -0600
Subject: [sdiy] Roland Juno60 VCF Freq Calibration question
Message-ID: <CAKu63Ygn8e_hT=uveVq+bEwuphrjNPtFcxJ455+pkHXSJmOmSQ@mail.gmail.com>

I'm almost completely finished a very long Juno 60 refurb. Prior to putting
it all back together I connected its loose pieces and went through the
calibration procedure. All went well except for one VCF setting on Voice 6.
When I attempt to match Voice 6's Freq setting of 248Hz (procedure 8.2 in
Juno 60 Service Manual) the lowest I can get it by adjusting Voice 6's VR2
(as low as it will go), is 260Hz. All other settings for Voice 6's VCF are
fine (Res, Width). The one possibility I've finally eliminated is that it's
not the IR3109 chip. My only other thought at the moment, as I'm not a
tech, is to swap R13.

Any advice welcome as I haven't a the funds to bring it to a tech at the
moment.

Cheers,
James
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151113/764a7769/attachment.htm>

From w.james.meagher at gmail.com  Fri Nov 13 22:33:42 2015
From: w.james.meagher at gmail.com (James Meagher)
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 15:33:42 -0600
Subject: [sdiy] Roland Juno60 VCF Freq Calibration question
In-Reply-To: <CAKu63Ygn8e_hT=uveVq+bEwuphrjNPtFcxJ455+pkHXSJmOmSQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKu63Ygn8e_hT=uveVq+bEwuphrjNPtFcxJ455+pkHXSJmOmSQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKu63Yj8PtgQmZeuXSypzEidE7KfiwuRpUyT6Pmua3z7Ygr33w@mail.gmail.com>

Swapped R13 between voices 4 and 6 and now they'll all calibrate properly .
. . maybe just a poor solder joint between VR2 and R13 of Voice 6 was
causing the problem . . ?

On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 2:46 PM, James Meagher <w.james.meagher at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I'm almost completely finished a very long Juno 60 refurb. Prior to
> putting it all back together I connected its loose pieces and went through
> the calibration procedure. All went well except for one VCF setting on
> Voice 6. When I attempt to match Voice 6's Freq setting of 248Hz (procedure
> 8.2 in Juno 60 Service Manual) the lowest I can get it by adjusting Voice
> 6's VR2 (as low as it will go), is 260Hz. All other settings for Voice 6's
> VCF are fine (Res, Width). The one possibility I've finally eliminated is
> that it's not the IR3109 chip. My only other thought at the moment, as I'm
> not a tech, is to swap R13.
>
> Any advice welcome as I haven't a the funds to bring it to a tech at the
> moment.
>
> Cheers,
> James
>
>


-- 
C'est La Guerre Moving Pictures Inc.
(204) 918 9317
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151113/a1c9dd7d/attachment.htm>

From synthnerd at gmail.com  Fri Nov 13 23:37:21 2015
From: synthnerd at gmail.com (John Henson)
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 22:37:21 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Roland Juno60 VCF Freq Calibration question
In-Reply-To: <CAKu63Yj8PtgQmZeuXSypzEidE7KfiwuRpUyT6Pmua3z7Ygr33w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKu63Ygn8e_hT=uveVq+bEwuphrjNPtFcxJ455+pkHXSJmOmSQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKu63Yj8PtgQmZeuXSypzEidE7KfiwuRpUyT6Pmua3z7Ygr33w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <56466621.50803@gmail.com>

I have also seen problems with the trim pots themselves, and have had to 
replace quite a few in 60's in the past, but if you have got it working, 
then well done, time to close it up and enjoy it.
Regards,
John.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



From blacet at blacet.com  Mon Nov 16 18:02:15 2015
From: blacet at blacet.com (blacet at blacet.com)
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 09:02:15 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Blacet Research Warehouse Cleanup
In-Reply-To: <CAKu63Yj8PtgQmZeuXSypzEidE7KfiwuRpUyT6Pmua3z7Ygr33w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKu63Ygn8e_hT=uveVq+bEwuphrjNPtFcxJ455+pkHXSJmOmSQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKu63Yj8PtgQmZeuXSypzEidE7KfiwuRpUyT6Pmua3z7Ygr33w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <a6f8398b7a08e2b10c619ba1a96be220.squirrel@webmail.blacet.com>

Finally got around to it!

Mystery Box #0001

12 pounds of electronic components: overruns from production, samples,
parts pulled from breadboards. All either new or mostly useable.

Resistors, capacitors, switches, pots, knobs, relays, voltage regulators,
ICs, etc, etc ---something for everyone and some truly weird stuff.

Hundreds if not a few thousands of $$$ worth.

First $129, shipped free in continental US.



From blair.morrison at gmail.com  Mon Nov 16 18:06:36 2015
From: blair.morrison at gmail.com (Blair Morrison)
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 12:06:36 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] Blacet Research Warehouse Cleanup
In-Reply-To: <a6f8398b7a08e2b10c619ba1a96be220.squirrel@webmail.blacet.com>
References: <CAKu63Ygn8e_hT=uveVq+bEwuphrjNPtFcxJ455+pkHXSJmOmSQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKu63Yj8PtgQmZeuXSypzEidE7KfiwuRpUyT6Pmua3z7Ygr33w@mail.gmail.com>
 <a6f8398b7a08e2b10c619ba1a96be220.squirrel@webmail.blacet.com>
Message-ID: <CAAtvsEz=pHmQVzdm3sKsX4KAP8fiuz0Op46ZDcsaCcm26iTyKA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

I'll take it! If not already grabbed by someone else.

Blair

On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:02 PM, <blacet at blacet.com> wrote:

> Finally got around to it!
>
> Mystery Box #0001
>
> 12 pounds of electronic components: overruns from production, samples,
> parts pulled from breadboards. All either new or mostly useable.
>
> Resistors, capacitors, switches, pots, knobs, relays, voltage regulators,
> ICs, etc, etc ---something for everyone and some truly weird stuff.
>
> Hundreds if not a few thousands of $$$ worth.
>
> First $129, shipped free in continental US.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151116/f60b4dd1/attachment.htm>

From blacet at blacet.com  Mon Nov 16 22:32:40 2015
From: blacet at blacet.com (blacet at blacet.com)
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 13:32:40 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Blacet Research Warehouse Cleanup
In-Reply-To: <a6f8398b7a08e2b10c619ba1a96be220.squirrel@webmail.blacet.com>
References: <CAKu63Ygn8e_hT=uveVq+bEwuphrjNPtFcxJ455+pkHXSJmOmSQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKu63Yj8PtgQmZeuXSypzEidE7KfiwuRpUyT6Pmua3z7Ygr33w@mail.gmail.com>
 <a6f8398b7a08e2b10c619ba1a96be220.squirrel@webmail.blacet.com>
Message-ID: <9be322b63748366e86c782b771262827.squirrel@webmail.blacet.com>

SOLD!


> Finally got around to it!
>
> Mystery Box #0001
>
> 12 pounds of electronic components: overruns from production, samples,
> parts pulled from breadboards. All either new or mostly useable.
>
> Resistors, capacitors, switches, pots, knobs, relays, voltage regulators,
> ICs, etc, etc ---something for everyone and some truly weird stuff.
>
> Hundreds if not a few thousands of $$$ worth.
>
> First $129, shipped free in continental US.
>




From carlosrochaportela at gmail.com  Tue Nov 17 14:47:44 2015
From: carlosrochaportela at gmail.com (Carlos Portela)
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 14:47:44 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] psu negative too high
Message-ID: <CANdqpLaX3d812G_p0FfiuU93zEjgkx-DFfDJf9bXKK8tB1WXTA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

Im having a problem with my psu.
Its a 15v dual psu + 5v. The 15V and the 5V are working; the negative
outputs around 30V.
Atacched the link for pcb layout:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/6cvz87s6dm7nqdq/psu-comp.png?dl=0

Thanks


From werner.fluegel at b-tu.de  Tue Nov 17 15:00:47 2015
From: werner.fluegel at b-tu.de (=?UTF-8?Q?Werner_Fl=c3=bcgel?=)
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 15:00:47 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] psu negative too high
In-Reply-To: <CANdqpLaX3d812G_p0FfiuU93zEjgkx-DFfDJf9bXKK8tB1WXTA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANdqpLaX3d812G_p0FfiuU93zEjgkx-DFfDJf9bXKK8tB1WXTA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <564B330F.9070702@b-tu.de>

Am 17.11.2015 um 14:47 schrieb Carlos Portela:
> Hi all,
> 
> Im having a problem with my psu.
> Its a 15v dual psu + 5v. The 15V and the 5V are working; the negative
> outputs around 30V.

Put a little load on the negative rail - a multimeter has too high input
impedance. Had the same effect recently ;-)

-- 
mfG.

W.Fl?gel
BTU Cottbus-Senftenberg
RZ Senftenberg
Tel. 03573 / 85382

Wir sind IT. Das ist kein Beruf, das ist eine Diagnose.
<7123838.uCcSxbalbl at rotfl.franken.de>


From carlosrochaportela at gmail.com  Tue Nov 17 15:01:38 2015
From: carlosrochaportela at gmail.com (Carlos Portela)
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 15:01:38 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] psu negative too high
In-Reply-To: <564B330F.9070702@b-tu.de>
References: <CANdqpLaX3d812G_p0FfiuU93zEjgkx-DFfDJf9bXKK8tB1WXTA@mail.gmail.com>
 <564B330F.9070702@b-tu.de>
Message-ID: <CANdqpLbU_G5Dxpmhr9-gfXv_Z6VbQr0YFQBLE6gU_YLsHdJbTQ@mail.gmail.com>

you mean like a led?

2015-11-17 15:00 GMT+01:00 Werner Fl?gel <werner.fluegel at b-tu.de>:
> Am 17.11.2015 um 14:47 schrieb Carlos Portela:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Im having a problem with my psu.
>> Its a 15v dual psu + 5v. The 15V and the 5V are working; the negative
>> outputs around 30V.
>
> Put a little load on the negative rail - a multimeter has too high input
> impedance. Had the same effect recently ;-)
>
> --
> mfG.
>
> W.Fl?gel
> BTU Cottbus-Senftenberg
> RZ Senftenberg
> Tel. 03573 / 85382
>
> Wir sind IT. Das ist kein Beruf, das ist eine Diagnose.
> <7123838.uCcSxbalbl at rotfl.franken.de>


From carlosrochaportela at gmail.com  Tue Nov 17 15:33:19 2015
From: carlosrochaportela at gmail.com (Carlos Portela)
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 15:33:19 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] psu negative too high
In-Reply-To: <CANdqpLacCVkzGS-EtW9wvT8SPgQd8Uz_CF24+doZKq_B2sDgWQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANdqpLaX3d812G_p0FfiuU93zEjgkx-DFfDJf9bXKK8tB1WXTA@mail.gmail.com>
 <717316522.2932468.1447768626037.JavaMail.zimbra@comcast.net>
 <CANdqpLZU-zFy6_QaPOHfbYpDuMWehOpEaWWgSTj7G4QZxU0+Nw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1104384181.2966951.1447770569017.JavaMail.zimbra@comcast.net>
 <CANdqpLacCVkzGS-EtW9wvT8SPgQd8Uz_CF24+doZKq_B2sDgWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANdqpLZa-7ov2oziWaB9wzGAi0FccqqMU8+19Vf3GcX+nvx9Aw@mail.gmail.com>

It works with a led on negative rail.
Thanks all

2015-11-17 15:32 GMT+01:00 Carlos Portela <carlosrochaportela at gmail.com>:
> working...
> thanks all
>
> 2015-11-17 15:29 GMT+01:00  <ijfritz at comcast.net>:
>> Yeah, something like that.  You can find the minimum required current in the
>> regulator's data sheet.
>>
>> Ian
>>
>>
>> ------ Original Message ------
>>
>> From: Carlos Portela
>> To: ijfritz at comcast.net
>> Sent: November 17, 2015 at 6:59 AM
>> Subject: Re: [sdiy] psu negative too high
>>
>>
>> what does it mean?
>> Like a led and resistor from ground?
>>
>> 2015-11-17 14:57 GMT+01:00  <ijfritz at comcast.net>:
>>> Common problem.  Negative regulators usually need a load to operate
>>> properly.
>>>
>>> Ian
>>>
>>>
>>> ------ Original Message ------
>>>
>>> From: Carlos Portela
>>> To: Synth-Diy
>>> Sent: November 17, 2015 at 6:48 AM
>>> Subject: [sdiy] psu negative too high
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Im having a problem with my psu.
>>> Its a 15v dual psu + 5v. The 15V and the 5V are working; the negative
>>> outputs around 30V.
>>> Atacched the link for pcb layout:
>>>
>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/6cvz87s6dm7nqdq/psu-comp.png?dl=0
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Synth-diy mailing list
>>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Tue Nov 17 19:03:24 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 10:03:24 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] psu negative too high
In-Reply-To: <CANdqpLbU_G5Dxpmhr9-gfXv_Z6VbQr0YFQBLE6gU_YLsHdJbTQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANdqpLaX3d812G_p0FfiuU93zEjgkx-DFfDJf9bXKK8tB1WXTA@mail.gmail.com>
 <564B330F.9070702@b-tu.de>
 <CANdqpLbU_G5Dxpmhr9-gfXv_Z6VbQr0YFQBLE6gU_YLsHdJbTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <35EBF6C8-0191-495F-88D7-65855A421679@audiobanshee.com>

Yikes, no! Never connect an LED to a voltage source without the appropriate current-limiting resistor. You risk burning out the LED. For a -15 V supply, you'd need at least 600 to 700 Ohms.

Of course, by the time you find a resistor to protect the LED, you could just load down your supply with the resistor alone. A 600 Ohm resistor will draw 25 mA from the -15 V supply, but you'd better have a 1/2 Watt resistor because it's going to get warm. Also, don't put anything that will melt near that resistor - like your multimeter test probes.

A 1 kOhm resistor will only draw 15 mA, so you'd only need the standard 1/4 Watt resistor. It still might get hot.

Brian Willoughby
Sound Consulting


On Nov 17, 2015, at 6:01 AM, Carlos Portela <carlosrochaportela at gmail.com> wrote:
> you mean like a led?
> 
> 2015-11-17 15:00 GMT+01:00 Werner Fl?gel <werner.fluegel at b-tu.de>:
>> Am 17.11.2015 um 14:47 schrieb Carlos Portela:
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> Im having a problem with my psu.
>>> Its a 15v dual psu + 5v. The 15V and the 5V are working; the negative
>>> outputs around 30V.
>> 
>> Put a little load on the negative rail - a multimeter has too high input
>> impedance. Had the same effect recently ;-)



From nitro2k01 at gmail.com  Tue Nov 17 19:43:02 2015
From: nitro2k01 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?T3ZlIFJpZMOp?=)
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 19:43:02 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] psu negative too high
In-Reply-To: <35EBF6C8-0191-495F-88D7-65855A421679@audiobanshee.com>
References: <CANdqpLaX3d812G_p0FfiuU93zEjgkx-DFfDJf9bXKK8tB1WXTA@mail.gmail.com>
 <564B330F.9070702@b-tu.de>
 <CANdqpLbU_G5Dxpmhr9-gfXv_Z6VbQr0YFQBLE6gU_YLsHdJbTQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <35EBF6C8-0191-495F-88D7-65855A421679@audiobanshee.com>
Message-ID: <CABacs=DZFKDU9JBiHBE+9j6Sp0kO4xpfv0hg9eL_-rr+jop6Hw@mail.gmail.com>

I don't think anyone suggested connecting the LED without a resistor.
And furthermore, a LED on each rail has the added benefit of
indicating that power is on and working. Having 2 or even 3 resistors
in series could be useful for distributing the wasted heat. And also
perhaps to revisit the classical method of lifting the resistor a bit
above the PCB to improve air flow.

On 17 November 2015 at 19:03,  <rsdio at audiobanshee.com> wrote:
> Yikes, no! Never connect an LED to a voltage source without the appropriate current-limiting resistor. You risk burning out the LED. For a -15 V supply, you'd need at least 600 to 700 Ohms.
>
> Of course, by the time you find a resistor to protect the LED, you could just load down your supply with the resistor alone. A 600 Ohm resistor will draw 25 mA from the -15 V supply, but you'd better have a 1/2 Watt resistor because it's going to get warm. Also, don't put anything that will melt near that resistor - like your multimeter test probes.
>
> A 1 kOhm resistor will only draw 15 mA, so you'd only need the standard 1/4 Watt resistor. It still might get hot.
>
> Brian Willoughby
> Sound Consulting
>
>
> On Nov 17, 2015, at 6:01 AM, Carlos Portela <carlosrochaportela at gmail.com> wrote:
>> you mean like a led?
>>
>> 2015-11-17 15:00 GMT+01:00 Werner Fl?gel <werner.fluegel at b-tu.de>:
>>> Am 17.11.2015 um 14:47 schrieb Carlos Portela:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Im having a problem with my psu.
>>>> Its a 15v dual psu + 5v. The 15V and the 5V are working; the negative
>>>> outputs around 30V.
>>>
>>> Put a little load on the negative rail - a multimeter has too high input
>>> impedance. Had the same effect recently ;-)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



-- 
/Ove

Blog: <http://blog.gg8.se/>

"Here is Evergreen City. Evergreen? is the color of green forever."


From rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk  Fri Nov 20 21:12:48 2015
From: rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk (Richie Burnett)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 20:12:48 -0000
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
Message-ID: <36AB125EE2204FC284DF266BC6AF580B@RichiePC>

A question for the Cadsoft Eagle gurus...

Just finishing off a PCB here with Eagle and noticed that all of the SOIC 
devices have no component outlines or orientation markings on the silkscreen 
layer, only tDocu which can be printed off as documentation to aid in 
assembly but doesn't end up in the silkscreen Gerber file.  All other semi 
packages used on this board like TSSOP, TQFP, SOT23 etc, have at least 
partial outlines and orientation markings on the silkscreen layer, often 
with more extensive detail on the tDocu layer.  I'm happy with these.

Is there some reason for this?  Did Cadsoft just forget to put orientation 
markings in the SOIC package footprints in their libraries, or is there some 
rule of PCB design somewhere that says there shouldn't be silkscreen ink 
under SOIC devices?  Does it interfere with the correct seating of SOIC 
packages during reflow, or can I just add silkscreen orientation marks under 
the device body to the footprints that I'm using to aid?  I can understand 
not putting silkscreen orientation marks under QFNs that are planar on the 
bottom and pretty much have to be put on by machine anyway, but some 
orientation marks on SOIC's would really help with manual placement.

I realise that any marking underneath the ICs will be covered after fitting 
and make checking device orientation difficult, but I'd rather not put 
orientation marks outside the perimeter of the part as component packing 
density is very high!

I'm interested to hear any thoughts on this,

-Richie, 



From plodger at gmail.com  Fri Nov 20 21:18:36 2015
From: plodger at gmail.com (Sarah Thompson)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 12:18:36 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <36AB125EE2204FC284DF266BC6AF580B@RichiePC>
References: <36AB125EE2204FC284DF266BC6AF580B@RichiePC>
Message-ID: <3DEAE078-97EB-4C25-9F1D-8C805C252777@gmail.com>

I?m not sure what CadSoft were thinking here either ? I?ve always ended up having to edit those outlines myself. Grr ? I?ve missed it a couple of times and had to be super careful assembling prototypes.

Sarah

> On Nov 20, 2015, at 12:12 PM, Richie Burnett <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> A question for the Cadsoft Eagle gurus...
> 
> Just finishing off a PCB here with Eagle and noticed that all of the SOIC devices have no component outlines or orientation markings on the silkscreen layer, only tDocu which can be printed off as documentation to aid in assembly but doesn't end up in the silkscreen Gerber file.  All other semi packages used on this board like TSSOP, TQFP, SOT23 etc, have at least partial outlines and orientation markings on the silkscreen layer, often with more extensive detail on the tDocu layer.  I'm happy with these.
> 
> Is there some reason for this?  Did Cadsoft just forget to put orientation markings in the SOIC package footprints in their libraries, or is there some rule of PCB design somewhere that says there shouldn't be silkscreen ink under SOIC devices?  Does it interfere with the correct seating of SOIC packages during reflow, or can I just add silkscreen orientation marks under the device body to the footprints that I'm using to aid?  I can understand not putting silkscreen orientation marks under QFNs that are planar on the bottom and pretty much have to be put on by machine anyway, but some orientation marks on SOIC's would really help with manual placement.
> 
> I realise that any marking underneath the ICs will be covered after fitting and make checking device orientation difficult, but I'd rather not put orientation marks outside the perimeter of the part as component packing density is very high!
> 
> I'm interested to hear any thoughts on this,
> 
> -Richie, 
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



From stewpye at optusnet.com.au  Fri Nov 20 21:25:15 2015
From: stewpye at optusnet.com.au (Stewart Pye)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 06:25:15 +1000
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <36AB125EE2204FC284DF266BC6AF580B@RichiePC>
References: <36AB125EE2204FC284DF266BC6AF580B@RichiePC>
Message-ID: <564F81AB.3010601@optusnet.com.au>

Hi Ritchie,

I don't use Eagle, but I can't see any reason why you couldn't have an 
outline within the boundary of the package on the silkscreen layer. I 
avoid having the silkscreen layer going over solder areas, but it sounds 
like you're not going to do that anyway. Just edit the component to add 
the outline you want.

Regards,
Stewart.


On 11/21/2015 6:12 AM, Richie Burnett wrote:
> A question for the Cadsoft Eagle gurus...
>
> Just finishing off a PCB here with Eagle and noticed that all of the 
> SOIC devices have no component outlines or orientation markings on the 
> silkscreen layer, only tDocu which can be printed off as documentation 
> to aid in assembly but doesn't end up in the silkscreen Gerber file.  
> All other semi packages used on this board like TSSOP, TQFP, SOT23 
> etc, have at least partial outlines and orientation markings on the 
> silkscreen layer, often with more extensive detail on the tDocu 
> layer.  I'm happy with these.
>
> Is there some reason for this?  Did Cadsoft just forget to put 
> orientation markings in the SOIC package footprints in their 
> libraries, or is there some rule of PCB design somewhere that says 
> there shouldn't be silkscreen ink under SOIC devices?  Does it 
> interfere with the correct seating of SOIC packages during reflow, or 
> can I just add silkscreen orientation marks under the device body to 
> the footprints that I'm using to aid?  I can understand not putting 
> silkscreen orientation marks under QFNs that are planar on the bottom 
> and pretty much have to be put on by machine anyway, but some 
> orientation marks on SOIC's would really help with manual placement.
>
> I realise that any marking underneath the ICs will be covered after 
> fitting and make checking device orientation difficult, but I'd rather 
> not put orientation marks outside the perimeter of the part as 
> component packing density is very high!
>
> I'm interested to hear any thoughts on this,
>
> -Richie,
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>



From jarno.verhoeven at ziggo.nl  Fri Nov 20 21:38:47 2015
From: jarno.verhoeven at ziggo.nl (jarno.verhoeven at ziggo.nl)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 21:38:47 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
Message-ID: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>

Checked my board stash, and there are a few boards which do have the outline, and a few that don't. It seems the tl072 component doesn't have the outlines, but a board with some smt tl074's and cmos does have outlines. (and I use lbr's that eagle came with)You could change the settings of the gerber cam to also include tdocu, that would be a quick fix.Best regards,Jarno.
------ Origineel bericht------Van: Richie BurnettDatum: vr, 20 nov. 2015 21:18Naar: synth-diy;CC: Onderwerp:[sdiy] Eagle footprints
A question for the Cadsoft Eagle gurus...Just finishing off a PCB here with Eagle and noticed that all of the SOIC devices have no component outlines or orientation markings on the silkscreen layer, only tDocu which can be printed off as documentation to aid in assembly but doesn't end up in the silkscreen Gerber file.  All other semi packages used on this board like TSSOP, TQFP, SOT23 etc, have at least partial outlines and orientation markings on the silkscreen layer, often with more extensive detail on the tDocu layer.  I'm happy with these.Is there some reason for this?  Did Cadsoft just forget to put orientation markings in the SOIC package footprints in their libraries, or is there some rule of PCB design somewhere that says there shouldn't be silkscreen ink under SOIC devices?  Does it interfere with the correct seating of SOIC packages during reflow, or can I just add silkscreen orientation marks under the device body to the footprints that I'm using to aid?  I can understand not putting silkscreen orientation marks under QFNs that are planar on the bottom and pretty much have to be put on by machine anyway, but some orientation marks on SOIC's would really help with manual placement.I realise that any marking underneath the ICs will be covered after fitting and make checking device orientation difficult, but I'd rather not put orientation marks outside the perimeter of the part as component packing density is very high!I'm interested to hear any thoughts on this,-Richie, _______________________________________________Synth-diy mailing listSynth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nlhttp://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151120/74bea042/attachment.htm>

From admin at bugbrand.co.uk  Fri Nov 20 21:44:57 2015
From: admin at bugbrand.co.uk (Tom Bugs)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 20:44:57 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <36AB125EE2204FC284DF266BC6AF580B@RichiePC>
References: <36AB125EE2204FC284DF266BC6AF580B@RichiePC>
Message-ID: <564F8649.6090408@bugbrand.co.uk>

You could specify in the CAM processor to have TDocu included in the 
silkscreen layer if you wanted.
(each export part has a selectable list of layers to include)
But, checking now, I see I don't have that selected in my standard 
gerber export process, so I guess I must have changed any TDocu data 
into TPlace or TNames sometime in the past.
Tom

On 20/11/2015 20:12, Richie Burnett wrote:
> A question for the Cadsoft Eagle gurus...
>
> Just finishing off a PCB here with Eagle and noticed that all of the 
> SOIC devices have no component outlines or orientation markings on the 
> silkscreen layer, only tDocu which can be printed off as documentation 
> to aid in assembly but doesn't end up in the silkscreen Gerber file.  
> All other semi packages used on this board like TSSOP, TQFP, SOT23 
> etc, have at least partial outlines and orientation markings on the 
> silkscreen layer, often with more extensive detail on the tDocu 
> layer.  I'm happy with these.
>
> Is there some reason for this?  Did Cadsoft just forget to put 
> orientation markings in the SOIC package footprints in their 
> libraries, or is there some rule of PCB design somewhere that says 
> there shouldn't be silkscreen ink under SOIC devices?  Does it 
> interfere with the correct seating of SOIC packages during reflow, or 
> can I just add silkscreen orientation marks under the device body to 
> the footprints that I'm using to aid?  I can understand not putting 
> silkscreen orientation marks under QFNs that are planar on the bottom 
> and pretty much have to be put on by machine anyway, but some 
> orientation marks on SOIC's would really help with manual placement.
>
> I realise that any marking underneath the ICs will be covered after 
> fitting and make checking device orientation difficult, but I'd rather 
> not put orientation marks outside the perimeter of the part as 
> component packing density is very high!
>
> I'm interested to hear any thoughts on this,
>
> -Richie,
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>

-- 
BugBrand LTD
UK company No. 07199808
VAT No. GB 988 2629 57
1 Ninetree Hill
BRISTOL BS1 3SB
United Kingdom
www.bugbrand.co.uk



From rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk  Fri Nov 20 21:54:32 2015
From: rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk (Richie Burnett)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 20:54:32 -0000
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
Message-ID: <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>

> You could change the settings of the gerber cam to also include tdocu, 
> that would be a quick fix.

Thanks Jarno.  I could do that.  I tried it, but it results in many 
instances of silkscreen printing over SMD pads which I don't like.  Most 
board houses I've used crop the silkscreen layer against the resist layer 
before fabrication to prevent ink on pads, but I'd rather avoid 
intentionally creating artwork that way.

>From the replies I've been getting it sounds like it's a good idea to just 
edit the footprints to at least include some orientation mark on the tPlace 
layer (21)

-Richie,


-----Original Message----- 
From: jarno.verhoeven at ziggo.nl
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 8:38 PM
To: synth-diy
Subject: Re: [sdiy] Eagle footprints



Checked my board stash, and there are a few boards which do have the 
outline, and a few that don't. It seems the tl072 component doesn't have the 
outlines, but a board with some smt tl074's and cmos does have outlines. 
(and I use lbr's that eagle came with)

You could change the settings of the gerber cam to also include tdocu, that 
would be a quick fix.

Best regards,

Jarno.






------ Origineel bericht------

Van: Richie Burnett

Datum: vr, 20 nov. 2015 21:18

Naar: synth-diy;

CC:

Onderwerp:[sdiy] Eagle footprints




A question for the Cadsoft Eagle gurus...Just finishing off a PCB here with 
Eagle and noticed that all of the SOIC devices have no component outlines or 
orientation markings on the silkscreen layer, only tDocu which can be 
printed off as documentation to aid in assembly but doesn't end up in the 
silkscreen Gerber file. All other semi packages used on this board like 
TSSOP, TQFP, SOT23 etc, have at least partial outlines and orientation 
markings on the silkscreen layer, often with more extensive detail on the 
tDocu layer. I'm happy with these.Is there some reason for this? Did Cadsoft 
just forget to put orientation markings in the SOIC package footprints in 
their libraries, or is there some rule of PCB design somewhere that says 
there shouldn't be silkscreen ink under SOIC devices? Does it interfere with 
the correct seating of SOIC packages during reflow, or can I just add 
silkscreen orientation marks under the device body to the footprints that 
I'm using to aid? I can understand not putting silkscreen orientation marks 
under QFNs that are planar on the bottom and pretty much have to be put on 
by machine anyway, but some orientation marks on SOIC's would really help 
with manual placement.I realise that any marking underneath the ICs will be 
covered after fitting and make checking device orientation difficult, but 
I'd rather not put orientation marks outside the perimeter of the part as 
component packing density is very high!I'm interested to hear any thoughts 
on this,-Richie, __________ _____________________________________Synth-diy 
mailing 
listSynth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nlhttp://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy





_______________________________________________
Synth-diy mailing list
Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy








No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4842 / Virus Database: 4447/11035 - Release Date: 11/20/15



From neil.johnson71 at gmail.com  Fri Nov 20 22:17:10 2015
From: neil.johnson71 at gmail.com (Neil Johnson)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 21:17:10 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
Message-ID: <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Richie,

This is one of the reasons why I never use the libraries provided with CAD
tools.  The quality is just so varied, rarely consistent, and full of
unknown bugs.  At least if I fab a board with a mistake in a component I
have created I have only myself to blame!  And quite honestly by the time
I've thoroughly checked a vendor library for correctness I might as well
have made it myself.

I separately maintain a catalogue of custom part numbers in a spreadsheet
(one sheet for each component type), and when I have fabbed a board with a
new footprint and tested it I then mark that entry in bold so I know it
works.

Cheers,
Neil
--
http://www.njohnson.co.uk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151120/b79e86d8/attachment.htm>

From timr at circuitabbey.com  Fri Nov 20 22:33:11 2015
From: timr at circuitabbey.com (Tim Ressel)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 13:33:11 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <564F9197.1080003@circuitabbey.com>

I have been burned a few times using downloaded library parts only to 
find they are wrong. Found out by burning PCBs, which means lost time 
and money.

If you download libraries ALWAYS check them. IF you are lucky enough to 
have a part that the manufacturer provides a .bxl file, you can use a 
program like Ultra Librarian to create an Eagle symbol. It may still 
need editing but the basics should be correct.

--TimR

On 11/20/2015 1:17 PM, Neil Johnson wrote:
> Hi Richie,
>
> This is one of the reasons why I never use the libraries provided with 
> CAD tools.  The quality is just so varied, rarely consistent, and full 
> of unknown bugs.  At least if I fab a board with a mistake in a 
> component I have created I have only myself to blame!  And quite 
> honestly by the time I've thoroughly checked a vendor library for 
> correctness I might as well have made it myself.
>
> I separately maintain a catalogue of custom part numbers in a 
> spreadsheet (one sheet for each component type), and when I have 
> fabbed a board with a new footprint and tested it I then mark that 
> entry in bold so I know it works.
>
> Cheers,
> Neil
> --
> http://www.njohnson.co.uk
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

-- 
--Tim Ressel
Circuit Abbey
timr at circuitabbey.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151120/14c4cd74/attachment.htm>

From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Fri Nov 20 22:36:56 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 13:36:56 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
Message-ID: <8CEB964A-7A79-433D-9361-17025711183F@audiobanshee.com>

Cadsoft does not create all of the devices in the provided library. In fact, there are additional libraries available for download from their site. This explains the wide variety of quality and style. Some are probably so old that they existed before Cadsoft bought the rights to Eagle.

I maintain my own private library of parts, symbols, and packages, and then copy selected devices from the other libraries as needed. This way, once I have an SOIC marking that I like, I can easily reuse it for new SOIC parts. Also, I know that all the devices in my personal library have been vetted on previous fabrications. Over time, the design process gets quicker if you're using your own library. The only trouble is that when I work for hire, I need to provide the library when I'm paid for the layout, and that means I have to create a third-party library for the client. Eagle has handy 'copy' commands for duplicating devices across library files.

There's probably no reason to worry about silkscreen over SMD pads, because even the cheapest fab houses will automatically remove them. The bigger reason, in my opinion, to remove them is because they don't do anybody any good if they're never printed.

I'd recommend placing at least a 'dot' or something that is visible after the SMD chip has been placed. You wouldn't believe how many times the CAD file will get the orientation 180 degrees off. I tend to match the markings on the chip itself with my silk, so that it's obvious. Under the chip, you can put more extensive markings (unless there is a large ground pad for heat dissipation).

Brian Willoughby
Sound Consulting


On Nov 20, 2015, at 12:54 PM, "Richie Burnett" <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
>> You could change the settings of the gerber cam to also include tdocu, that would be a quick fix.
> 
> Thanks Jarno.  I could do that.  I tried it, but it results in many instances of silkscreen printing over SMD pads which I don't like.  Most board houses I've used crop the silkscreen layer against the resist layer before fabrication to prevent ink on pads, but I'd rather avoid intentionally creating artwork that way.
> 
> From the replies I've been getting it sounds like it's a good idea to just edit the footprints to at least include some orientation mark on the tPlace layer (21)
> 
> -Richie,
> 
> 
> ------ Origineel bericht------
> Van: Richie Burnett
> 
> A question for the Cadsoft Eagle gurus?
> 
> Just finishing off a PCB here with Eagle and noticed that all of the SOIC devices have no component outlines or orientation markings on the silkscreen layer, only tDocu which can be printed off as documentation to aid in assembly but doesn't end up in the silkscreen Gerber file. All other semi packages used on this board like TSSOP, TQFP, SOT23 etc, have at least partial outlines and orientation markings on the silkscreen layer, often with more extensive detail on the tDocu layer. I'm happy with these.
> 
> Is there some reason for this? Did Cadsoft just forget to put orientation markings in the SOIC package footprints in their libraries, or is there some rule of PCB design somewhere that says there shouldn't be silkscreen ink under SOIC devices? Does it interfere with the correct seating of SOIC packages during reflow, or can I just add silkscreen orientation marks under the device body to the footprints that I'm using to aid? I can understand not putting silkscreen orientation marks under QFNs that are planar on the bottom and pretty much have to be put on by machine anyway, but some orientation marks on SOIC's would really help with manual placement.
> 
> I realise that any marking underneath the ICs will be covered after fitting and make checking device orientation difficult, but I'd rather not put orientation marks outside the perimeter of the part as component packing density is very high!
> 
> I'm interested to hear any thoughts on this,-Richie,



From tom at electricdruid.net  Fri Nov 20 22:50:30 2015
From: tom at electricdruid.net (Tom Wiltshire)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 21:50:30 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <564F9197.1080003@circuitabbey.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <564F9197.1080003@circuitabbey.com>
Message-ID: <B18EE576-0CC3-48C0-A6FF-8F1709B392FE@electricdruid.net>

I've been caught like this too - but how stupid is this situation?!

Software houses and parts vendors spend time and money getting together the most extensive parts libraries they can, but nobody uses them because they probably have some errors. Instead we redo all the work they already did...so we can get it wrong ourselves?

It's daft, but we all do it. ( Why? Wrong list for psychology questions, I know?)

Tom


On 20 Nov 2015, at 21:33, Tim Ressel <timr at circuitabbey.com> wrote:

> I have been burned a few times using downloaded library parts only to find they are wrong. Found out by burning PCBs, which means lost time and money.
> 
> If you download libraries ALWAYS check them. IF you are lucky enough to have a part that the manufacturer provides a .bxl file, you can use a program like Ultra Librarian to create an Eagle symbol. It may still need editing but the basics should be correct.
> 
> --TimR
> 
> On 11/20/2015 1:17 PM, Neil Johnson wrote:
>> Hi Richie,
>> 
>> This is one of the reasons why I never use the libraries provided with CAD tools.  The quality is just so varied, rarely consistent, and full of unknown bugs.  At least if I fab a board with a mistake in a component I have created I have only myself to blame!  And quite honestly by the time I've thoroughly checked a vendor library for correctness I might as well have made it myself.
>> 
>> I separately maintain a catalogue of custom part numbers in a spreadsheet (one sheet for each component type), and when I have fabbed a board with a new footprint and tested it I then mark that entry in bold so I know it works.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Neil
>> --
>> http://www.njohnson.co.uk
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> 
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> 
> -- 
> --Tim Ressel
> Circuit Abbey
> 
> timr at circuitabbey.com
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Fri Nov 20 23:46:17 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 14:46:17 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <B18EE576-0CC3-48C0-A6FF-8F1709B392FE@electricdruid.net>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <564F9197.1080003@circuitabbey.com>
 <B18EE576-0CC3-48C0-A6FF-8F1709B392FE@electricdruid.net>
Message-ID: <0547CEAD-BF4D-4978-AB33-0C5E91C2541D@audiobanshee.com>

Why?

One word: Incentive.

In other words, because these libraries are free, they have their share of errors or are merely incomplete. Not that paying for libraries guarantees quality, but they wouldn't stay in business long without doing better. I doubt that Cadsoft has really invested that much in the libraries - at least I hope not.

Same thing for firmware: I've seen free, open source code for USB-MIDI firmware, but the code actually gets the standard wrong. Better to roll your own, especially if it takes less time than performing a code review on the open source version.

Brian


On Nov 20, 2015, at 1:50 PM, Tom Wiltshire <tom at electricdruid.net> wrote:
> I've been caught like this too - but how stupid is this situation?!
> 
> Software houses and parts vendors spend time and money getting together the most extensive parts libraries they can, but nobody uses them because they probably have some errors. Instead we redo all the work they already did...so we can get it wrong ourselves?
> 
> It's daft, but we all do it. ( Why? Wrong list for psychology questions, I know?)
> 
> On 20 Nov 2015, at 21:33, Tim Ressel <timr at circuitabbey.com> wrote:
>> I have been burned a few times using downloaded library parts only to find they are wrong. Found out by burning PCBs, which means lost time and money.
>> 
>> If you download libraries ALWAYS check them. IF you are lucky enough to have a part that the manufacturer provides a .bxl file, you can use a program like Ultra Librarian to create an Eagle symbol. It may still need editing but the basics should be correct.
>> 
>> On 11/20/2015 1:17 PM, Neil Johnson wrote:
>>> This is one of the reasons why I never use the libraries provided with CAD tools.  The quality is just so varied, rarely consistent, and full of unknown bugs.  At least if I fab a board with a mistake in a component I have created I have only myself to blame!  And quite honestly by the time I've thoroughly checked a vendor library for correctness I might as well have made it myself.
>>> 
>>> I separately maintain a catalogue of custom part numbers in a spreadsheet (one sheet for each component type), and when I have fabbed a board with a new footprint and tested it I then mark that entry in bold so I know it works.



From rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk  Sat Nov 21 00:12:56 2015
From: rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk (Richie Burnett)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 23:12:56 -0000
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com><3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC>

Thanks everyone for the suggestions.  I've kind of ended up building my own 
libraries on a per project basis now anyway, so I'll just mod the footprints 
to put a silkscreen dot nearby to mark pin one of the SOIC devices.

As Neil and Brian have said, if your previous board comes back perfect from 
fab/assembly, then all of those footprints are then "approved".  I like that 
way of working, even though I still check all my artworks in obsessive 
detail first using GC-prevue, and laser-print life-size paper boards!

-Richie,



-----Original Message----- 
From: Neil Johnson
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 9:17 PM
To: Richie Burnett
Cc: synth-diy
Subject: Re: [sdiy] Eagle footprints


Hi Richie,

This is one of the reasons why I never use the libraries provided with CAD 
tools.  The quality is just so varied, rarely consistent, and full of 
unknown bugs.  At least if I fab a board with a mistake in a component I 
have created I have only myself to blame!  And quite honestly by the time 
I've thoroughly checked a vendor library for correctness I might as well 
have made it myself.

I separately maintain a catalogue of custom part numbers in a spreadsheet 
(one sheet for each component type), and when I have fabbed a board with a 
new footprint and tested it I then mark that entry in bold so I know it 
works.

Cheers,
Neil
--
http://www.njohnson.co.uk



No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4842 / Virus Database: 4447/11035 - Release Date: 11/20/15



From grant at musictechnologiesgroup.com  Sat Nov 21 00:20:05 2015
From: grant at musictechnologiesgroup.com (MTG)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 15:20:05 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <0547CEAD-BF4D-4978-AB33-0C5E91C2541D@audiobanshee.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <564F9197.1080003@circuitabbey.com>
 <B18EE576-0CC3-48C0-A6FF-8F1709B392FE@electricdruid.net>
 <0547CEAD-BF4D-4978-AB33-0C5E91C2541D@audiobanshee.com>
Message-ID: <564FAAA5.8050108@musictechnologiesgroup.com>

Or code libraries that come from MCU Silicon vendors. It's been a while 
since I did USB-MIDI and I don't recall if I started from scratch but I 
doubt it. The one that bit me though was a USB Mass Storage Device 
library that was full of holes.  In fact I find a lot of the USB 
"frameworks" are quite poor.

GB

On 11/20/2015 2:46 PM, rsdio at audiobanshee.com wrote:
>
> Same thing for firmware: I've seen free, open source code for
 > USB-MIDI firmware, but the code actually gets the standard wrong.
 > Better to roll your own, especially if it takes less time than
 > performing a code review on the open source version.
>
> Brian


From timr at circuitabbey.com  Sat Nov 21 01:04:20 2015
From: timr at circuitabbey.com (Tim Ressel)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 16:04:20 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC>
Message-ID: <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>

Yeah, same here. I also do things like widen the SMT pads on some parts 
to make it easier to hand solder.

I like the bit about having a spreadsheet of known good library parts. I 
believe Sparkfun does this.

--TimR

On 11/20/2015 3:12 PM, Richie Burnett wrote:
> Thanks everyone for the suggestions.  I've kind of ended up building 
> my own libraries on a per project basis now anyway, so I'll just mod 
> the footprints to put a silkscreen dot nearby to mark pin one of the 
> SOIC devices.
>
> As Neil and Brian have said, if your previous board comes back perfect 
> from fab/assembly, then all of those footprints are then "approved".  
> I like that way of working, even though I still check all my artworks 
> in obsessive detail first using GC-prevue, and laser-print life-size 
> paper boards!
>
> -Richie,
>
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Neil Johnson
> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 9:17 PM
> To: Richie Burnett
> Cc: synth-diy
> Subject: Re: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
>
>
> Hi Richie,
>
> This is one of the reasons why I never use the libraries provided with 
> CAD tools.  The quality is just so varied, rarely consistent, and full 
> of unknown bugs.  At least if I fab a board with a mistake in a 
> component I have created I have only myself to blame!  And quite 
> honestly by the time I've thoroughly checked a vendor library for 
> correctness I might as well have made it myself.
>
> I separately maintain a catalogue of custom part numbers in a 
> spreadsheet (one sheet for each component type), and when I have 
> fabbed a board with a new footprint and tested it I then mark that 
> entry in bold so I know it works.
>
> Cheers,
> Neil
> -- 
> http://www.njohnson.co.uk
>
>
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2014.0.4842 / Virus Database: 4447/11035 - Release Date: 
> 11/20/15
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>

-- 
--Tim Ressel
Circuit Abbey
timr at circuitabbey.com



From kmkennedy at gmail.com  Sat Nov 21 01:21:28 2015
From: kmkennedy at gmail.com (Kylee Kennedy)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 16:21:28 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
Message-ID: <CADD61nUp8XC6QqFn8ok94wO4uC5QmNq68KdiDxZnHhsuGmE4HQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi fellow Synth-DIYers...If you haven't heard one of our brothers is in
need.

https://www.gofundme.com/raywilson

I just picked up the Make: Synthesizer book and there's a lot of great
resources in there for anyone into SynthDIY. Love the MFOS website and have
been looking over it for years.

I hope we can band together, help him and his family get through this. He
has been very generous with sharing his schematics and describing circuits
for years. I know I'll be giving a little, wish I could do more. I've
learned a lot from him over the years.

Thanks RAY!!!



Kylee Kennedy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151120/c59a27ab/attachment.htm>

From timr at circuitabbey.com  Sat Nov 21 01:51:46 2015
From: timr at circuitabbey.com (Tim Ressel)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 16:51:46 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
Message-ID: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com>

Hi y'all,

I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing +/-5V. I 
can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?

Thanks!

-- 
--Tim Ressel
Circuit Abbey
timr at circuitabbey.com



From timr at circuitabbey.com  Sat Nov 21 01:52:33 2015
From: timr at circuitabbey.com (Tim Ressel)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 16:52:33 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
In-Reply-To: <CADD61nUp8XC6QqFn8ok94wO4uC5QmNq68KdiDxZnHhsuGmE4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADD61nUp8XC6QqFn8ok94wO4uC5QmNq68KdiDxZnHhsuGmE4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <564FC051.9090001@circuitabbey.com>

Donated. My mom beat here cancer. I hope Ray is as fortunate.

On 11/20/2015 4:21 PM, Kylee Kennedy wrote:
> Hi fellow Synth-DIYers...If you haven't heard one of our brothers is 
> in need.
>
> https://www.gofundme.com/raywilson
>
> I just picked up the Make: Synthesizer book and there's a lot of great 
> resources in there for anyone into SynthDIY. Love the MFOS website and 
> have been looking over it for years.
>
> I hope we can band together, help him and his family get through this. 
> He has been very generous with sharing his schematics and describing 
> circuits for years. I know I'll be giving a little, wish I could do 
> more. I've learned a lot from him over the years.
>
> Thanks RAY!!!
>
>
>
> Kylee Kennedy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

-- 
--Tim Ressel
Circuit Abbey
timr at circuitabbey.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151120/17ad72a6/attachment.htm>

From cjuried at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 21 01:54:57 2015
From: cjuried at yahoo.com (Chris Juried)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 00:54:57 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
References: <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
Message-ID: <815570901.7789075.1448067297859.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>

Hi all,
With all this talk about board design, I was wondering if anyone is using NI's Ultiboard with Multisim to handle these tasks?
?Sincerely,???
??Chris 
Audio Engineering Society (AES)?Member? 
InfoComm-Recognized AV Technologist
http://www.JuriedEngineering.com 
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this email, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify me and permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any printout thereof.

      From: Tim Ressel <timr at circuitabbey.com>
 To: synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl 
 Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 7:04 PM
 Subject: Re: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
   
Yeah, same here. I also do things like widen the SMT pads on some parts 
to make it easier to hand solder.

I like the bit about having a spreadsheet of known good library parts. I 
believe Sparkfun does this.

--TimR

On 11/20/2015 3:12 PM, Richie Burnett wrote:
> Thanks everyone for the suggestions.? I've kind of ended up building 
> my own libraries on a per project basis now anyway, so I'll just mod 
> the footprints to put a silkscreen dot nearby to mark pin one of the 
> SOIC devices.
>
> As Neil and Brian have said, if your previous board comes back perfect 
> from fab/assembly, then all of those footprints are then "approved".? 
> I like that way of working, even though I still check all my artworks 
> in obsessive detail first using GC-prevue, and laser-print life-size 
> paper boards!
>
> -Richie,
>
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Neil Johnson
> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 9:17 PM
> To: Richie Burnett
> Cc: synth-diy
> Subject: Re: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
>
>
> Hi Richie,
>
> This is one of the reasons why I never use the libraries provided with 
> CAD tools.? The quality is just so varied, rarely consistent, and full 
> of unknown bugs.? At least if I fab a board with a mistake in a 
> component I have created I have only myself to blame!? And quite 
> honestly by the time I've thoroughly checked a vendor library for 
> correctness I might as well have made it myself.
>
> I separately maintain a catalogue of custom part numbers in a 
> spreadsheet (one sheet for each component type), and when I have 
> fabbed a board with a new footprint and tested it I then mark that 
> entry in bold so I know it works.
>
> Cheers,
> Neil
> -- 
> http://www.njohnson.co.uk
>
>
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2014.0.4842 / Virus Database: 4447/11035 - Release Date: 
> 11/20/15
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>

-- 
--Tim Ressel
Circuit Abbey
timr at circuitabbey.com



_______________________________________________
Synth-diy mailing list
Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151121/1ab47aa1/attachment.htm>

From rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk  Sat Nov 21 02:19:11 2015
From: rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk (Richie Burnett)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 01:19:11 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <815570901.7789075.1448067297859.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <815570901.7789075.1448067297859.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <umn9ekb9rqvkr61ehea9m5r3.1448068751966@email.android.com>

They have a site license for it where I work. The simulator isn't too bad, but I'm not keen on Ultiboard. That's why we bought Eagle for our PCB design work. Despite its quirks, Eagle is pitched just right in terms of complexity for the jobs it gets used for.

-Richie,

Sent from my Xperia SP on O2

---- Chris Juried wrote ----

>_______________________________________________
>Synth-diy mailing list
>Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151121/4ec94279/attachment.htm>

From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Sat Nov 21 02:49:00 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 17:49:00 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
In-Reply-To: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com>
References: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com>
Message-ID: <BDCAF262-9E31-46F8-8B5B-448FC8103C4D@audiobanshee.com>

Doing it with op amps IS the clever way. But I think that pulling it off with a single op-amp, as opposed to a dual, is the cleverer way. I recently worked this out for +/-10V, but I can't find the paper where I scribbled down the notes.

There's a DAC data sheet out there with the 0-5V to +/-5V op-amp circuit in it as an example of interfacing their DAC. Forgot who that was, but sounds like you already have that circuit.

Brian


On Nov 20, 2015, at 4:51 PM, Tim Ressel <timr at circuitabbey.com> wrote:
> Hi y'all,
> 
> I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing +/-5V. I can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?
> 


From dixon at mail.ubc.ca  Sat Nov 21 05:03:06 2015
From: dixon at mail.ubc.ca (David G Dixon)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 20:03:06 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
In-Reply-To: <CADD61nUp8XC6QqFn8ok94wO4uC5QmNq68KdiDxZnHhsuGmE4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADD61nUp8XC6QqFn8ok94wO4uC5QmNq68KdiDxZnHhsuGmE4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3745669FE3A94516A3FB063155110371@galvanox01>

Donated.  I owe Ray for getting me started in synth design.  I hope he comes
through this.


  _____  

From: Synth-diy [mailto:synth-diy-bounces at dropmix.xs4all.nl] On Behalf Of
Kylee Kennedy
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 4:21 PM
To: SDIY List
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help


Hi fellow Synth-DIYers...If you haven't heard one of our brothers is in
need. 

https://www.gofundme.com/raywilson


I just picked up the Make: Synthesizer book and there's a lot of great
resources in there for anyone into SynthDIY. Love the MFOS website and have
been looking over it for years.

I hope we can band together, help him and his family get through this. He
has been very generous with sharing his schematics and describing circuits
for years. I know I'll be giving a little, wish I could do more. I've
learned a lot from him over the years.

Thanks RAY!!!



Kylee Kennedy

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151120/a09adf38/attachment.htm>

From pfperry at melbpc.org.au  Sat Nov 21 05:19:19 2015
From: pfperry at melbpc.org.au (Paul Perry)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 15:19:19 +1100
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
References: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com>
Message-ID: <4FA9B8325E7E44F3974902963E7C7901@ownerf0d9273f5>

What voltage power rails are available?
I'm sure there is a transistor solution.

But back in The Day, this was a job for the LM3900.

paul perry Melbourne Australia
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tim Ressel" > I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make 
them swing +/-5V. I
> can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?



From list at mikebeauchamp.com  Sat Nov 21 05:28:50 2015
From: list at mikebeauchamp.com (Mike Beauchamp)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 23:28:50 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
In-Reply-To: <CADD61nUp8XC6QqFn8ok94wO4uC5QmNq68KdiDxZnHhsuGmE4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADD61nUp8XC6QqFn8ok94wO4uC5QmNq68KdiDxZnHhsuGmE4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <564FF302.8050904@mikebeauchamp.com>

Damn, that page wasn't easy to read.

I hope my little donation helps. I've used MOFS as a resource for years 
and I always appreciate Ray's non-nonsense circuits and explanations.

Mike


On 11/20/2015 07:21 PM, Kylee Kennedy wrote:
> Hi fellow Synth-DIYers...If you haven't heard one of our brothers is in
> need.
>
> https://www.gofundme.com/raywilson
>
> I just picked up the Make: Synthesizer book and there's a lot of great
> resources in there for anyone into SynthDIY. Love the MFOS website and
> have been looking over it for years.
>
> I hope we can band together, help him and his family get through this.
> He has been very generous with sharing his schematics and describing
> circuits for years. I know I'll be giving a little, wish I could do
> more. I've learned a lot from him over the years.
>
> Thanks RAY!!!
>
>
>
> Kylee Kennedy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>


From subjectivity at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 21 06:02:28 2015
From: subjectivity at hotmail.com (Dan Snazelle)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 00:02:28 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
In-Reply-To: <3745669FE3A94516A3FB063155110371@galvanox01>
References: <CADD61nUp8XC6QqFn8ok94wO4uC5QmNq68KdiDxZnHhsuGmE4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3745669FE3A94516A3FB063155110371@galvanox01>
Message-ID: <SNT405-EAS339E7BB5A86B71EC7119C43C8190@phx.gbl>

Donating


Really rough reading :( 

The WSG was the first project I ever built and first schematic I ever learned to read 

I really hope he knows how much he is appreciated 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 20, 2015, at 11:05 PM, David G Dixon <dixon at mail.ubc.ca> wrote:
> 
> Donated.  I owe Ray for getting me started in synth design.  I hope he comes through this.
> 
> From: Synth-diy [mailto:synth-diy-bounces at dropmix.xs4all.nl] On Behalf Of Kylee Kennedy
> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 4:21 PM
> To: SDIY List
> Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
> 
> Hi fellow Synth-DIYers...If you haven't heard one of our brothers is in need.
> 
> https://www.gofundme.com/raywilson
> 
> I just picked up the Make: Synthesizer book and there's a lot of great resources in there for anyone into SynthDIY. Love the MFOS website and have been looking over it for years.
> 
> I hope we can band together, help him and his family get through this. He has been very generous with sharing his schematics and describing circuits for years. I know I'll be giving a little, wish I could do more. I've learned a lot from him over the years.
> 
> Thanks RAY!!!
> 
> 
> 
> Kylee Kennedy
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151121/566150af/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Synth-diy mailing list
Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

From obl64 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Nov 21 06:11:39 2015
From: obl64 at ix.netcom.com (Oren Leavitt)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 23:11:39 -0600
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
In-Reply-To: <CADD61nUp8XC6QqFn8ok94wO4uC5QmNq68KdiDxZnHhsuGmE4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADD61nUp8XC6QqFn8ok94wO4uC5QmNq68KdiDxZnHhsuGmE4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <564FFD0B.6020207@ix.netcom.com>

Damn... sorry to hear. Donation done. Sending best vibes and wishes to 
you, Ray!

- Oren

On 11/20/15 6:21 PM, Kylee Kennedy wrote:
> Hi fellow Synth-DIYers...If you haven't heard one of our brothers is 
> in need.
>
> https://www.gofundme.com/raywilson
>
> I just picked up the Make: Synthesizer book and there's a lot of great 
> resources in there for anyone into SynthDIY. Love the MFOS website and 
> have been looking over it for years.
>
> I hope we can band together, help him and his family get through this. 
> He has been very generous with sharing his schematics and describing 
> circuits for years. I know I'll be giving a little, wish I could do 
> more. I've learned a lot from him over the years.
>
> Thanks RAY!!!
>
>
>
> Kylee Kennedy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151120/b48d9bad/attachment.htm>

From oldcrow at oldcrows.net  Sat Nov 21 06:34:24 2015
From: oldcrow at oldcrows.net (The Old Crow)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 23:34:24 -0600
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
In-Reply-To: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com>
References: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com>
Message-ID: <56500260.9030402@oldcrows.net>

   My favorite old trick for this is to use the venerable MC1488 line 
driver. --Crow

On 11/20/2015 6:51 PM, Tim Ressel wrote:
> Hi y'all,
>
> I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing +/-5V. 
> I can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?
>
> Thanks!
>



From mbedtom at gmail.com  Sat Nov 21 08:18:34 2015
From: mbedtom at gmail.com (Tom Farrand)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 01:18:34 -0600
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
In-Reply-To: <CADD61nUp8XC6QqFn8ok94wO4uC5QmNq68KdiDxZnHhsuGmE4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADD61nUp8XC6QqFn8ok94wO4uC5QmNq68KdiDxZnHhsuGmE4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAGYZNz9_EHy7pm2A2QTELAJLKqShRPzGNRz10Dko8f9KUbJNHw@mail.gmail.com>

Did the deed, too.  I hope many can give a little something to Ray.
He has given much in the pay-it-forward-plan.

Thank you Ray!

Tom Farrand

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Kylee Kennedy <kmkennedy at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi fellow Synth-DIYers...If you haven't heard one of our brothers is in
> need.
>
> https://www.gofundme.com/raywilson
>
> I just picked up the Make: Synthesizer book and there's a lot of great
> resources in there for anyone into SynthDIY. Love the MFOS website and have
> been looking over it for years.
>
> I hope we can band together, help him and his family get through this. He
> has been very generous with sharing his schematics and describing circuits
> for years. I know I'll be giving a little, wish I could do more. I've
> learned a lot from him over the years.
>
> Thanks RAY!!!
>
>
>
> Kylee Kennedy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>


From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Sat Nov 21 08:28:27 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 23:28:27 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
In-Reply-To: <4FA9B8325E7E44F3974902963E7C7901@ownerf0d9273f5>
References: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com>
 <4FA9B8325E7E44F3974902963E7C7901@ownerf0d9273f5>
Message-ID: <42EBFBB9-2A6B-431D-B034-0166C9F671F1@audiobanshee.com>

Why choose a current mode (Norton) amplifier, like the LM3900 or LM359? Sure, they allow the input voltage to exceed the supply, but in this case we need the output voltage to exceed the input voltage, at least on the negative side.

Brian


On Nov 20, 2015, at 8:19 PM, Paul Perry <pfperry at melbpc.org.au> wrote:
> But back in The Day, this was a job for the LM3900.
> 
> paul perry Melbourne Australia
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Ressel" > I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing +/-5V. I
>> can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?
> 



From jason at tribbeck.com  Sat Nov 21 09:15:05 2015
From: jason at tribbeck.com (Jason Tribbeck)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 08:15:05 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
In-Reply-To: <42EBFBB9-2A6B-431D-B034-0166C9F671F1@audiobanshee.com>
References: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com>
 <4FA9B8325E7E44F3974902963E7C7901@ownerf0d9273f5>
 <42EBFBB9-2A6B-431D-B034-0166C9F671F1@audiobanshee.com>
Message-ID: <CAL3=FbY5H0BPKa-wwD7Bm3qrAocmJR_ANp5CPNeZ-39jAvYkKw@mail.gmail.com>

I would've thought something like an RS232 transceiver - ISTR that while
it's normally +/-12V, some laptops did +/-5V instead.

Although just doing a quick check of the RS232 transceivers, and it's +/-7V
for all of the ones I have datasheets for.

On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 at 07:29 <rsdio at audiobanshee.com> wrote:

> Why choose a current mode (Norton) amplifier, like the LM3900 or LM359?
> Sure, they allow the input voltage to exceed the supply, but in this case
> we need the output voltage to exceed the input voltage, at least on the
> negative side.
>
> Brian
>
>
> On Nov 20, 2015, at 8:19 PM, Paul Perry <pfperry at melbpc.org.au> wrote:
> > But back in The Day, this was a job for the LM3900.
> >
> > paul perry Melbourne Australia
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Ressel" > I'd like to take
> several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing +/-5V. I
> >> can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151121/e21fbe7b/attachment.htm>

From nitro2k01 at gmail.com  Sat Nov 21 09:49:13 2015
From: nitro2k01 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?T3ZlIFJpZMOp?=)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 09:49:13 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
Message-ID: <CABacs=AVyLcC2PrcXmUKsn4RQ7vTaTn=avJCcqk1qcv7Zmocmg@mail.gmail.com>

What kind of precision do you require?

On 21 November 2015 at 01:51, Tim Ressel <timr at circuitabbey.com> wrote:
> Hi y'all,
>
> I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing +/-5V. I can
> do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> --Tim Ressel
> Circuit Abbey
> timr at circuitabbey.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



--
/Ove

Blog: <http://blog.gg8.se/>

"Here is Evergreen City. Evergreen? is the color of green forever."


From synth at schmitzbits.de  Sat Nov 21 12:36:13 2015
From: synth at schmitzbits.de (=?UTF-8?Q?Ren=c3=a9_Schmitz?=)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 12:36:13 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
In-Reply-To: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com>
References: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com>
Message-ID: <5650572D.7080904@schmitzbits.de>

Am 21.11.2015 um 01:51 schrieb Tim Ressel:
> Hi y'all,
>
> I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing +/-5V. I
> can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?
>
> Thanks!
>
A 4053 can be powered from +-5V (Vcc=5V, Vee=-5V, GND=0V) and does still 
accept 0-5V input. Then tie +5 and -5 to the switch inputs.
Gives you three channels in one package. You can even do inversion by 
swapping the connections on the switch.

Best,
  Ren?

-- 
synth at schmitzbits.de
http://www.schmitzbits.de/


From dlmanley at sonic.net  Sat Nov 21 13:02:43 2015
From: dlmanley at sonic.net (Dave Manley)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 04:02:43 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
In-Reply-To: <5650572D.7080904@schmitzbits.de>
References: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com> <5650572D.7080904@schmitzbits.de>
Message-ID: <96963A6A-E941-468E-B058-1DB257F9F63E@sonic.net>



On November 21, 2015 3:36:13 AM PST, "Ren? Schmitz" <synth at schmitzbits.de> wrote:
>Am 21.11.2015 um 01:51 schrieb Tim Ressel:
>> Hi y'all,
>>
>> I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing
>+/-5V. I
>> can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>A 4053 can be powered from +-5V (Vcc=5V, Vee=-5V, GND=0V) and does
>still 
>accept 0-5V input. Then tie +5 and -5 to the switch inputs.
>Gives you three channels in one package. You can even do inversion by 
>swapping the connections on the switch.
>
>Best,
>  Ren?

Most clevererer answer so far!

-Dave


From Peter.Ullrich at kapsch.net  Sat Nov 21 13:09:34 2015
From: Peter.Ullrich at kapsch.net (Ullrich Peter)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 12:09:34 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
In-Reply-To: <96963A6A-E941-468E-B058-1DB257F9F63E@sonic.net>
References: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com>
 <5650572D.7080904@schmitzbits.de>,
 <96963A6A-E941-468E-B058-1DB257F9F63E@sonic.net>
Message-ID: <8BF8151491B683469DBE3534B77A7286E00FCEA9@S900X027.kapsch.co.at>

And if you don't have enough IO-lines to switch the signals then you can select the 74HC/HCT4353 thats like the 4053 but with additional latching function.

http://www.nxp.com/documents/data_sheet/74HC_HCT4353_CNV.pdf

Ciao
Peter

http://www.ullrich.at.tt

________________________________________
Von: Synth-diy [synth-diy-bounces at dropmix.xs4all.nl]&quot; im Auftrag von &quot;Dave Manley [dlmanley at sonic.net]
Gesendet: Samstag, 21. November 2015 13:02
An: Ren? Schmitz; synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
Betreff: Re: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion

On November 21, 2015 3:36:13 AM PST, "Ren? Schmitz" <synth at schmitzbits.de> wrote:
>Am 21.11.2015 um 01:51 schrieb Tim Ressel:
>> Hi y'all,
>>
>> I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing
>+/-5V. I
>> can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>A 4053 can be powered from +-5V (Vcc=5V, Vee=-5V, GND=0V) and does
>still
>accept 0-5V input. Then tie +5 and -5 to the switch inputs.
>Gives you three channels in one package. You can even do inversion by
>swapping the connections on the switch.
>
>Best,
>  Ren?

Most clevererer answer so far!

-Dave
_______________________________________________
Synth-diy mailing list
Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



The information contained in this e-mail message is privileged and confidential and is for the exclusive use of the addressee. The person who receives this message and who is not the addressee, one of his employees or an agent entitled to hand it over to the addressee, is informed that he may not use, disclose or reproduce the contents thereof, and is kindly asked to notify the sender and delete the e-mail immediately.



From ifergu1 at gmail.com  Sat Nov 21 14:23:54 2015
From: ifergu1 at gmail.com (Ian Michael Ferguson)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 08:23:54 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
In-Reply-To: <CAGYZNz9_EHy7pm2A2QTELAJLKqShRPzGNRz10Dko8f9KUbJNHw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADD61nUp8XC6QqFn8ok94wO4uC5QmNq68KdiDxZnHhsuGmE4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGYZNz9_EHy7pm2A2QTELAJLKqShRPzGNRz10Dko8f9KUbJNHw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAMjFWNuvHPtNcganxcefMK-pTmjSZpTbiaXz6nH5T2Dug5mMdg@mail.gmail.com>

This made me very sad and angry.
I spoke to him via e-mail not that long ago for help debugging my Sound Lab
Ultimate and he was very helpful.

Thank you Ray for being a mentor and such a generous and gifted person.

I've done my best to contact Maker Media about seeing if they could post
something...

On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 2:18 AM, Tom Farrand <mbedtom at gmail.com> wrote:

> Did the deed, too.  I hope many can give a little something to Ray.
> He has given much in the pay-it-forward-plan.
>
> Thank you Ray!
>
> Tom Farrand
>
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Kylee Kennedy <kmkennedy at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi fellow Synth-DIYers...If you haven't heard one of our brothers is in
> > need.
> >
> > https://www.gofundme.com/raywilson
> >
> > I just picked up the Make: Synthesizer book and there's a lot of great
> > resources in there for anyone into SynthDIY. Love the MFOS website and
> have
> > been looking over it for years.
> >
> > I hope we can band together, help him and his family get through this. He
> > has been very generous with sharing his schematics and describing
> circuits
> > for years. I know I'll be giving a little, wish I could do more. I've
> > learned a lot from him over the years.
> >
> > Thanks RAY!!!
> >
> >
> >
> > Kylee Kennedy
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Synth-diy mailing list
> > Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> > http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151121/a62f7223/attachment.htm>

From mr at analogue.org  Sat Nov 21 16:28:38 2015
From: mr at analogue.org (Mattias Rickardsson)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 16:28:38 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
In-Reply-To: <96963A6A-E941-468E-B058-1DB257F9F63E@sonic.net>
References: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com> <5650572D.7080904@schmitzbits.de>
 <96963A6A-E941-468E-B058-1DB257F9F63E@sonic.net>
Message-ID: <CAP92RBVLoDeACOLhxOmnDpdpfxLd-StjkAjmr3Xgxv2RC6xizQ@mail.gmail.com>

It depends a bit, we're all waiting to hear what supply voltages are
available. :-)

/mr
Den 21 nov. 2015 1:02 em skrev "Dave Manley" <dlmanley at sonic.net>:

>
>
> On November 21, 2015 3:36:13 AM PST, "Ren? Schmitz" <synth at schmitzbits.de>
> wrote:
> >Am 21.11.2015 um 01:51 schrieb Tim Ressel:
> >> Hi y'all,
> >>
> >> I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing
> >+/-5V. I
> >> can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >A 4053 can be powered from +-5V (Vcc=5V, Vee=-5V, GND=0V) and does
> >still
> >accept 0-5V input. Then tie +5 and -5 to the switch inputs.
> >Gives you three channels in one package. You can even do inversion by
> >swapping the connections on the switch.
> >
> >Best,
> >  Ren?
>
> Most clevererer answer so far!
>
> -Dave
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151121/77c3a33f/attachment.htm>

From admin at bugbrand.co.uk  Sat Nov 21 17:31:50 2015
From: admin at bugbrand.co.uk (Tom Bugs)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 16:31:50 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
In-Reply-To: <CAMjFWNuvHPtNcganxcefMK-pTmjSZpTbiaXz6nH5T2Dug5mMdg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADD61nUp8XC6QqFn8ok94wO4uC5QmNq68KdiDxZnHhsuGmE4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGYZNz9_EHy7pm2A2QTELAJLKqShRPzGNRz10Dko8f9KUbJNHw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMjFWNuvHPtNcganxcefMK-pTmjSZpTbiaXz6nH5T2Dug5mMdg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <56509C76.3010007@bugbrand.co.uk>

Echoing thoughts!

By the way, others have suggested that if, like me, you think perhaps 
GoFundMe skim a little heavy on the donations (5% + extra fees on WePay 
whatever that is), then you can send funds to his Paypal address which 
apparently is 'info' and then the at sign followed by his website address.

Please continue to spread the word!

On 21/11/2015 13:23, Ian Michael Ferguson wrote:
> This made me very sad and angry.
> I spoke to him via e-mail not that long ago for help debugging my 
> Sound Lab Ultimate and he was very helpful.
>
> Thank you Ray for being a mentor and such a generous and gifted person.
>
> I've done my best to contact Maker Media about seeing if they could 
> post something...
>
> On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 2:18 AM, Tom Farrand <mbedtom at gmail.com 
> <mailto:mbedtom at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Did the deed, too.  I hope many can give a little something to Ray.
>     He has given much in the pay-it-forward-plan.
>
>     Thank you Ray!
>
>     Tom Farrand
>
>     On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Kylee Kennedy
>     <kmkennedy at gmail.com <mailto:kmkennedy at gmail.com>> wrote:
>     > Hi fellow Synth-DIYers...If you haven't heard one of our
>     brothers is in
>     > need.
>     >
>     > https://www.gofundme.com/raywilson
>     >
>     > I just picked up the Make: Synthesizer book and there's a lot of
>     great
>     > resources in there for anyone into SynthDIY. Love the MFOS
>     website and have
>     > been looking over it for years.
>     >
>     > I hope we can band together, help him and his family get through
>     this. He
>     > has been very generous with sharing his schematics and
>     describing circuits
>     > for years. I know I'll be giving a little, wish I could do more.
>     I've
>     > learned a lot from him over the years.
>     >
>     > Thanks RAY!!!
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > Kylee Kennedy
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > Synth-diy mailing list
>     > Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl <mailto:Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl>
>     > http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>     >
>     _______________________________________________
>     Synth-diy mailing list
>     Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl <mailto:Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl>
>     http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

-- 
BugBrand LTD
UK company No. 07199808
VAT No. GB 988 2629 57
1 Ninetree Hill
BRISTOL BS1 3SB
United Kingdom
www.bugbrand.co.uk

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151121/562ff656/attachment.htm>

From info at synthcube.com  Sat Nov 21 18:17:05 2015
From: info at synthcube.com (info at synthcube.com)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 10:17:05 -0700
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
Message-ID: <20151121101705.3a027d564b495c443912516e20da7489.44d606950a.wbe@email15.secureserver.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151121/4c7b2c00/attachment.htm>

From fanwander at mnet-online.de  Sat Nov 21 19:39:12 2015
From: fanwander at mnet-online.de (Florian Anwander)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 19:39:12 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
In-Reply-To: <20151121101705.3a027d564b495c443912516e20da7489.44d606950a.wbe@email15.secureserver.net>
References: <20151121101705.3a027d564b495c443912516e20da7489.44d606950a.wbe@email15.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <5650BA50.5030900@mnet-online.de>

On AH matrix from tmatrixsynth.com gave the hint, to donate directly to 
his paypal account
http://www.matrixsynth.com/2015/11/ray-wilson-of-music-from-outer-space.html
Do it as personal payment. You will have to pay one percent of the amount.

Done too.

Florian

On 21.11.15 18:17 , info at synthcube.com wrote:
> we donated as well and passed along the link via facebook et al.
> best wished for ray and family.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151121/17629d9d/attachment.htm>

From matrixsynth at gmail.com  Sat Nov 21 20:00:15 2015
From: matrixsynth at gmail.com (matrix)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 11:00:15 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
In-Reply-To: <5650BA50.5030900@mnet-online.de>
References: <20151121101705.3a027d564b495c443912516e20da7489.44d606950a.wbe@email15.secureserver.net>
 <5650BA50.5030900@mnet-online.de>
Message-ID: <CAPR-mM9NmumNoXNn+wpLN9fPEMta8_WZ0FFdaUhJKrAD5oJWvg@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks for the Paypal tip goes to Tom Bugs.  It is a huge thanks for those
of us that have the funds available there, so thanks again Tom!

On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Florian Anwander <fanwander at mnet-online.de
> wrote:

> On AH matrix from tmatrixsynth.com gave the hint, to donate directly to
> his paypal account
>
> http://www.matrixsynth.com/2015/11/ray-wilson-of-music-from-outer-space.html
> Do it as personal payment. You will have to pay one percent of the amount.
>
> Done too.
>
> Florian
>
> On 21.11.15 18:17 , info at synthcube.com wrote:
>
> we donated as well and passed along the link via facebook et al.
> best wished for ray and family.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>


-- 

cheers,
matrix
http://www.matrixsynth.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151121/fbf4e0a3/attachment.htm>

From admin at bugbrand.co.uk  Sat Nov 21 21:23:18 2015
From: admin at bugbrand.co.uk (Tom Bugs)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 20:23:18 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
In-Reply-To: <CAPR-mM9NmumNoXNn+wpLN9fPEMta8_WZ0FFdaUhJKrAD5oJWvg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20151121101705.3a027d564b495c443912516e20da7489.44d606950a.wbe@email15.secureserver.net>
 <5650BA50.5030900@mnet-online.de>
 <CAPR-mM9NmumNoXNn+wpLN9fPEMta8_WZ0FFdaUhJKrAD5oJWvg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5650D2B6.3090309@bugbrand.co.uk>

I defer thanks onwards to someone at the MW forum!
Very good point on the Personal Payment - I got charged 1% too, though 
sounds like US people are getting charged 0% - ie. Personal Payment is 
best all round
(as long as PP don't kick up a fuss - they shouted at me several times 
when customers paid with personal payments)
Tom

On 21/11/2015 19:00, matrix wrote:
> Thanks for the Paypal tip goes to Tom Bugs.  It is a huge thanks for 
> those of us that have the funds available there, so thanks again Tom!
>
> On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Florian Anwander 
> <fanwander at mnet-online.de <mailto:fanwander at mnet-online.de>> wrote:
>
>     On AH matrix from tmatrixsynth.com <http://tmatrixsynth.com> gave
>     the hint, to donate directly to his paypal account
>     http://www.matrixsynth.com/2015/11/ray-wilson-of-music-from-outer-space.html
>     Do it as personal payment. You will have to pay one percent of the
>     amount.
>
>     Done too.
>
>     Florian
>
>     On 21.11.15 18:17 , info at synthcube.com <mailto:info at synthcube.com>
>     wrote:
>>     we donated as well and passed along the link via facebook et al.
>>     best wished for ray and family.
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Synth-diy mailing list
>     Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl <mailto:Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl>
>     http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
>
>
> -- 
>
> cheers,
> matrix
> http://www.matrixsynth.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

-- 
BugBrand LTD
UK company No. 07199808
VAT No. GB 988 2629 57
1 Ninetree Hill
BRISTOL BS1 3SB
United Kingdom
www.bugbrand.co.uk

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151121/f487d1b7/attachment.htm>

From timr at circuitabbey.com  Sat Nov 21 21:29:58 2015
From: timr at circuitabbey.com (Tim Ressel)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 12:29:58 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
In-Reply-To: <CAP92RBVLoDeACOLhxOmnDpdpfxLd-StjkAjmr3Xgxv2RC6xizQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com> <5650572D.7080904@schmitzbits.de>
 <96963A6A-E941-468E-B058-1DB257F9F63E@sonic.net>
 <CAP92RBVLoDeACOLhxOmnDpdpfxLd-StjkAjmr3Xgxv2RC6xizQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5650D446.8040800@circuitabbey.com>

Thanks for all the great ideas. I have +/- 5V available, and there is no 
precision requirements.

I am going to look into the 4053 idea.


--tr

On 11/21/2015 7:28 AM, Mattias Rickardsson wrote:
>
> It depends a bit, we're all waiting to hear what supply voltages are 
> available. :-)
>
> /mr
>
> Den 21 nov. 2015 1:02 em skrev "Dave Manley" <dlmanley at sonic.net 
> <mailto:dlmanley at sonic.net>>:
>
>
>
>     On November 21, 2015 3:36:13 AM PST, "Ren? Schmitz"
>     <synth at schmitzbits.de <mailto:synth at schmitzbits.de>> wrote:
>     >Am 21.11.2015 um 01:51 schrieb Tim Ressel:
>     >> Hi y'all,
>     >>
>     >> I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing
>     >+/-5V. I
>     >> can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?
>     >>
>     >> Thanks!
>     >>
>     >A 4053 can be powered from +-5V (Vcc=5V, Vee=-5V, GND=0V) and does
>     >still
>     >accept 0-5V input. Then tie +5 and -5 to the switch inputs.
>     >Gives you three channels in one package. You can even do inversion by
>     >swapping the connections on the switch.
>     >
>     >Best,
>     >  Ren?
>
>     Most clevererer answer so far!
>
>     -Dave
>     _______________________________________________
>     Synth-diy mailing list
>     Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl <mailto:Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl>
>     http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

-- 
--Tim Ressel
Circuit Abbey
timr at circuitabbey.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151121/8eb85564/attachment.htm>

From indigoid at oldcorollas.org  Sat Nov 21 22:12:05 2015
From: indigoid at oldcorollas.org (john slee)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 08:12:05 +1100
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC> <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
Message-ID: <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>

Why not note the validation status in the Eagle part itself, whether in the
description, attributes, or whatever. This would be particularly
appropriate if you keep all your libraries etc in some sort of revision
control system a la git[hub]

John

On 21 November 2015 at 11:04, Tim Ressel <timr at circuitabbey.com> wrote:

> Yeah, same here. I also do things like widen the SMT pads on some parts to
> make it easier to hand solder.
>
> I like the bit about having a spreadsheet of known good library parts. I
> believe Sparkfun does this.
>
> --TimR
>
>
> On 11/20/2015 3:12 PM, Richie Burnett wrote:
>
>> Thanks everyone for the suggestions.  I've kind of ended up building my
>> own libraries on a per project basis now anyway, so I'll just mod the
>> footprints to put a silkscreen dot nearby to mark pin one of the SOIC
>> devices.
>>
>> As Neil and Brian have said, if your previous board comes back perfect
>> from fab/assembly, then all of those footprints are then "approved".  I
>> like that way of working, even though I still check all my artworks in
>> obsessive detail first using GC-prevue, and laser-print life-size paper
>> boards!
>>
>> -Richie,
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Neil Johnson
>> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 9:17 PM
>> To: Richie Burnett
>> Cc: synth-diy
>> Subject: Re: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
>>
>>
>> Hi Richie,
>>
>> This is one of the reasons why I never use the libraries provided with
>> CAD tools.  The quality is just so varied, rarely consistent, and full of
>> unknown bugs.  At least if I fab a board with a mistake in a component I
>> have created I have only myself to blame!  And quite honestly by the time
>> I've thoroughly checked a vendor library for correctness I might as well
>> have made it myself.
>>
>> I separately maintain a catalogue of custom part numbers in a spreadsheet
>> (one sheet for each component type), and when I have fabbed a board with a
>> new footprint and tested it I then mark that entry in bold so I know it
>> works.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Neil
>> --
>> http://www.njohnson.co.uk
>>
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2014.0.4842 / Virus Database: 4447/11035 - Release Date: 11/20/15
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>
>>
> --
> --Tim Ressel
> Circuit Abbey
> timr at circuitabbey.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151122/67ae0b80/attachment.htm>

From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Sat Nov 21 22:14:50 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 13:14:50 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
In-Reply-To: <89684239.2870227.1448114309583.JavaMail.open-xchange@omgreatgod.store>
References: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com>
 <BDCAF262-9E31-46F8-8B5B-448FC8103C4D@audiobanshee.com>
 <89684239.2870227.1448114309583.JavaMail.open-xchange@omgreatgod.store>
Message-ID: <0740B646-9B30-4A97-AADB-D21E3D7A1757@audiobanshee.com>


On Nov 21, 2015, at 5:58 AM, Simon Brouwer <simon at brousant.nl> wrote:
> Opamps in general are not the best choice for this unless you select a rail to rail output type (assuming you have -5 and +5 rails).
Agreed, with a couple of caveats regarding my original response.

First, I assumed that +/-12V is available (Doepfer modular), so +/-5V would not be an issue at all for a standard op-amps.

Second, I somehow missed that Tim only wants to output +5V and -5V exactly, and not anything in between! For binary output, an op-amp is a bit overkill, although it will provide the proper voltage to just about any load.


> I would use LM339 which is a low cost quad comparator. It has open collector output though, so you need pull-up resistors.
Good suggestion, but the pull-up voltage will sag when high currents are sinked by the load. When the output is -5V, though, the voltage will be consistent under any normal load.

I tried to come up with a simple, two-transister FET solution with a complementary pair of depletion-mode PFET and NFET transistors, but it looks like the task requires three or more transistors to work.

Brian

> Best regards
> Simon
>  
> 
> > Op 21 november 2015 om 2:49 schreef rsdio at audiobanshee.com:
> > Doing it with op amps IS the clever way. But I think that pulling it off with a single op-amp, as opposed to a dual, is the cleverer way. I recently worked this out for +/-10V, but I can't find the paper where I scribbled down the notes.
> > 
> > There's a DAC data sheet out there with the 0-5V to +/-5V op-amp circuit in it as an example of interfacing their DAC. Forgot who that was, but sounds like you already have that circuit.
> > 
> > Brian
> > 
> > 
> > On Nov 20, 2015, at 4:51 PM, Tim Ressel <timr at circuitabbey.com> wrote:
> > > Hi y'all,
> > > 
> > > I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing +/-5V. I can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?


From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Sat Nov 21 22:22:38 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 13:22:38 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC> <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <857CB523-0709-4C3B-A7CC-CA4620481E6D@audiobanshee.com>

That's a great suggestion, John. I use revision control for my Eagle library, and make comments about each checking, but it's difficult to look at a part and know it's history. Also, some of my custom parts have not been used yet, so presence in my private library is no guarantee that it's been vetted.

With status in the description, it's possible to note which projects have used a part. I just needed to change to larger SMD pads for a diode, and couldn't remember where it had been used.

Of course, there's no way I'll have time to list every project that a given part has been used, but at least the first success can be noted as a reference.

Fortunately, Eagle will not change the footprint in an existing layout if you change it in the library. The update only occurs when you specifically ask for it. Unfortunately, if you put all parts in the same library, then updating one will update them all. Tools like Cadence Allegro allow the update on a part-by-part basis, but the rest of their system is not as easy to use as Eagle.

Brian


On Nov 21, 2015, at 1:12 PM, john slee <indigoid at oldcorollas.org> wrote:
> Why not note the validation status in the Eagle part itself, whether in the description, attributes, or whatever. This would be particularly appropriate if you keep all your libraries etc in some sort of revision control system a la git[hub]
> 
> On 21 November 2015 at 11:04, Tim Ressel <timr at circuitabbey.com> wrote:
>> Yeah, same here. I also do things like widen the SMT pads on some parts to make it easier to hand solder.
>> 
>> I like the bit about having a spreadsheet of known good library parts. I believe Sparkfun does this.
>> 
>> On 11/20/2015 3:12 PM, Richie Burnett wrote:
>>> Thanks everyone for the suggestions.  I've kind of ended up building my own libraries on a per project basis now anyway, so I'll just mod the footprints to put a silkscreen dot nearby to mark pin one of the SOIC devices.
>>> 
>>> As Neil and Brian have said, if your previous board comes back perfect from fab/assembly, then all of those footprints are then "approved".  I like that way of working, even though I still check all my artworks in obsessive detail first using GC-prevue, and laser-print life-size paper boards!
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message----- From: Neil Johnson
>>> Hi Richie,
>>> 
>>> This is one of the reasons why I never use the libraries provided with CAD tools.  The quality is just so varied, rarely consistent, and full of unknown bugs.  At least if I fab a board with a mistake in a component I have created I have only myself to blame!  And quite honestly by the time I've thoroughly checked a vendor library for correctness I might as well have made it myself.
>>> 
>>> I separately maintain a catalogue of custom part numbers in a spreadsheet (one sheet for each component type), and when I have fabbed a board with a new footprint and tested it I then mark that entry in bold so I know it works.



From indigoid at oldcorollas.org  Sun Nov 22 00:34:06 2015
From: indigoid at oldcorollas.org (john slee)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 10:34:06 +1100
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <390B5606-A6EF-4980-BD32-8CC4F8642EE8@audiobanshee.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC> <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <390B5606-A6EF-4980-BD32-8CC4F8642EE8@audiobanshee.com>
Message-ID: <CAK+JDy0u3psD-=yf4ZEQQ4OoqFPkwk5ZO-+1R_A0AmPj6y-Xzg@mail.gmail.com>

On 22 November 2015 at 08:21, Brian Willoughby <brianw at audiobanshee.com>
wrote:

> With status in the description, it's possible to note which projects have
> used a part. I just needed to change to larger SMD pads for a diode, and
> couldn't remember where it had been used.
>

This gave me an idea, and it turns out that someone already wrote a Ruby
gem for reading Eagle schematics files. I now have the beginnings of a
little Ruby commandline tool "eaglegrep" that combines all the parts used
in all specified schematics, and optionally searches on the part name:

$ bundle exec exe/eaglegrep partsgrep BC..7
~/Documents/eagle/jslee/cgs/*/*.sch
transistor-npn/BC547*/
transistor-pnp/BC557/

The description is there in the schematic file too but it requires more
connecting of dots because each part references a device set and technology

I'll keep bashing at it and make this available on Github when it's a
little more useful. I like the idea of running an audit tool across all of
my projects at once, rather than interactively in Eagle, one at a time

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151122/445ba74b/attachment.htm>

From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Sun Nov 22 00:55:44 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 15:55:44 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC> <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <381F5134-1178-416C-9A6C-0F449E57A7CD@audiobanshee.com>

That's a great suggestion, John. I use revision control for my Eagle library, and make comments about each checking, but it's difficult to look at a part and know it's history. Also, some of my custom parts have not been used yet, so presence in my private library is no guarantee that it's been vetted.

With status in the description, it's possible to note which projects have used a part. I just needed to change to larger SMD pads for a diode, and couldn't remember where it had been used.

Of course, there's no way I'll have time to list every project that a given part has been used, but at least the first success can be noted as a reference.

Fortunately, Eagle will not change the footprint in an existing layout if you change it in the library. The update only occurs when you specifically ask for it. Unfortunately, if you put all parts in the same library, then updating one will update them all. Tools like Cadence Allegro allow the update on a part-by-part basis, but the rest of their system is not as easy to use as Eagle.

Brian


On Nov 21, 2015, at 1:12 PM, john slee <indigoid at oldcorollas.org> wrote:
> Why not note the validation status in the Eagle part itself, whether in the description, attributes, or whatever. This would be particularly appropriate if you keep all your libraries etc in some sort of revision control system a la git[hub]
> 
> On 21 November 2015 at 11:04, Tim Ressel <timr at circuitabbey.com> wrote:
>> Yeah, same here. I also do things like widen the SMT pads on some parts to make it easier to hand solder.
>> 
>> I like the bit about having a spreadsheet of known good library parts. I believe Sparkfun does this.
>> 
>> On 11/20/2015 3:12 PM, Richie Burnett wrote:
>>> Thanks everyone for the suggestions.  I've kind of ended up building my own libraries on a per project basis now anyway, so I'll just mod the footprints to put a silkscreen dot nearby to mark pin one of the SOIC devices.
>>> 
>>> As Neil and Brian have said, if your previous board comes back perfect from fab/assembly, then all of those footprints are then "approved".  I like that way of working, even though I still check all my artworks in obsessive detail first using GC-prevue, and laser-print life-size paper boards!
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message----- From: Neil Johnson
>>> Hi Richie,
>>> 
>>> This is one of the reasons why I never use the libraries provided with CAD tools.  The quality is just so varied, rarely consistent, and full of unknown bugs.  At least if I fab a board with a mistake in a component I have created I have only myself to blame!  And quite honestly by the time I've thoroughly checked a vendor library for correctness I might as well have made it myself.
>>> 
>>> I separately maintain a catalogue of custom part numbers in a spreadsheet (one sheet for each component type), and when I have fabbed a board with a new footprint and tested it I then mark that entry in bold so I know it works.



From indigoid at oldcorollas.org  Sun Nov 22 03:28:18 2015
From: indigoid at oldcorollas.org (john slee)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 13:28:18 +1100
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <381F5134-1178-416C-9A6C-0F449E57A7CD@audiobanshee.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC> <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <381F5134-1178-416C-9A6C-0F449E57A7CD@audiobanshee.com>
Message-ID: <CAK+JDy1uBrikXFi_qwX4Cc6xy6JVS+bRQ_zfmTHL7caLgp1+5Q@mail.gmail.com>

On 22 November 2015 at 10:55, <rsdio at audiobanshee.com> wrote:

> With status in the description, it's possible to note which projects have
> used a part. I just needed to change to larger SMD pads for a diode, and
> couldn't remember where it had been used.
>

Unfortunately Eagle doesn't seem to store a description per device, only
per set of devices, and also for the library containing it.

Looking at what it does store in the schematic file per device, I think one
possibility might be to add an APPROVED attribute in the Technology section
(where some of the CADSoft-supplied libraries store Farnell etc part
numbers and other assorted metadata) when you've approved a device, and
then search on that. This would be quite easy to then write an audit tool
for. I've already extended the aforementioned Ruby gem to parse that part
of the schematic (and various other parts).

Alternatively, you can add a description to a package. If you're reusing
the same package for a variety of parts (eg. the same 0805 footprint for C
and R) this might make sense. But it's not quite as sane for parts where
you may reuse the same package for many devices but the pinout *also* needs
to be approved, eg. TO-92 or ICs.

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151122/3e6472d6/attachment.htm>

From indigoid at oldcorollas.org  Sun Nov 22 08:14:46 2015
From: indigoid at oldcorollas.org (john slee)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 18:14:46 +1100
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <F275AF83-6371-49FC-B564-57541451266D@audiobanshee.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC> <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <390B5606-A6EF-4980-BD32-8CC4F8642EE8@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy0u3psD-=yf4ZEQQ4OoqFPkwk5ZO-+1R_A0AmPj6y-Xzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <F275AF83-6371-49FC-B564-57541451266D@audiobanshee.com>
Message-ID: <CAK+JDy03+NMMq3hUVo5HAE6EY3Uf8TpXUjEeYNrmjG0bK_QWKQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On 22 November 2015 at 10:55, Brian Willoughby <brianw at audiobanshee.com>
wrote:

> Very nice, John. This is appreciated, so let us know when you've made it
> available. I assume it will run for folks who are not Ruby developers.
>

https://github.com/indigoid/eaglegrep

You'll need Ruby installed, and installation is... not great right now...
but it does work. It's somewhat documented, even.

Also this only works for XML schematics as emitted by modern Eagle. I'm
afraid I don't know what the cutoff version is. I'm using 7.4.0. I noticed
along the way that Olivier Gillet's schematics/boards are in the old binary
format.


> I often use regular 'grep' to search all available Eagle libraries for a
> package that's not yet in my own library. It's not very sophisticated,
> because all it does it point to libraries that I need to open and then
> manually search for packages, but it does save some time.
>

I was starting to wonder about libraries. Haven't gone there yet but as the
modern ones are XML... One of the things that seems to be lacking in Eagle
as-is (unless I'm missing something?) is a way to extract parts from
schematics, into new libraries. No promises but I may look at that too


> I imagine that your command-line tool will useful as well for managing and
> coordinating many projects.
>

I hope so. It's already helping me with a few things. Feedback/constructive
abuse/etc welcome :-)

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151122/bbd44fb4/attachment.htm>

From jason at tribbeck.com  Sun Nov 22 09:26:30 2015
From: jason at tribbeck.com (Jason Tribbeck)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 08:26:30 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <CAK+JDy03+NMMq3hUVo5HAE6EY3Uf8TpXUjEeYNrmjG0bK_QWKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC> <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <390B5606-A6EF-4980-BD32-8CC4F8642EE8@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy0u3psD-=yf4ZEQQ4OoqFPkwk5ZO-+1R_A0AmPj6y-Xzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <F275AF83-6371-49FC-B564-57541451266D@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy03+NMMq3hUVo5HAE6EY3Uf8TpXUjEeYNrmjG0bK_QWKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAL3=FbbV5cRbFKSHYHaT-ZBzTUvwh-5LmmRfC=LdH_eQxC8vvg@mail.gmail.com>

Eagle 6.0 was the first version with XML as the back-end native format -
although I can't say when the built-in libraries were migrated (and you've
got the third-party contribution libraries as well - some of these may
never be upgraded [it prevents you from using it on earlier versions]).

I've written parsers for both formats - obviously the XML one is much
easier than the binary format. Although I've only done old format libraries
- I think the schematic and board files are going to be the same format.

Going back to the original question/problem, since I etch my own boards, I
always mark pin 1 with a small square of copper. This should be visible
through the silk screen if I was getting the boards properly made.

On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 at 07:17 john slee <indigoid at oldcorollas.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 22 November 2015 at 10:55, Brian Willoughby <brianw at audiobanshee.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Very nice, John. This is appreciated, so let us know when you've made it
>> available. I assume it will run for folks who are not Ruby developers.
>>
>
> https://github.com/indigoid/eaglegrep
>
> You'll need Ruby installed, and installation is... not great right now...
> but it does work. It's somewhat documented, even.
>
> Also this only works for XML schematics as emitted by modern Eagle. I'm
> afraid I don't know what the cutoff version is. I'm using 7.4.0. I noticed
> along the way that Olivier Gillet's schematics/boards are in the old binary
> format.
>
>
>> I often use regular 'grep' to search all available Eagle libraries for a
>> package that's not yet in my own library. It's not very sophisticated,
>> because all it does it point to libraries that I need to open and then
>> manually search for packages, but it does save some time.
>>
>
> I was starting to wonder about libraries. Haven't gone there yet but as
> the modern ones are XML... One of the things that seems to be lacking in
> Eagle as-is (unless I'm missing something?) is a way to extract parts from
> schematics, into new libraries. No promises but I may look at that too
>
>
>> I imagine that your command-line tool will useful as well for managing
>> and coordinating many projects.
>>
>
> I hope so. It's already helping me with a few things.
> Feedback/constructive abuse/etc welcome :-)
>
> John
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151122/f61fd8ce/attachment.htm>

From djthomaswhite at gmail.com  Sun Nov 22 10:51:39 2015
From: djthomaswhite at gmail.com (Thomas White)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 01:51:39 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] For Sale: Modular, FX Pedals and NI Maschine
Message-ID: <F90712E1-A6C5-4FF7-8752-93AC907C84A6@gmail.com>

MOTM format Blacet/Wiard Miniwave: 2U panel with extra sound eprom - $400

Music From OuterSpace Stereo Panner with Leslie speed button in 5U MOTM panel - $150

EFM (electronics For Music) Diode Ladder Lowpass Filter in 5U MOTM Panel - $150

Oakley Sound Multimix 3:1 mixer with reversing attenuators and summing mode in 5U MOTM Panel - $150

MF-101 Moogerfooger Lowpass Filter Pedal with power supply - $200

Native Instruments Maschine 2 (Black) with original 1.0 software and Sound Packs (8 or so). Will transfer all licenses to buyer per NI policies. Like new with box.  - $400

Akai ME30PII midi routing bay 4in, 8 out rack unit. $100

Korg Volca Keys poly synth with power supply, output speaker doesn't work, otherwise like new - $100

Korg Monotribe with power supply, $150

Build Your Own Clone Analog Delay Pedal in purple sparkle housing. No knob or jack labeling but built and ready to go. Over 1000ms of analog delay. No power supply included. $120

Behringer headphone distribution rack, virtualizer or MX1602a tabletop mixer $75 each

All prices without shipping. I can ship whatever method you are willing to pay for. Local pickup in Southern California possible. Gotta slim my rig down. Hoping to find a home for these items. Thanks for checking my post. 

Thomas White
djthomaswhite at yahoo, hotmail or gmail.com's
Natural Rhythm Music
www.naturalrhythmmusic.com

From walkershurlds at gmail.com  Sun Nov 22 18:09:33 2015
From: walkershurlds at gmail.com (Walker Shurlds)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 11:09:33 -0600
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
In-Reply-To: <0740B646-9B30-4A97-AADB-D21E3D7A1757@audiobanshee.com>
References: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com>
 <BDCAF262-9E31-46F8-8B5B-448FC8103C4D@audiobanshee.com>
 <89684239.2870227.1448114309583.JavaMail.open-xchange@omgreatgod.store>
 <0740B646-9B30-4A97-AADB-D21E3D7A1757@audiobanshee.com>
Message-ID: <CAL=-CDpCoqJ65HidOKmK3WPVXC2PL6S5WL4W14KNKR8p5zdFbA@mail.gmail.com>

Apologies if someone already covered this, but can't this just be done with
a single common-emitter bjt? (or two, if we need it to not be inverted.)

This works in spice: https://flic.kr/p/ANP4Xg

But something tells me there are some major limitations to this strategy.

-Walker


> > On Nov 20, 2015, at 4:51 PM, Tim Ressel <timr at circuitabbey.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi y'all,
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing
> +/-5V. I can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151122/20a3954c/attachment.htm>

From timr at circuitabbey.com  Sun Nov 22 21:16:42 2015
From: timr at circuitabbey.com (Tim Ressel)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 12:16:42 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
In-Reply-To: <0740B646-9B30-4A97-AADB-D21E3D7A1757@audiobanshee.com>
References: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com>
 <BDCAF262-9E31-46F8-8B5B-448FC8103C4D@audiobanshee.com>
 <89684239.2870227.1448114309583.JavaMail.open-xchange@omgreatgod.store>
 <0740B646-9B30-4A97-AADB-D21E3D7A1757@audiobanshee.com>
Message-ID: <565222AA.6010409@circuitabbey.com>

So here I am laying out the 4053 solution when it occurs to me that I 
can run all the logic on +/- 5V. I have LM311 comparators turning analog 
into digital but those can do +/- 5V outputs as well. That should give 
me my bipolar outputs without having to massage the levels.

Or am I missing something?

--TimR

On 11/21/2015 1:14 PM, rsdio at audiobanshee.com wrote:
> On Nov 21, 2015, at 5:58 AM, Simon Brouwer <simon at brousant.nl> wrote:
>> Opamps in general are not the best choice for this unless you select a rail to rail output type (assuming you have -5 and +5 rails).
> Agreed, with a couple of caveats regarding my original response.
>
> First, I assumed that +/-12V is available (Doepfer modular), so +/-5V would not be an issue at all for a standard op-amps.
>
> Second, I somehow missed that Tim only wants to output +5V and -5V exactly, and not anything in between! For binary output, an op-amp is a bit overkill, although it will provide the proper voltage to just about any load.
>
>
>> I would use LM339 which is a low cost quad comparator. It has open collector output though, so you need pull-up resistors.
> Good suggestion, but the pull-up voltage will sag when high currents are sinked by the load. When the output is -5V, though, the voltage will be consistent under any normal load.
>
> I tried to come up with a simple, two-transister FET solution with a complementary pair of depletion-mode PFET and NFET transistors, but it looks like the task requires three or more transistors to work.
>
> Brian
>
>> Best regards
>> Simon
>>   
>>
>>> Op 21 november 2015 om 2:49 schreef rsdio at audiobanshee.com:
>>> Doing it with op amps IS the clever way. But I think that pulling it off with a single op-amp, as opposed to a dual, is the cleverer way. I recently worked this out for +/-10V, but I can't find the paper where I scribbled down the notes.
>>>
>>> There's a DAC data sheet out there with the 0-5V to +/-5V op-amp circuit in it as an example of interfacing their DAC. Forgot who that was, but sounds like you already have that circuit.
>>>
>>> Brian
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 20, 2015, at 4:51 PM, Tim Ressel <timr at circuitabbey.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi y'all,
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing +/-5V. I can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>

-- 
--Tim Ressel
Circuit Abbey
timr at circuitabbey.com



From modular at go2.pl  Sun Nov 22 21:21:43 2015
From: modular at go2.pl (=?UTF-8?Q?Roman?=)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 21:21:43 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] =?utf-8?q?Logic_to_+/-5V_conversion?=
In-Reply-To: <CAL=-CDpCoqJ65HidOKmK3WPVXC2PL6S5WL4W14KNKR8p5zdFbA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com>
 <89684239.2870227.1448114309583.JavaMail.open-xchange@omgreatgod.store>
 <0740B646-9B30-4A97-AADB-D21E3D7A1757@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAL=-CDpCoqJ65HidOKmK3WPVXC2PL6S5WL4W14KNKR8p5zdFbA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <679e9c9.c32e848.565223d7.ef418@go2.pl>

This can be done with 2 transistors, one NPN and one PNP. Or even just one PNP if your driving 0/5V source is open drain.
This is best done using dual biased transistors, like PUMD48 in SOT363 case, so it only needs one extra resistor on output pull-down. Still this is real-estate comparable with opamp soution (in SC70-5) and 2 resistors, while opemp solution is more power efficient, and what's most adorable - push-pull output.
Nevertheless, the 4053 idea, despite needing more space, is brilliant IMHO.
Roman
Dnia 22 listopada 2015 18:09 Walker Shurlds &lt;walkershurlds at gmail.com&gt; napisa?(a):
Apologies if someone already covered this, but can't this just be done with a single common-emitter bjt? (or two, if we need it to not be inverted.)
This works in spice: https://flic.kr/p/ANP4Xg
But something tells me there are some major limitations to this strategy.
-Walker
&gt; &gt; On Nov 20, 2015, at 4:51 PM, Tim Ressel &lt;timr at circuitabbey.com&gt; wrote:
&gt; &gt; &gt; Hi y'all,
&gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing +/-5V. I can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151122/1fc4c998/attachment.htm>

From modular at go2.pl  Sun Nov 22 21:28:29 2015
From: modular at go2.pl (=?UTF-8?Q?Roman?=)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 21:28:29 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] =?utf-8?q?Ray_Wilson_Help?=
In-Reply-To: <5650BA50.5030900@mnet-online.de>
References: <20151121101705.3a027d564b495c443912516e20da7489.44d606950a.wbe@email15.secureserver.net>
 <5650BA50.5030900@mnet-online.de>
Message-ID: <2274f6e6.235bb814.5652256d.bc84@go2.pl>

Right after donating I thought why his daughter (isn't she running the campaign?) hasn't set up a bunch of products in their store for various amounts to do the same thing without gofundme fees. It's all already there, no hassle. But then I thought maybe Ray was against the idea, as the description says something about it, or maybe if there are so many payments to his account directly, this would be treated like regular income and IRS will take their share. I don't know, but maybe gofundme stuff is differently taxed?
Roman
Dnia 21 listopada 2015 19:39 Florian Anwander &lt;fanwander at mnet-online.de&gt; napisa?(a):
On AH matrix from tmatrixsynth.com gave the hint, to donate directly to his paypal account
http://www.matrixsynth.com/2015/11/ray-wilson-of-music-from-outer-space.html
Do it as personal payment. You will have to pay one percent of the amount.
Done too.
Florian
On 21.11.15 18:17 , info at synthcube.com wrote:we donated as well and passed along the link via facebook et al.best wished for ray and family.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151122/4f37df69/attachment.htm>

From w.james.meagher at gmail.com  Sun Nov 22 21:35:17 2015
From: w.james.meagher at gmail.com (James Meagher)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 14:35:17 -0600
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
In-Reply-To: <2274f6e6.235bb814.5652256d.bc84@go2.pl>
References: <20151121101705.3a027d564b495c443912516e20da7489.44d606950a.wbe@email15.secureserver.net>
 <5650BA50.5030900@mnet-online.de>
 <2274f6e6.235bb814.5652256d.bc84@go2.pl>
Message-ID: <CAKu63YiGke=Sx9dVnGeskuJOYk607FM-Mdmg3eG7tsnwtD3kzg@mail.gmail.com>

Hmmm . . . interesting point. I just sent a Friends and Family PayPal
donation because GoFundMe only accept credit cards it seems.

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Roman <modular at go2.pl> wrote:

> Right after donating I thought why his daughter (isn't she running the
> campaign?) hasn't set up a bunch of products in their store for various
> amounts to do the same thing without gofundme fees. It's all already there,
> no hassle. But then I thought maybe Ray was against the idea, as the
> description says something about it, or maybe if there are so many payments
> to his account directly, this would be treated like regular income and IRS
> will take their share. I don't know, but maybe gofundme stuff is
> differently taxed?
>
> Roman
>
>
>
> Dnia 21 listopada 2015 19:39 Florian Anwander <fanwander at mnet-online.de>
> napisa?(a):
>
> On AH matrix from tmatrixsynth.com gave the hint, to donate directly to
> his paypal account
>
> http://www.matrixsynth.com/2015/11/ray-wilson-of-music-from-outer-space.html
> Do it as personal payment. You will have to pay one percent of the amount.
>
> Done too.
>
> Florian
>
> On 21.11.15 18:17 , info at synthcube.com wrote:
>
> we donated as well and passed along the link via facebook et al.
> best wished for ray and family.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>


-- 
C'est La Guerre Moving Pictures Inc.
(204) 918 9317
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151122/1d1c62e7/attachment.htm>

From admin at bugbrand.co.uk  Sun Nov 22 21:41:53 2015
From: admin at bugbrand.co.uk (Tom Bugs)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 20:41:53 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
In-Reply-To: <CAKu63YiGke=Sx9dVnGeskuJOYk607FM-Mdmg3eG7tsnwtD3kzg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20151121101705.3a027d564b495c443912516e20da7489.44d606950a.wbe@email15.secureserver.net>
 <5650BA50.5030900@mnet-online.de> <2274f6e6.235bb814.5652256d.bc84@go2.pl>
 <CAKu63YiGke=Sx9dVnGeskuJOYk607FM-Mdmg3eG7tsnwtD3kzg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <56522891.80907@bugbrand.co.uk>

GoFundMe are pretty hands-off about it:
"Most donations on GoFundMe are personal gifts between family & friends 
and not usually tax deductible. Only donations made to a 'Certified 
Charity <http://www.gofundme.com/charity-donations>' campaign may be 
eligible for tax deductions. We recommend you consult with a tax 
professional about your specific situation"
I don't see that as different from Personal Payment via Paypal 
really...?!...

On 22/11/2015 20:35, James Meagher wrote:
> Hmmm . . . interesting point. I just sent a Friends and Family PayPal 
> donation because GoFundMe only accept credit cards it seems.
>
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Roman <modular at go2.pl 
> <mailto:modular at go2.pl>> wrote:
>
>     Right after donating I thought why his daughter (isn't she running
>     the campaign?) hasn't set up a bunch of products in their store
>     for various amounts to do the same thing without gofundme fees.
>     It's all already there, no hassle. But then I thought maybe Ray
>     was against the idea, as the description says something about it,
>     or maybe if there are so many payments to his account directly,
>     this would be treated like regular income and IRS will take their
>     share. I don't know, but maybe gofundme stuff is differently taxed?
>
>     Roman
>
>
>
>     Dnia 21 listopada 2015 19:39 Florian Anwander
>     <fanwander at mnet-online.de <mailto:fanwander at mnet-online.de>>
>     napisa?(a):
>
>         On AH matrix from tmatrixsynth.com <http://tmatrixsynth.com>
>         gave the hint, to donate directly to his paypal account
>         http://www.matrixsynth.com/2015/11/ray-wilson-of-music-from-outer-space.html
>         Do it as personal payment. You will have to pay one percent of
>         the amount.
>
>         Done too.
>
>         Florian
>
>         On 21.11.15 18:17 , info at synthcube.com
>         <mailto:info at synthcube.com> wrote:
>
>             we donated as well and passed along the link via facebook
>             et al.
>             best wished for ray and family.
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Synth-diy mailing list
>     Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl <mailto:Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl>
>     http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> C'est La Guerre Moving Pictures Inc.
> (204) 918 9317
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

-- 
BugBrand LTD
UK company No. 07199808
VAT No. GB 988 2629 57
1 Ninetree Hill
BRISTOL BS1 3SB
United Kingdom
www.bugbrand.co.uk

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151122/7994c791/attachment.htm>

From tom at electricdruid.net  Sun Nov 22 21:45:48 2015
From: tom at electricdruid.net (Tom Wiltshire)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 20:45:48 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
In-Reply-To: <565222AA.6010409@circuitabbey.com>
References: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com>
 <BDCAF262-9E31-46F8-8B5B-448FC8103C4D@audiobanshee.com>
 <89684239.2870227.1448114309583.JavaMail.open-xchange@omgreatgod.store>
 <0740B646-9B30-4A97-AADB-D21E3D7A1757@audiobanshee.com>
 <565222AA.6010409@circuitabbey.com>
Message-ID: <91AFF83B-793C-46D8-9ABF-019E7AC94E38@electricdruid.net>

Nope, I don't think you're missing anything. 311 comparator would be a reasonable solution, and if you've got one in the circuit already, that makes life simple.

On 22 Nov 2015, at 20:16, Tim Ressel <timr at circuitabbey.com> wrote:

> So here I am laying out the 4053 solution when it occurs to me that I can run all the logic on +/- 5V. I have LM311 comparators turning analog into digital but those can do +/- 5V outputs as well. That should give me my bipolar outputs without having to massage the levels.
> 
> Or am I missing something?
> 
> --TimR
> 
> On 11/21/2015 1:14 PM, rsdio at audiobanshee.com wrote:
>> On Nov 21, 2015, at 5:58 AM, Simon Brouwer <simon at brousant.nl> wrote:
>>> Opamps in general are not the best choice for this unless you select a rail to rail output type (assuming you have -5 and +5 rails).
>> Agreed, with a couple of caveats regarding my original response.
>> 
>> First, I assumed that +/-12V is available (Doepfer modular), so +/-5V would not be an issue at all for a standard op-amps.
>> 
>> Second, I somehow missed that Tim only wants to output +5V and -5V exactly, and not anything in between! For binary output, an op-amp is a bit overkill, although it will provide the proper voltage to just about any load.
>> 
>> 
>>> I would use LM339 which is a low cost quad comparator. It has open collector output though, so you need pull-up resistors.
>> Good suggestion, but the pull-up voltage will sag when high currents are sinked by the load. When the output is -5V, though, the voltage will be consistent under any normal load.
>> 
>> I tried to come up with a simple, two-transister FET solution with a complementary pair of depletion-mode PFET and NFET transistors, but it looks like the task requires three or more transistors to work.
>> 
>> Brian
>> 
>>> Best regards
>>> Simon
>>>  
>>>> Op 21 november 2015 om 2:49 schreef rsdio at audiobanshee.com:
>>>> Doing it with op amps IS the clever way. But I think that pulling it off with a single op-amp, as opposed to a dual, is the cleverer way. I recently worked this out for +/-10V, but I can't find the paper where I scribbled down the notes.
>>>> 
>>>> There's a DAC data sheet out there with the 0-5V to +/-5V op-amp circuit in it as an example of interfacing their DAC. Forgot who that was, but sounds like you already have that circuit.
>>>> 
>>>> Brian
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Nov 20, 2015, at 4:51 PM, Tim Ressel <timr at circuitabbey.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi y'all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing +/-5V. I can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>> 
> 
> -- 
> --Tim Ressel
> Circuit Abbey
> timr at circuitabbey.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



From jason at redfish.net  Sun Nov 22 21:45:54 2015
From: jason at redfish.net (Jason Proctor)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 12:45:54 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
In-Reply-To: <56522891.80907@bugbrand.co.uk>
References: <20151121101705.3a027d564b495c443912516e20da7489.44d606950a.wbe@email15.secureserver.net>
 <5650BA50.5030900@mnet-online.de>
 <2274f6e6.235bb814.5652256d.bc84@go2.pl>
 <CAKu63YiGke=Sx9dVnGeskuJOYk607FM-Mdmg3eG7tsnwtD3kzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <56522891.80907@bugbrand.co.uk>
Message-ID: <CALQanAK7W=pmjALGpCwZzLankUud4=wpk0noMn9OfzaDSk2Yhw@mail.gmail.com>

the issue isn't so much tax as the fact that these organisations need to
take a small percentage to fund their operation - in the case of GoFundMe
it's 3%. personal payments via Paypal (at least within the same currency)
don't incur fees.

i wish i'd known about the Paypal option before donating. oh well.



On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Tom Bugs <admin at bugbrand.co.uk> wrote:

> GoFundMe are pretty hands-off about it:
> "Most donations on GoFundMe are personal gifts between family & friends
> and not usually tax deductible. Only donations made to a 'Certified
> Charity <http://www.gofundme.com/charity-donations>' campaign may be
> eligible for tax deductions. We recommend you consult with a tax
> professional about your specific situation"
> I don't see that as different from Personal Payment via Paypal
> really...?!...
>
>
> On 22/11/2015 20:35, James Meagher wrote:
>
> Hmmm . . . interesting point. I just sent a Friends and Family PayPal
> donation because GoFundMe only accept credit cards it seems.
>
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Roman <modular at go2.pl> wrote:
>
>> Right after donating I thought why his daughter (isn't she running the
>> campaign?) hasn't set up a bunch of products in their store for various
>> amounts to do the same thing without gofundme fees. It's all already there,
>> no hassle. But then I thought maybe Ray was against the idea, as the
>> description says something about it, or maybe if there are so many payments
>> to his account directly, this would be treated like regular income and IRS
>> will take their share. I don't know, but maybe gofundme stuff is
>> differently taxed?
>>
>> Roman
>>
>>
>>
>> Dnia 21 listopada 2015 19:39 Florian Anwander <
>> <fanwander at mnet-online.de>fanwander at mnet-online.de> napisa?(a):
>>
>> On AH matrix from tmatrixsynth.com gave the hint, to donate directly to
>> his paypal account
>>
>> http://www.matrixsynth.com/2015/11/ray-wilson-of-music-from-outer-space.html
>> Do it as personal payment. You will have to pay one percent of the amount.
>>
>> Done too.
>>
>> Florian
>>
>> On 21.11.15 18:17 , info at synthcube.com wrote:
>>
>> we donated as well and passed along the link via facebook et al.
>> best wished for ray and family.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> C'est La Guerre Moving Pictures Inc.
> (204) 918 9317
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing listSynth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nlhttp://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
> --
> BugBrand LTD
> UK company No. 07199808
> VAT No. GB 988 2629 57
> 1 Ninetree Hill
> BRISTOL BS1 3SB
> United Kingdomwww.bugbrand.co.uk
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151122/3e1cc3dc/attachment.htm>

From synthlab at nc.rr.com  Sun Nov 22 23:06:25 2015
From: synthlab at nc.rr.com (Robert Shanks)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 17:06:25 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
Message-ID: <067E1EA5-DB21-47D5-B1C2-E9426A857BFA@nc.rr.com>

Donation done.   

Wishing for Ray and family that you can beat this thing.  Thoughts and prayers.

Robert

From charlie at finitemonkeys.com  Sun Nov 22 23:26:38 2015
From: charlie at finitemonkeys.com (charlie wallace)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 14:26:38 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <CAK+JDy03+NMMq3hUVo5HAE6EY3Uf8TpXUjEeYNrmjG0bK_QWKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC>
 <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <390B5606-A6EF-4980-BD32-8CC4F8642EE8@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy0u3psD-=yf4ZEQQ4OoqFPkwk5ZO-+1R_A0AmPj6y-Xzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <F275AF83-6371-49FC-B564-57541451266D@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy03+NMMq3hUVo5HAE6EY3Uf8TpXUjEeYNrmjG0bK_QWKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH2ZmX=RcJrTDgK+V3aQmPx4Jd_XqxvxXMOWxVVO+yp834z4qg@mail.gmail.com>

> One of the things that seems to be lacking in Eagle
> as-is (unless I'm missing something?) is a way to extract parts from
> schematics, into new libraries. No promises but I may look at that too

exp-lbrs.ulp


From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Mon Nov 23 00:25:03 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 15:25:03 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <CAH2ZmX=RcJrTDgK+V3aQmPx4Jd_XqxvxXMOWxVVO+yp834z4qg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC> <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <390B5606-A6EF-4980-BD32-8CC4F8642EE8@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy0u3psD-=yf4ZEQQ4OoqFPkwk5ZO-+1R_A0AmPj6y-Xzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <F275AF83-6371-49FC-B564-57541451266D@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy03+NMMq3hUVo5HAE6EY3Uf8TpXUjEeYNrmjG0bK_QWKQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH2ZmX=RcJrTDgK+V3aQmPx4Jd_XqxvxXMOWxVVO+yp834z4qg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <31B44A3D-7570-4460-B9C8-B5F23ADDF52E@audiobanshee.com>


On Nov 22, 2015, at 2:26 PM, charlie wallace <charlie at finitemonkeys.com> wrote:
>> One of the things that seems to be lacking in Eagle
>> as-is (unless I'm missing something?) is a way to extract parts from
>> schematics, into new libraries. No promises but I may look at that too
> 
> exp-lbrs.ulp

Thanks, Charlie.

After reading that John's code only works with the new releases of Eagle as well as requiring the Ruby development environment, I was already starting to wonder whether there was a way to expand the support by writing something similar with an Eagle User Language Program or Script.

So far, I've used Eagle Scripts to aid in distinct rules for auto-layout of analog, power, and digital sections of my boards, but I haven't delved into the User Language Programming yet.

Brian



From neil.johnson71 at gmail.com  Mon Nov 23 00:28:15 2015
From: neil.johnson71 at gmail.com (Neil Johnson)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 23:28:15 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <B18EE576-0CC3-48C0-A6FF-8F1709B392FE@electricdruid.net>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <564F9197.1080003@circuitabbey.com>
 <B18EE576-0CC3-48C0-A6FF-8F1709B392FE@electricdruid.net>
Message-ID: <CACZGMx+beqE37p7P_kSs4+6T++gBDDMgGSNQi3sFy2=gDogxBg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Tom,

> I've been caught like this too - but how stupid is this situation?!
>
> Software houses and parts vendors spend time and money getting together the most extensive parts libraries they can, but nobody uses them because they probably have some errors. Instead we redo all the work they already did...so we can get it wrong ourselves?
>
> It's daft, but we all do it. ( Why? Wrong list for psychology questions, I know?)

The big boys in the CAD market -- Mentor, Cadence, Zuken, etc -- don't
put much effort into libraries for several reasons:
- big customers don't buy the product based on the size of libraries,
they want other things (integration with manufacturing systems, tools
that speed up board layout, signal integrity analysis, thermal
analysis, etc), so why spend money on something that won't get you a
sale?
- libraries need maintaining, when vendors update footprints, new
parts come out, old parts are EOLed, etc.
- big customers have CAD data management teams that work with their
own QA departments and work to industry-specific standards --
automotive, aerospace, medical, nuclear, defence, consumer, prosumer,
high-quality, high-volume, etc.  One library won't suit everyone, and
the big customers will ignore them anyway.

Further down the CAD tool foodchain the budgets for creating libraries
get smaller.  You get what you pay for.

Finally, you get to the bottom of the stack: free(mium) tools like
Eagle, DesignSpark, Altium's CircuitMaker.
Below that the FOSS tools like KiCad, GEDA, etc.

And then there are companies who specialise in producing parts
libraries and/or tools.  For example I occassionally use Ultra
Librarian, which has a free reader/converter and so I can take BXL
files from TI, Maxim, etc and autogenerate symbols and footprints for
a wide range of parts direct from vendor data into the format needed
for the CAD tools I use.  For example:
http://www.accelerated-designs.com/ultra-librarian/
https://www.maximintegrated.com/en/design/packaging/cad/
http://webench.ti.com/cad/
Other manufacturers that provide BXL files include Analog Devices,
Microchip, Freescale, and so on.

Having been sorely bitten by bugs in high-end CAD vendor libraries I
no longer trust them for anything other than to provide some examples
for training.

Neil
--
http://www.njohnson.co.uk


From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Mon Nov 23 00:33:40 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 15:33:40 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <CAK+JDy1uBrikXFi_qwX4Cc6xy6JVS+bRQ_zfmTHL7caLgp1+5Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC> <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <381F5134-1178-416C-9A6C-0F449E57A7CD@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy1uBrikXFi_qwX4Cc6xy6JVS+bRQ_zfmTHL7caLgp1+5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F9C7268C-39B0-4F8A-B4ED-832E72EADACB@audiobanshee.com>


On Nov 21, 2015, at 6:28 PM, john slee <indigoid at oldcorollas.org> wrote:
> On 22 November 2015 at 10:55, <rsdio at audiobanshee.com> wrote:
>> With status in the description, it's possible to note which projects have used a part. I just needed to change to larger SMD pads for a diode, and couldn't remember where it had been used.
>> 
> Unfortunately Eagle doesn't seem to store a description per device, only per set of devices, and also for the library containing it.
> 
> Looking at what it does store in the schematic file per device, I think one possibility might be to add an APPROVED attribute in the Technology section (where some of the CADSoft-supplied libraries store Farnell etc part numbers and other assorted metadata) when you've approved a device, and then search on that. This would be quite easy to then write an audit tool for. I've already extended the aforementioned Ruby gem to parse that part of the schematic (and various other parts).
> 
> Alternatively, you can add a description to a package. If you're reusing the same package for a variety of parts (eg. the same 0805 footprint for C and R) this might make sense. But it's not quite as sane for parts where you may reuse the same package for many devices but the pinout *also* needs to be approved, eg. TO-92 or ICs.
I definitely add descriptions to packages. I've noticed that the supplied packages usually include a URL for the data sheet where the package specifications originated, and this really helps for confirmation that the design is valid. When I can't simply copy an existing package, I create my own new packages from the manufacturer data sheets, so I try to do the same as a reference for the source of the measurements.

But you raise a good point - for every package in a set of devices, there's a potential that the pin-out could be wrong. So it would be helpful to have an attribute that serves as an "approved" status for a given pin-to-package mapping.

If you guys come up with any clever solutions in this area, please share.

Brian

p.s. On a related note, I mostly create devices for a particular part, naming the device with the part number. This works well for being sure that all the specifics are correct. Lately, though, I've been finding that it's more useful to have generic devices with lots of package alternatives, with less emphasis on a specific manufacturer or part number. When the part is highly specific, and has no pin-compatible alternative, the former approach works well. But when I need a diode, I'm finding it problematic that I have most of my diodes in my library as a particular part number, rather than a generic diode. So, I'm trying to create new devices to avoid manufacturer-specific designs as much as possible.



From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Mon Nov 23 00:43:33 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 15:43:33 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <CACZGMx+beqE37p7P_kSs4+6T++gBDDMgGSNQi3sFy2=gDogxBg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <564F9197.1080003@circuitabbey.com>
 <B18EE576-0CC3-48C0-A6FF-8F1709B392FE@electricdruid.net>
 <CACZGMx+beqE37p7P_kSs4+6T++gBDDMgGSNQi3sFy2=gDogxBg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0B5D180B-E883-495A-88FD-5FB741E24AC1@audiobanshee.com>


On Nov 22, 2015, at 3:28 PM, Neil Johnson <neil.johnson71 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> 
>> I've been caught like this too - but how stupid is this situation?!
>> 
>> Software houses and parts vendors spend time and money getting together the most extensive parts libraries they can, but nobody uses them because they probably have some errors. Instead we redo all the work they already did...so we can get it wrong ourselves?
>> 
>> It's daft, but we all do it. ( Why? Wrong list for psychology questions, I know?)
> 
> The big boys in the CAD market -- Mentor, Cadence, Zuken, etc -- don't
> put much effort into libraries for several reasons:
> - big customers don't buy the product based on the size of libraries,
> they want other things (integration with manufacturing systems, tools
> that speed up board layout, signal integrity analysis, thermal
> analysis, etc), so why spend money on something that won't get you a
> sale?
> - libraries need maintaining, when vendors update footprints, new
> parts come out, old parts are EOLed, etc.
> - big customers have CAD data management teams that work with their
> own QA departments and work to industry-specific standards --
> automotive, aerospace, medical, nuclear, defence, consumer, prosumer,
> high-quality, high-volume, etc.  One library won't suit everyone, and
> the big customers will ignore them anyway.
> 
> Further down the CAD tool foodchain the budgets for creating libraries
> get smaller.  You get what you pay for.
> 
> Finally, you get to the bottom of the stack: free(mium) tools like
> Eagle, DesignSpark, Altium's CircuitMaker.
> Below that the FOSS tools like KiCad, GEDA, etc.
> 
> And then there are companies who specialise in producing parts
> libraries and/or tools.  For example I occassionally use Ultra
> Librarian, which has a free reader/converter and so I can take BXL
> files from TI, Maxim, etc and autogenerate symbols and footprints for
> a wide range of parts direct from vendor data into the format needed
> for the CAD tools I use.  For example:
> http://www.accelerated-designs.com/ultra-librarian/
> https://www.maximintegrated.com/en/design/packaging/cad/
> http://webench.ti.com/cad/
> Other manufacturers that provide BXL files include Analog Devices,
> Microchip, Freescale, and so on.
> 
> Having been sorely bitten by bugs in high-end CAD vendor libraries I
> no longer trust them for anything other than to provide some examples
> for training.

Thanks for the comments, Neil.

One thing that I've noticed is that there doesn't seem to be a definitive landing pattern for surface mount devices. The impression that I get is that it's highly dependent upon the particular fabrication process, the particular stencil thickness, and the particular assembly house process. Although I want to look to the manufacturer to provide a definitive SMD package layout for their parts, it doesn't seem to be 100% reliable.

For example, a thicker solder resist layer might interfere with placement of small parts, as the resist extends over the copper in some places. This is more of an issue with thicker Cu than with thinner. Also, a thick or thin stencil will affect the amount of solder paste, and thus the appropriate size for the stencil openings. I also imagine that different formulations of solder paste may require slightly different stencil design.

My point is that it seems a given library is only really 100% appropriate for a particular manufacturing chain, so the library that works for me might not work for someone else, particularly if a different fab house, stencil shop, and assembler are used.

This is probably less of an issue for pure through-hole designs, which I assume are less picky than surface mount assembly.

Brian



From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Mon Nov 23 00:50:22 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 15:50:22 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <CAK+JDy03+NMMq3hUVo5HAE6EY3Uf8TpXUjEeYNrmjG0bK_QWKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC> <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <390B5606-A6EF-4980-BD32-8CC4F8642EE8@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy0u3psD-=yf4ZEQQ4OoqFPkwk5ZO-+1R_A0AmPj6y-Xzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <F275AF83-6371-49FC-B564-57541451266D@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy03+NMMq3hUVo5HAE6EY3Uf8TpXUjEeYNrmjG0bK_QWKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8E9AB35C-A700-41A3-8050-0789A00E6886@audiobanshee.com>


On Nov 21, 2015, at 11:14 PM, john slee <indigoid at oldcorollas.org> wrote:
> On 22 November 2015 at 10:55, Brian Willoughby <brianw at audiobanshee.com> wrote:
>> I imagine that your command-line tool will useful as well for managing and coordinating many projects.
> 
> I hope so. It's already helping me with a few things. Feedback/constructive abuse/etc welcome :-)

Unfortunately - at least in terms of interoperability - I'm still working with Eagle 5.11.0, and I'm a little reluctant to install the Ruby development environment even if I upgrade to Eagle 6.

Meanwhile, all of this talk has me wondering whether an Eagle ULP would be able to accomplish the same things you're doing without depending upon Ruby or the XML versions of Eagle.

I may just have to learn Eagle User Language Programming and see how far I can get with the ideas you've implemented in Ruby/XML. I hate to suggest that you switch languages after you've gotten a good start, but it might serve more Eagle users if you were to develop in their internal language (assuming it's capable).

Brian



From mverbos at earthlink.net  Mon Nov 23 01:01:55 2015
From: mverbos at earthlink.net (mark verbos)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 19:01:55 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] Logic to +/-5V conversion
In-Reply-To: <5650D446.8040800@circuitabbey.com>
References: <564FC022.20008@circuitabbey.com> <5650572D.7080904@schmitzbits.de>
 <96963A6A-E941-468E-B058-1DB257F9F63E@sonic.net>
 <CAP92RBVLoDeACOLhxOmnDpdpfxLd-StjkAjmr3Xgxv2RC6xizQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <5650D446.8040800@circuitabbey.com>
Message-ID: <180DD460-7733-4FEC-B14E-3066CEDC75C5@earthlink.net>

You could just run a CD4050 buffer from +/-5. You'll have to use some resistors to push your signals down a little bit to be centered around the new threshold of 0V, but it would work AND you'll get 6 buffers in one package.

Mark





On Nov 21, 2015, at 3:29 PM, Tim Ressel wrote:

> Thanks for all the great ideas. I have +/- 5V available, and there is no precision requirements. 
> 
> I am going to look into the 4053 idea. 
> 
> 
> --tr
> 
> On 11/21/2015 7:28 AM, Mattias Rickardsson wrote:
>> It depends a bit, we're all waiting to hear what supply voltages are available. :-)
>> 
>> /mr
>> Den 21 nov. 2015 1:02 em skrev "Dave Manley" <dlmanley at sonic.net>:
>> 
>> 
>> On November 21, 2015 3:36:13 AM PST, "Ren? Schmitz" <synth at schmitzbits.de> wrote:
>> >Am 21.11.2015 um 01:51 schrieb Tim Ressel:
>> >> Hi y'all,
>> >>
>> >> I'd like to take several 0-5V digital lines and make them swing
>> >+/-5V. I
>> >> can do it with op amps, but is there a clevererer way?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks!
>> >>
>> >A 4053 can be powered from +-5V (Vcc=5V, Vee=-5V, GND=0V) and does
>> >still
>> >accept 0-5V input. Then tie +5 and -5 to the switch inputs.
>> >Gives you three channels in one package. You can even do inversion by
>> >swapping the connections on the switch.
>> >
>> >Best,
>> >  Ren?
>> 
>> Most clevererer answer so far!
>> 
>> -Dave
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> 
> -- 
> --Tim Ressel
> Circuit Abbey
> timr at circuitabbey.com
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151122/09130e56/attachment.htm>

From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Mon Nov 23 01:09:15 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 16:09:15 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Ray Wilson Help
In-Reply-To: <56522891.80907@bugbrand.co.uk>
References: <20151121101705.3a027d564b495c443912516e20da7489.44d606950a.wbe@email15.secureserver.net>
 <5650BA50.5030900@mnet-online.de> <2274f6e6.235bb814.5652256d.bc84@go2.pl>
 <CAKu63YiGke=Sx9dVnGeskuJOYk607FM-Mdmg3eG7tsnwtD3kzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <56522891.80907@bugbrand.co.uk>
Message-ID: <1C449243-654C-4689-ABA6-77A9650CD73E@audiobanshee.com>

I believe that the term "tax deductible" usually refers to the sender rather than the receiver. Donations to certified charities can be written off on the sender's tax return, so that they do not have to pay income tax on the amount they've donated to a good cause - it's as if they never made the money that was passed on.

On the receiving end, I'm not really sure what the usual terminology would be, and I further assume that GoFundMe describe this more on the pages for folks creating a campaign, rather than for folks donating to a campaign. Ah, but the U.S. Tax Code can be complicated, and increasingly so.

Brian


On Nov 22, 2015, at 12:41 PM, Tom Bugs <admin at bugbrand.co.uk> wrote:
> GoFundMe are pretty hands-off about it:
> "Most donations on GoFundMe are personal gifts between family & friends and not usually tax deductible. Only donations made to a 'Certified Charity' campaign may be eligible for tax deductions. We recommend you consult with a tax professional about your specific situation"
> I don't see that as different from Personal Payment via Paypal really...?!...
> 


From plodger at gmail.com  Mon Nov 23 02:12:52 2015
From: plodger at gmail.com (Sarah Thompson)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 17:12:52 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <8E9AB35C-A700-41A3-8050-0789A00E6886@audiobanshee.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC> <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <390B5606-A6EF-4980-BD32-8CC4F8642EE8@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy0u3psD-=yf4ZEQQ4OoqFPkwk5ZO-+1R_A0AmPj6y-Xzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <F275AF83-6371-49FC-B564-57541451266D@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy03+NMMq3hUVo5HAE6EY3Uf8TpXUjEeYNrmjG0bK_QWKQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <8E9AB35C-A700-41A3-8050-0789A00E6886@audiobanshee.com>
Message-ID: <9F1A67FF-0C72-46AE-B259-78BDA7648F76@gmail.com>

One thing I have recently started to do in EAGLE is to religiously add attributes to every library object that specify Digikey/Mouser/manufacturer part numbers. This makes it really easy to generate an accurate BOM directly from Eagle, the import it directly to the Digikey web site to create a kit for a prototype build. This means that BOMs update with design changes, and you can create derivative designs by cutting and pasting schematics between projects and still create a kittable BOM just as quickly. It takes more time to set up first time around, but saves a ton of time over multiple spins whilst also reducing mistakes.

A second huge timesaver is the Octopart Excel add-in, which lets you create a BOM spreadsheet that can automatically check stock, availability and pricing. If you have to deal with a stupid procurement process that takes forever between approval and ordering, this can be a lifesaver by making it possible to check for out of stock situations really quickly across multiple suppliers just by reopening the spreadsheet.

Sarah

> On Nov 22, 2015, at 3:50 PM, rsdio at audiobanshee.com wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Nov 21, 2015, at 11:14 PM, john slee <indigoid at oldcorollas.org> wrote:
>>> On 22 November 2015 at 10:55, Brian Willoughby <brianw at audiobanshee.com> wrote:
>>> I imagine that your command-line tool will useful as well for managing and coordinating many projects.
>> 
>> I hope so. It's already helping me with a few things. Feedback/constructive abuse/etc welcome :-)
> 
> Unfortunately - at least in terms of interoperability - I'm still working with Eagle 5.11.0, and I'm a little reluctant to install the Ruby development environment even if I upgrade to Eagle 6.
> 
> Meanwhile, all of this talk has me wondering whether an Eagle ULP would be able to accomplish the same things you're doing without depending upon Ruby or the XML versions of Eagle.
> 
> I may just have to learn Eagle User Language Programming and see how far I can get with the ideas you've implemented in Ruby/XML. I hate to suggest that you switch languages after you've gotten a good start, but it might serve more Eagle users if you were to develop in their internal language (assuming it's capable).
> 
> Brian
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Mon Nov 23 02:56:47 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 17:56:47 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <9F1A67FF-0C72-46AE-B259-78BDA7648F76@gmail.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC> <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <390B5606-A6EF-4980-BD32-8CC4F8642EE8@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy0u3psD-=yf4ZEQQ4OoqFPkwk5ZO-+1R_A0AmPj6y-Xzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <F275AF83-6371-49FC-B564-57541451266D@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy03+NMMq3hUVo5HAE6EY3Uf8TpXUjEeYNrmjG0bK_QWKQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <8E9AB35C-A700-41A3-8050-0789A00E6886@audiobanshee.com>
 <9F1A67FF-0C72-46AE-B259-78BDA7648F76@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E82E9FA0-B4BA-480D-914C-C37427DB38F3@audiobanshee.com>

Thanks, Sarah.

Can you explain how to use device attributes to track part numbers? I've dabbled in attributes for simple things like the specific output voltage of a fixed regulator that's available in multiple values, or the memory sizes of a given processor variations, but haven't figured out how to access these attributes elsewhere. I do usually name the device after the part number, and if that's not possible then I set the "value" of the device to its part number, but obviously that's neither consistent nor does it work in every situation. With a bit of work, the "*" and "?" part of device names can be used to piece together the full part number for some families of devices, but again that doesn't work in all situations.

Do you have a link to the Octopart Excel add-in? Is it available for the Open Office spreadsheet? I don't use Microsoft Excel.

Brian

On Nov 22, 2015, at 5:12 PM, Sarah Thompson <plodger at gmail.com> wrote:
> One thing I have recently started to do in EAGLE is to religiously add attributes to every library object that specify Digikey/Mouser/manufacturer part numbers. This makes it really easy to generate an accurate BOM directly from Eagle, the import it directly to the Digikey web site to create a kit for a prototype build. This means that BOMs update with design changes, and you can create derivative designs by cutting and pasting schematics between projects and still create a kittable BOM just as quickly. It takes more time to set up first time around, but saves a ton of time over multiple spins whilst also reducing mistakes.
> 
> A second huge timesaver is the Octopart Excel add-in, which lets you create a BOM spreadsheet that can automatically check stock, availability and pricing. If you have to deal with a stupid procurement process that takes forever between approval and ordering, this can be a lifesaver by making it possible to check for out of stock situations really quickly across multiple suppliers just by reopening the spreadsheet.



From charlie at finitemonkeys.com  Mon Nov 23 03:04:13 2015
From: charlie at finitemonkeys.com (charlie wallace)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 18:04:13 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <9F1A67FF-0C72-46AE-B259-78BDA7648F76@gmail.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC>
 <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <390B5606-A6EF-4980-BD32-8CC4F8642EE8@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy0u3psD-=yf4ZEQQ4OoqFPkwk5ZO-+1R_A0AmPj6y-Xzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <F275AF83-6371-49FC-B564-57541451266D@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy03+NMMq3hUVo5HAE6EY3Uf8TpXUjEeYNrmjG0bK_QWKQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <8E9AB35C-A700-41A3-8050-0789A00E6886@audiobanshee.com>
 <9F1A67FF-0C72-46AE-B259-78BDA7648F76@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH2ZmX=DKqnFLduGYieaH8i-__5JVtgOQsh326otsZVWLWUHDQ@mail.gmail.com>

i do a similar thing, i added a digikey/mouser/oem part number
attribute and then i use the bom-ex.ulp to manage them all.

http://www.bot-thoughts.com/2012/03/eagle-managing-parts-with-bom-ex.html

there are couple of versions knocking about.

someone mentioned ultra librarian as well, there is a free version
that also exports scripts for eagle (And others) for specific oems.
http://www.silabs.com/support/pages/cad-cae-schematic-footprints-and-symbols.aspx

eagle also has a bsdl ulp that can make parts.



On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Sarah Thompson <plodger at gmail.com> wrote:
> One thing I have recently started to do in EAGLE is to religiously add attributes to every library object that specify Digikey/Mouser/manufacturer part numbers. This makes it really easy to generate an accurate BOM directly from Eagle, the import it directly to the Digikey web site to create a kit for a prototype build. This means that BOMs update with design changes, and you can create derivative designs by cutting and pasting schematics between projects and still create a kittable BOM just as quickly. It takes more time to set up first time around, but saves a ton of time over multiple spins whilst also reducing mistakes.
>
> A second huge timesaver is the Octopart Excel add-in, which lets you create a BOM spreadsheet that can automatically check stock, availability and pricing. If you have to deal with a stupid procurement process that takes forever between approval and ordering, this can be a lifesaver by making it possible to check for out of stock situations really quickly across multiple suppliers just by reopening the spreadsheet.
>
> Sarah
>
>> On Nov 22, 2015, at 3:50 PM, rsdio at audiobanshee.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 21, 2015, at 11:14 PM, john slee <indigoid at oldcorollas.org> wrote:
>>>> On 22 November 2015 at 10:55, Brian Willoughby <brianw at audiobanshee.com> wrote:
>>>> I imagine that your command-line tool will useful as well for managing and coordinating many projects.
>>>
>>> I hope so. It's already helping me with a few things. Feedback/constructive abuse/etc welcome :-)
>>
>> Unfortunately - at least in terms of interoperability - I'm still working with Eagle 5.11.0, and I'm a little reluctant to install the Ruby development environment even if I upgrade to Eagle 6.
>>
>> Meanwhile, all of this talk has me wondering whether an Eagle ULP would be able to accomplish the same things you're doing without depending upon Ruby or the XML versions of Eagle.
>>
>> I may just have to learn Eagle User Language Programming and see how far I can get with the ideas you've implemented in Ruby/XML. I hate to suggest that you switch languages after you've gotten a good start, but it might serve more Eagle users if you were to develop in their internal language (assuming it's capable).
>>
>> Brian
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


From indigoid at oldcorollas.org  Mon Nov 23 04:36:41 2015
From: indigoid at oldcorollas.org (john slee)
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 14:36:41 +1100
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <9F1A67FF-0C72-46AE-B259-78BDA7648F76@gmail.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC> <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <390B5606-A6EF-4980-BD32-8CC4F8642EE8@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy0u3psD-=yf4ZEQQ4OoqFPkwk5ZO-+1R_A0AmPj6y-Xzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <F275AF83-6371-49FC-B564-57541451266D@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy03+NMMq3hUVo5HAE6EY3Uf8TpXUjEeYNrmjG0bK_QWKQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <8E9AB35C-A700-41A3-8050-0789A00E6886@audiobanshee.com>
 <9F1A67FF-0C72-46AE-B259-78BDA7648F76@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAK+JDy1hkSZoSEHsXLBLHn4K0HRiJrHoREbhc9EL7L1fk8AXag@mail.gmail.com>

On 23 November 2015 at 12:12, Sarah Thompson <plodger at gmail.com> wrote:

> One thing I have recently started to do in EAGLE is to religiously add
> attributes to every library object that specify Digikey/Mouser/manufacturer
> part numbers. This makes it really easy to generate an accurate BOM
> directly from Eagle, the


Yeah. I like this.

What are you doing for parts with many possible values, like resistors? Do
you have a deviceset (as they are named in Eagle XML) with a separate
device for each E96 value (since you can preconfigure the value in the
device), with a supplier/manufacturer part# attribute on each device?

For me that approach makes sense. Though I would consider creating an
external filter (one with understanding of manufacturer part numbering
schemes built in) to translate from one manufacturer to another, at least
for things like R and C

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151123/b2ce00b7/attachment.htm>

From plodger at gmail.com  Mon Nov 23 07:22:52 2015
From: plodger at gmail.com (Sarah Thompson)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 22:22:52 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <CAK+JDy1hkSZoSEHsXLBLHn4K0HRiJrHoREbhc9EL7L1fk8AXag@mail.gmail.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC>
 <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <390B5606-A6EF-4980-BD32-8CC4F8642EE8@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy0u3psD-=yf4ZEQQ4OoqFPkwk5ZO-+1R_A0AmPj6y-Xzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <F275AF83-6371-49FC-B564-57541451266D@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy03+NMMq3hUVo5HAE6EY3Uf8TpXUjEeYNrmjG0bK_QWKQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <8E9AB35C-A700-41A3-8050-0789A00E6886@audiobanshee.com>
 <9F1A67FF-0C72-46AE-B259-78BDA7648F76@gmail.com>
 <CAK+JDy1hkSZoSEHsXLBLHn4K0HRiJrHoREbhc9EL7L1fk8AXag@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACVQNWX9gPaifHPQ8Pd9QwQcVcfVn=rnNuAyQz=agTKCRf=RjQ@mail.gmail.com>

I've not found an ideal option for resistors, capacitors, standard package
inductors, etc. Usually I add those attributes at the schematic level
rather than the library level -- this still generates perfect BOMs and
supports copy & paste, etc. One thing I do sometimes is make a
kind-of-library-thing (for want of a better name) which is essentially a
schematic containing a large number of circuit snippets that I can cut &
paste into a working design. Used with an underlying library this serves a
similar purpose, but deals with the resistor/capacitor issue and also of
course lets you make a library of subcircuits rather than simply devices.

In reply to Charlie Wallace, the Octopart add-in is here:
https://octopart.com/excel

I don't know if it works on anything other than for-real Excel on Windows,
since that's the only thing I've used it on, but it certainly works
amazingly well.

I second the BSDL ULP for making parts that can be hacked on further -- I
often use this to make packages. It does work without a BSDL file,
incidentally, though if you actually have one it is a lot easier to use.
I've done a 484 pin FPGA package from a BSDL generated directly from the
Actel chip editor software before, which worked fine and saved many hours
of work.

Sarah

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 7:36 PM, john slee <indigoid at oldcorollas.org> wrote:

> On 23 November 2015 at 12:12, Sarah Thompson <plodger at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> One thing I have recently started to do in EAGLE is to religiously add
>> attributes to every library object that specify Digikey/Mouser/manufacturer
>> part numbers. This makes it really easy to generate an accurate BOM
>> directly from Eagle, the
>
>
> Yeah. I like this.
>
> What are you doing for parts with many possible values, like resistors? Do
> you have a deviceset (as they are named in Eagle XML) with a separate
> device for each E96 value (since you can preconfigure the value in the
> device), with a supplier/manufacturer part# attribute on each device?
>
> For me that approach makes sense. Though I would consider creating an
> external filter (one with understanding of manufacturer part numbering
> schemes built in) to translate from one manufacturer to another, at least
> for things like R and C
>
> John
>



-- 
[s]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151122/12e6388a/attachment.htm>

From charlie at finitemonkeys.com  Mon Nov 23 07:42:33 2015
From: charlie at finitemonkeys.com (charlie wallace)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 22:42:33 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <9F1A67FF-0C72-46AE-B259-78BDA7648F76@gmail.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <440488A0B9AC4510B902E9FB737125AC@RichiePC>
 <564FB504.40200@circuitabbey.com>
 <CAK+JDy08vmiyeBh2kv-XwmJEARQU=0DA6ws-xNsvoeuvw6zqNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <390B5606-A6EF-4980-BD32-8CC4F8642EE8@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy0u3psD-=yf4ZEQQ4OoqFPkwk5ZO-+1R_A0AmPj6y-Xzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <F275AF83-6371-49FC-B564-57541451266D@audiobanshee.com>
 <CAK+JDy03+NMMq3hUVo5HAE6EY3Uf8TpXUjEeYNrmjG0bK_QWKQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <8E9AB35C-A700-41A3-8050-0789A00E6886@audiobanshee.com>
 <9F1A67FF-0C72-46AE-B259-78BDA7648F76@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH2ZmXk+dqxAgQgM4bA+C2OFi=SjMLx2U4N5NaE6Rb-nK9RVTQ@mail.gmail.com>

apologies, i posted a link to bom-ex.ulp, which is one i have used
previously, but its bom-xs.ulp i currently use.

http://www.xess.com/static/media/oss/tool_bom_03072011.php this is my
modded version that looks at different attributes
http://pastebin.com/8c1seswu

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Sarah Thompson <plodger at gmail.com> wrote:
> One thing I have recently started to do in EAGLE is to religiously add attributes to every library object that specify Digikey/Mouser/manufacturer part numbers. This makes it really easy to generate an accurate BOM directly from Eagle, the import it directly to the Digikey web site to create a kit for a prototype build. This means that BOMs update with design changes, and you can create derivative designs by cutting and pasting schematics between projects and still create a kittable BOM just as quickly. It takes more time to set up first time around, but saves a ton of time over multiple spins whilst also reducing mistakes.
>
> A second huge timesaver is the Octopart Excel add-in, which lets you create a BOM spreadsheet that can automatically check stock, availability and pricing. If you have to deal with a stupid procurement process that takes forever between approval and ordering, this can be a lifesaver by making it possible to check for out of stock situations really quickly across multiple suppliers just by reopening the spreadsheet.
>
> Sarah
>
>> On Nov 22, 2015, at 3:50 PM, rsdio at audiobanshee.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 21, 2015, at 11:14 PM, john slee <indigoid at oldcorollas.org> wrote:
>>>> On 22 November 2015 at 10:55, Brian Willoughby <brianw at audiobanshee.com> wrote:
>>>> I imagine that your command-line tool will useful as well for managing and coordinating many projects.
>>>
>>> I hope so. It's already helping me with a few things. Feedback/constructive abuse/etc welcome :-)
>>
>> Unfortunately - at least in terms of interoperability - I'm still working with Eagle 5.11.0, and I'm a little reluctant to install the Ruby development environment even if I upgrade to Eagle 6.
>>
>> Meanwhile, all of this talk has me wondering whether an Eagle ULP would be able to accomplish the same things you're doing without depending upon Ruby or the XML versions of Eagle.
>>
>> I may just have to learn Eagle User Language Programming and see how far I can get with the ideas you've implemented in Ruby/XML. I hate to suggest that you switch languages after you've gotten a good start, but it might serve more Eagle users if you were to develop in their internal language (assuming it's capable).
>>
>> Brian
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


From mark-abbott at lineone.net  Mon Nov 23 11:59:42 2015
From: mark-abbott at lineone.net (mark-abbott at lineone.net)
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 02:59:42 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Fw: new message
Message-ID: <00005b5b31f2$07f96ddf$998ca588$@lineone.net>

Hey!

 

New message, please read <http://www.sdfholistic.com/think.php?xhfq>

 

mark-abbott at lineone.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151123/dad7c40c/attachment.htm>

From neil.johnson71 at gmail.com  Mon Nov 23 12:14:23 2015
From: neil.johnson71 at gmail.com (Neil Johnson)
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 11:14:23 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle footprints
In-Reply-To: <0B5D180B-E883-495A-88FD-5FB741E24AC1@audiobanshee.com>
References: <k9f1cpge8pckl7tt7049a1th.1448051927953@email.lge.com>
 <3EA95EBE8E4C4DC1B48BEA9C329102CE@RichiePC>
 <CACZGMxKai5YX7hbt_gFJChw3zat1fuyRjf8cFNJC2O46LL2zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <564F9197.1080003@circuitabbey.com>
 <B18EE576-0CC3-48C0-A6FF-8F1709B392FE@electricdruid.net>
 <CACZGMx+beqE37p7P_kSs4+6T++gBDDMgGSNQi3sFy2=gDogxBg@mail.gmail.com>
 <0B5D180B-E883-495A-88FD-5FB741E24AC1@audiobanshee.com>
Message-ID: <CACZGMxLFSOBPGz_h7wHO=ot624bceknXR-Gewk_NcpWOqkaTHA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Brian,

> One thing that I've noticed is that there doesn't seem to be a definitive landing pattern for surface mount devices. The impression that I get is that it's highly dependent upon the particular fabrication process, the particular stencil thickness, and the particular assembly house process. Although I want to look to the manufacturer to provide a definitive SMD package layout for their parts, it doesn't seem to be 100% reliable.

There are standards - IPC for example - are a good place to start
from.  This extends to pad naming conventions too, so you see names
like "RX10Y20D5" to describe pads in a generic way.  For SMT you can
get bogged down in details:

http://pcbget.ru/Files/Standarts/IPC_7351.pdf

> For example, a thicker solder resist layer might interfere with placement of small parts, as the resist extends over the copper in some places. This is more of an issue with thicker Cu than with thinner. Also, a thick or thin stencil will affect the amount of solder paste, and thus the appropriate size for the stencil openings. I also imagine that different formulations of solder paste may require slightly different stencil design.

Ideally this shouldn't be an issue - manufacturers want their lines to
be as consistent as possible to minimise the amount of faff in setting
up a line.  Especially in high-volume consumer goods, especially
smartphones.

> My point is that it seems a given library is only really 100% appropriate for a particular manufacturing chain, so the library that works for me might not work for someone else, particularly if a different fab house, stencil shop, and assembler are used.

It's worse than that - the rules can change depending on what the
circuit needs to do.  It is not uncommon to have to tweak footprints
to meet specific design challenges, although ideally this would not be
needed.  It's gotten worse as circuit frequencies have risen, so now
digital circuits are really RF circuits, needing careful impedance
matching and line termination and so on, for example SDRAM, HDMI,
LVDS, etc.

> This is probably less of an issue for pure through-hole designs, which I assume are less picky than surface mount assembly.

I don't think they are less picky, just picky in different ways.

Cheers,
Neil
--
http://www.njohnson.co.uk


From ezion67 at gmail.com  Mon Nov 23 18:08:50 2015
From: ezion67 at gmail.com (ezion)
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 18:08:50 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Elektor Formant synth build
In-Reply-To: <DUB404-EAS7434137CEB4EA827C789F384160@phx.gbl>
References: <DUB404-EAS7434137CEB4EA827C789F384160@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <CAKAfhLTdXHcOv8xQ552wvTgWqMKc4gzCmiZtNZ1qqVtVKYzUVA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Josh
Why not go old school all the way and etch the PCBs yourself?
Its quite easy to do!

In my experience the formant is a nice system, but also nothing special.
For modules that use difficult to source parts you can just use a different
schematic with similar function.
Quite a few SDIY list members have plenty of suitable module schematics
online.

While your at it, better add in a few other non formant modules too.
You might end up with a more musical system as the original is quite
"technical" in its design.

Also please keep in mind, something complex like the formant may be less
suited as a first project!

Go have fun,
Theo

Groetjes Theo

On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 2:02 PM, josh wilkinson <j_wilco at hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> Hello All,
>
> My name is Josh Wilkinson, i am part of a Hackerspace in Brisbane
> Australia.
>
> Myself and a group of electronics enthusiasts (ranging form electricians
> to programmers to mechatronics) are keen to build the Elektor Formant synth.
> We have been reading book 1that was published with all the schematics and
> notes in it.
> Has anyone had any experience building this synth?
>
> Our main priority obviously is generating a proper PCB file that we can
> replicate for the modules. Has anyone already converted the PCB schematics
> in the book to Gerber files?
> If anyone has and feels like sharing that would be incredibly helpful.
>
> Also any leads on tracking down the tricky Fairchild chips?
>
> Really any experience with this build would be appreciated.
>
> Cheers,
> Josh and HSBNE Crew.
> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151123/3b126aa6/attachment.htm>

From rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk  Mon Nov 23 22:46:49 2015
From: rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk (Richie Burnett)
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 21:46:49 -0000
Subject: [sdiy] X7R, Y5V, Z5U characteristics
Message-ID: <890EE96222634727AD4C82AE1530BB59@RichiePC>

The terrible voltage-coefficient and temperature-coefficient of modern 
miniature high-k ceramic capacitors has been mentioned on this list many 
times already.  However I just found a neat online web application (nothing 
to install) that generates graphs showing how different size/dielectric 
Murata capacitors behave over varying conditions: DC bias, AC voltage, 
temperature, etc...

http://ds.murata.co.jp/software/simsurfing/en-us/index.html

I had never realised quite how "non-ideal" an 0603 size 4.7uF capacitor is 
until I saw the graphs for myself.  It doesn't make pretty viewing!

-Richie, 



From eric at ericframpton.com  Tue Nov 24 04:15:20 2015
From: eric at ericframpton.com (Eric Frampton)
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 22:15:20 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] Minimoog buffer board source?
Message-ID: <DF9D7FD6-19BE-4A5C-ADDA-685401CFC0AC@ericframpton.com>

Hi all - 

Has anyone done a run of Minimoog buffer boards, or have one or two (stuffed or blank, either way) you could spare?

thanks
e



From mr at analogue.org  Tue Nov 24 10:58:30 2015
From: mr at analogue.org (Mattias Rickardsson)
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 10:58:30 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] X7R, Y5V, Z5U characteristics
In-Reply-To: <890EE96222634727AD4C82AE1530BB59@RichiePC>
References: <890EE96222634727AD4C82AE1530BB59@RichiePC>
Message-ID: <CAP92RBXOLycE=qrMx6uQaRKu3gEKYPQyirMLZaHJm9xhatPq-g@mail.gmail.com>

Great little applet there, thanks!
Yes, X7R and similar caps are quite terrible in many ways when you
expect more or less ideal components. But C0G seem great, a totally
different thing. Has anyone had any problems worth mentioning using
C0G instead of precision film caps for timing purposes? I use them in
filters, oscillators... and there was much rejoicing.

/mr


On 23 November 2015 at 22:46, Richie Burnett
<rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
> The terrible voltage-coefficient and temperature-coefficient of modern
> miniature high-k ceramic capacitors has been mentioned on this list many
> times already.  However I just found a neat online web application (nothing
> to install) that generates graphs showing how different size/dielectric
> Murata capacitors behave over varying conditions: DC bias, AC voltage,
> temperature, etc...
>
> http://ds.murata.co.jp/software/simsurfing/en-us/index.html
>
> I had never realised quite how "non-ideal" an 0603 size 4.7uF capacitor is
> until I saw the graphs for myself.  It doesn't make pretty viewing!
>
> -Richie,
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


From grant at musictechnologiesgroup.com  Tue Nov 24 16:48:07 2015
From: grant at musictechnologiesgroup.com (MTG)
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 07:48:07 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] ARP Pioneer passes
Message-ID: <565486B7.1070908@musictechnologiesgroup.com>

Another GoFundMe, as posted on MatrixSynth:


Monday, November 23, 2015
RIP Dennis Colin, Co-Designer of the ARP 2600 & the Aries Modular

Some sad news in via Grant of Music Technologies Group. It has come to 
his attention that Dennis Colin of ARP and Aires fame has passed away. 
There is a GoFundMe page set up to help his daughter with the funeral 
and travel costs. Click through for details.

Dennis Colin not only designed the ARP 2600 with Alan R. Pearlman, he 
also built the Aries Modular (see this post and this post for 
reference), and he later ran Colin Electronics.

The image to the left is from an article in Guitar World from this year, 
back on February 9. The following is a short excerpt:

"The short story goes like this: Dennis spent several years at the ARP 
company, creating the 2600 and other strange instruments. Eventually the 
company changed hands and he moved on to other work away from music.

Years after retiring, Dennis now lives alone in a small house somewhere 
in New England. He recently lost his wife and has been having a rough 
time. A chance meeting between his daughter and my guitar-building 
buddy, Ben "C.B. Gitty" Baker, led to my eventual visit to his house. I 
stood on his doorstep feeling like Ralphie about to meet Santa Claus.

A frail man at 71, Dennis has sharp mind of a teenager. Although he left 
ARP Synthesizers many years ago, he never left music and he 
enthusiastically showed me his secret lab upstairs in the house. There 
were oscilloscopes, strange strobe lights, a homemade 500-watt amp (!) 
and model airplanes scattered about. The dude lights his cigarettes from 
a Tesla coil! When he talked about music, he referenced everything from 
da Vinci to string theory.

Forget Ralphie...I was in the inner-sanctum of the musical Willie Wonka!"

A great man behind some great synths. He will be remembered. Be sure to 
see the GoFundMe page.

https://www.gofundme.com/drbhrpr8



From don at till.com  Tue Nov 24 20:43:30 2015
From: don at till.com (Donald Tillman)
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 11:43:30 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] ARP Pioneer passes
In-Reply-To: <565486B7.1070908@musictechnologiesgroup.com>
References: <565486B7.1070908@musictechnologiesgroup.com>
Message-ID: <0BBAF04E-CE82-4ADE-B941-01BCD9F1BA03@till.com>


> On Nov 24, 2015, at 7:48 AM, MTG <grant at musictechnologiesgroup.com> wrote:
> 
> Monday, November 23, 2015
> RIP Dennis Colin, Co-Designer of the ARP 2600 & the Aries Modular

Here is Dennis' famous 1971 paper introducing the ARP 2500 filter:

    Dennis Colin
    Electrical Design and Musical Applications of an Unconditionally Stable Combination Voltage Controlled Filter / Resonator
    Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, December 1971
    http://www.guitarfool.com/ARP2500/DennisCollinPaper.pdf

It's pretty impressive and includes additional connections for an innovative resonator application that I have not seen since.

Dennis' daughter got me in touch with him, and we had some wonderful phone conversations over the last couple years.  An amazing fellow; he will be missed.

  -- Don

--
Don Tillman
Palo Alto, California
don at till.com
http://www.till.com






From pete.hartman at gmail.com  Tue Nov 24 21:17:52 2015
From: pete.hartman at gmail.com (Pete Hartman)
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 14:17:52 -0600
Subject: [sdiy] ARP Pioneer passes
In-Reply-To: <0BBAF04E-CE82-4ADE-B941-01BCD9F1BA03@till.com>
References: <565486B7.1070908@musictechnologiesgroup.com>
 <0BBAF04E-CE82-4ADE-B941-01BCD9F1BA03@till.com>
Message-ID: <CACodTR9iVv6UnRADDBQeQMirVZkbW9uST5s45yHXjpY-W643VQ@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks for the link to the paper, interesting reading.

Also, a good laugh: "(I offer my sincere apologies to mathematicians who do
not accept impulse functions)".  Sounds like an engaging guy, sorry I never
had the chance to meet him.

Pete



On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Donald Tillman <don at till.com> wrote:

>
> > On Nov 24, 2015, at 7:48 AM, MTG <grant at musictechnologiesgroup.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Monday, November 23, 2015
> > RIP Dennis Colin, Co-Designer of the ARP 2600 & the Aries Modular
>
> Here is Dennis' famous 1971 paper introducing the ARP 2500 filter:
>
>     Dennis Colin
>     Electrical Design and Musical Applications of an Unconditionally
> Stable Combination Voltage Controlled Filter / Resonator
>     Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, December 1971
>     http://www.guitarfool.com/ARP2500/DennisCollinPaper.pdf
>
> It's pretty impressive and includes additional connections for an
> innovative resonator application that I have not seen since.
>
> Dennis' daughter got me in touch with him, and we had some wonderful phone
> conversations over the last couple years.  An amazing fellow; he will be
> missed.
>
>   -- Don
>
> --
> Don Tillman
> Palo Alto, California
> don at till.com
> http://www.till.com
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151124/09441ea5/attachment.htm>

From rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk  Tue Nov 24 21:49:17 2015
From: rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk (Richie Burnett)
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 20:49:17 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] X7R, Y5V, Z5U characteristics
In-Reply-To: <CAP92RBXOLycE=qrMx6uQaRKu3gEKYPQyirMLZaHJm9xhatPq-g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <890EE96222634727AD4C82AE1530BB59@RichiePC>
 <CAP92RBXOLycE=qrMx6uQaRKu3gEKYPQyirMLZaHJm9xhatPq-g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <h4475daxgrhrr344tm9ixgid.1448397962845@email.android.com>

Yes, C0G/NP0 caps are much better behaved. Ideal for timing circuits, tuned circuits, etc. Lower microphony too, but they have lower CV density.

-Richie,


---- Mattias Rickardsson wrote ----

>Great little applet there, thanks!
>Yes, X7R and similar caps are quite terrible in many ways when you
>expect more or less ideal components. But C0G seem great, a totally
>different thing. Has anyone had any problems worth mentioning using
>C0G instead of precision film caps for timing purposes? I use them in
>filters, oscillators... and there was much rejoicing.
>
>/mr
>
>
>On 23 November 2015 at 22:46, Richie Burnett
><rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
>> The terrible voltage-coefficient and temperature-coefficient of modern
>> miniature high-k ceramic capacitors has been mentioned on this list many
>> times already.  However I just found a neat online web application (nothing
>> to install) that generates graphs showing how different size/dielectric
>> Murata capacitors behave over varying conditions: DC bias, AC voltage,
>> temperature, etc...
>>
>> http://ds.murata.co.jp/software/simsurfing/en-us/index.html
>>
>> I had never realised quite how "non-ideal" an 0603 size 4.7uF capacitor is
>> until I saw the graphs for myself.  It doesn't make pretty viewing!
>>
>> -Richie,
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>_______________________________________________
>Synth-diy mailing list
>Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

From rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk  Wed Nov 25 17:18:18 2015
From: rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk (Richie Burnett)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 16:18:18 -0000
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle analogue & digital groundplanes
Message-ID: <96642C5F098248C187F1156C1FB795C6@RichiePC>

Out of interest what are Eagle PCB CAD users doing to connect together their 
analogue and digital ground-planes?

A wire-link, 0805 zero-ohm link, or over-lapping the polygons for the analog 
and digital ground-planes and accepting a DRC violation at the point where 
they're connected?

Those are the best ideas I had, but wondered if there's a clever way to do 
it.

-Richie, 



From mr at analogue.org  Wed Nov 25 17:43:44 2015
From: mr at analogue.org (Mattias Rickardsson)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 17:43:44 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] 2164 -> TL074, 100 pF in feedback needed?
Message-ID: <CAP92RBXc5bK3qjwjbmxM4=NE1fEGnanjLVDhqLUU9LyrNLTyKQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi fellow 2164 addicts,  ;-)

the typical application circuit in the SSM2164 datasheet shows a 100
pF capacitor in parallel with the 30k feedback resistor on the op-amp,
saying

"The 100 pF capacitors ensure stability and reduce high frequency noise.
They can be increased to reduce the low pass cutoff frequency for
further noise reduction."

[...]

"If additional SSM2164s are added, the 100 pF capacitor may
need to be increased to ensure stability of the output amplifier.
Most op amps are sensitive to capacitance on their inverting
inputs. The capacitance forms a pole with the feedback resistor,
which reduces the high frequency phase margin. As more
SSM2164?s are added to the mixer circuit, their output capacitance
and the parasitic trace capacitance add, increasing the
overall input capacitance. Increasing the feedback capacitor will
maintain the stability of the output amplifier."

The problem is that they already lowpass filter the sound a little bit
- more than ? dB rolloff at 20 kHz - and sometimes you might need a
bigger resistor than 30k in order to optimize other aspects of the
circuit, resulting in even more HF rolloff. Not awfully much, but you
might have several of these stages in an audio path adding up to some
decibels.

But is 100 pF really needed?
Is TL07x sensitive to capacitance on their inverting inputs?
How about other common op-amps?

Using the bread-and-butter op-amp TL074, has anybody tried out any
variations on the 100 pF theme and run into problems?

I've used as low value as 33 pF & 47k after *two* summed 2164s,
withouth known problems yet. The datasheet pole recommendation would
be 127 pF for this scenario. Should I worry? :-)

(I'm sorry if this has been discussed already)

/mr


From rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk  Wed Nov 25 18:07:18 2015
From: rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk (Richie Burnett)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 17:07:18 -0000
Subject: [sdiy] 2164 -> TL074, 100 pF in feedback needed?
In-Reply-To: <CAP92RBXc5bK3qjwjbmxM4=NE1fEGnanjLVDhqLUU9LyrNLTyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAP92RBXc5bK3qjwjbmxM4=NE1fEGnanjLVDhqLUU9LyrNLTyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5D16AD0FFBBE476492C91F83C7A426F7@RichiePC>

I would recommend making your PCB in such a way that one of the design goals 
is minimising the stray capacitance from the inverting input of the op-amp 
to ground...

Then...

Populate it with 100pF in the feedback position and test it, then decrease 
this capacitance in steps until you observe HF oscillation at the output of 
the op-amp (due to the reduced phase-margin at the crossover frequency that 
they talked about.)  You will have to look with an oscilloscope as it will 
likely be in the MHz range and might only be a volt or so in amplitude.

When you find the critical value that is on the boundary of oscillation, 
triple it.  That should give you sufficient phase margin to prevent 
reoccurrence of HF oscillation during use with the minimal of HF rolloff at 
the top of the audio spectrum.  If you can't tolerate the resulting treble 
rolloff then reduce the feedback resistor and make up the lost gain with 
another amplifier stage.

The same problem must occur in large mixing desks that use long mix busses 
at "virtual earth" potential.  There are probably some other clever tricks 
possible like a phase-lead network to kick-in some extra phase-lead up in 
the MHz where the op-amp would be prone to oscillate due to compromised 
phase-margin.  Also, I'm sure someone on this list mentioned connecting the 
op-amp inverting-input to the mix buss through a small inductor to 
"de-couple" the stray capacitance of the mix buss from the virtual earth 
node of the op-amp.

-Richie,

-----Original Message----- 
From: Mattias Rickardsson
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 4:43 PM
To: synthdiy diy
Subject: [sdiy] 2164 -> TL074, 100 pF in feedback needed?

Hi fellow 2164 addicts,  ;-)

the typical application circuit in the SSM2164 datasheet shows a 100
pF capacitor in parallel with the 30k feedback resistor on the op-amp,
saying

"The 100 pF capacitors ensure stability and reduce high frequency noise.
They can be increased to reduce the low pass cutoff frequency for
further noise reduction."

[...]

"If additional SSM2164s are added, the 100 pF capacitor may
need to be increased to ensure stability of the output amplifier.
Most op amps are sensitive to capacitance on their inverting
inputs. The capacitance forms a pole with the feedback resistor,
which reduces the high frequency phase margin. As more
SSM2164?s are added to the mixer circuit, their output capacitance
and the parasitic trace capacitance add, increasing the
overall input capacitance. Increasing the feedback capacitor will
maintain the stability of the output amplifier."

The problem is that they already lowpass filter the sound a little bit
- more than ? dB rolloff at 20 kHz - and sometimes you might need a
bigger resistor than 30k in order to optimize other aspects of the
circuit, resulting in even more HF rolloff. Not awfully much, but you
might have several of these stages in an audio path adding up to some
decibels.

But is 100 pF really needed?
Is TL07x sensitive to capacitance on their inverting inputs?
How about other common op-amps?

Using the bread-and-butter op-amp TL074, has anybody tried out any
variations on the 100 pF theme and run into problems?

I've used as low value as 33 pF & 47k after *two* summed 2164s,
withouth known problems yet. The datasheet pole recommendation would
be 127 pF for this scenario. Should I worry? :-)

(I'm sorry if this has been discussed already)

/mr
_______________________________________________
Synth-diy mailing list
Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4842 / Virus Database: 4447/11063 - Release Date: 11/25/15 



From blacet at blacet.com  Wed Nov 25 19:09:58 2015
From: blacet at blacet.com (blacet at blacet.com)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:09:58 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] 2164 -> TL074, 100 pF in feedback needed?
In-Reply-To: <CAP92RBXc5bK3qjwjbmxM4=NE1fEGnanjLVDhqLUU9LyrNLTyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAP92RBXc5bK3qjwjbmxM4=NE1fEGnanjLVDhqLUU9LyrNLTyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2d28e26981e91147643aed8a1396c720.squirrel@webmail.blacet.com>

I've been using 22pF and 33K for several products for years with the TL074
and SSM2164.

No problems but your results may vary.



> Hi fellow 2164 addicts,  ;-)
>
> the typical application circuit in the SSM2164 datasheet shows a 100
> pF capacitor in parallel with the 30k feedback resistor on the op-amp,
> saying
>
> "The 100 pF capacitors ensure stability and reduce high frequency noise.
> They can be increased to reduce the low pass cutoff frequency for
> further noise reduction."
>
> [...]
>
> "If additional SSM2164s are added, the 100 pF capacitor may
> need to be increased to ensure stability of the output amplifier.
> Most op amps are sensitive to capacitance on their inverting
> inputs. The capacitance forms a pole with the feedback resistor,
> which reduces the high frequency phase margin. As more
> SSM2164???s are added to the mixer circuit, their output capacitance
> and the parasitic trace capacitance add, increasing the
> overall input capacitance. Increasing the feedback capacitor will
> maintain the stability of the output amplifier."
>
> The problem is that they already lowpass filter the sound a little bit
> - more than ?? dB rolloff at 20 kHz - and sometimes you might need a
> bigger resistor than 30k in order to optimize other aspects of the
> circuit, resulting in even more HF rolloff. Not awfully much, but you
> might have several of these stages in an audio path adding up to some
> decibels.
>
> But is 100 pF really needed?
> Is TL07x sensitive to capacitance on their inverting inputs?
> How about other common op-amps?
>
> Using the bread-and-butter op-amp TL074, has anybody tried out any
> variations on the 100 pF theme and run into problems?
>
> I've used as low value as 33 pF & 47k after *two* summed 2164s,
> withouth known problems yet. The datasheet pole recommendation would
> be 127 pF for this scenario. Should I worry? :-)
>
> (I'm sorry if this has been discussed already)
>
> /mr
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>




From tom at electricdruid.net  Wed Nov 25 19:50:46 2015
From: tom at electricdruid.net (Tom Wiltshire)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 18:50:46 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] 2164 -> TL074, 100 pF in feedback needed?
In-Reply-To: <CAP92RBXc5bK3qjwjbmxM4=NE1fEGnanjLVDhqLUU9LyrNLTyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAP92RBXc5bK3qjwjbmxM4=NE1fEGnanjLVDhqLUU9LyrNLTyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <96F945E7-B7DA-4E2D-93D6-C9D719798DF5@electricdruid.net>

I think the key phrase you used here is "not awfully much" ;)

The 30K/100p gives a Fc at 53KHz, which is a negligible effect on the audio range - a ? dB you say - no big deal. You could use 220p and you'll still not notice. Likewise, unless you connect a ton load of 2164s together, you could use 47p without any problems. The SSM2164 is pretty forgiving in my experience.

You ask "Should I worry?". I think the answer is "No", unless you've got some good reason to believe it's causing a problem. But you say you've reduced the cap's value on a pair of 2164s with no problems. I've used TL07x op-amps and forgot to put any cap at all, and never saw any ill effects from it. If there was any ultrasonic oscillation, it either wasn't of large amplitude, or it was filtered by subsequent stages before it caused serious trouble. I suspect the 100p value is fairly conservative (larger than necessary), and it can afford to be, when the cutoff is set a full octave off the top of the audio range.

HTH,
Tom

On 25 Nov 2015, at 16:43, Mattias Rickardsson <mr at analogue.org> wrote:

> Hi fellow 2164 addicts,  ;-)
> 
> the typical application circuit in the SSM2164 datasheet shows a 100
> pF capacitor in parallel with the 30k feedback resistor on the op-amp,
> saying
> 
> "The 100 pF capacitors ensure stability and reduce high frequency noise.
> They can be increased to reduce the low pass cutoff frequency for
> further noise reduction."
> 
> [...]
> 
> "If additional SSM2164s are added, the 100 pF capacitor may
> need to be increased to ensure stability of the output amplifier.
> Most op amps are sensitive to capacitance on their inverting
> inputs. The capacitance forms a pole with the feedback resistor,
> which reduces the high frequency phase margin. As more
> SSM2164?s are added to the mixer circuit, their output capacitance
> and the parasitic trace capacitance add, increasing the
> overall input capacitance. Increasing the feedback capacitor will
> maintain the stability of the output amplifier."
> 
> The problem is that they already lowpass filter the sound a little bit
> - more than ? dB rolloff at 20 kHz - and sometimes you might need a
> bigger resistor than 30k in order to optimize other aspects of the
> circuit, resulting in even more HF rolloff. Not awfully much, but you
> might have several of these stages in an audio path adding up to some
> decibels.
> 
> But is 100 pF really needed?
> Is TL07x sensitive to capacitance on their inverting inputs?
> How about other common op-amps?
> 
> Using the bread-and-butter op-amp TL074, has anybody tried out any
> variations on the 100 pF theme and run into problems?
> 
> I've used as low value as 33 pF & 47k after *two* summed 2164s,
> withouth known problems yet. The datasheet pole recommendation would
> be 127 pF for this scenario. Should I worry? :-)
> 
> (I'm sorry if this has been discussed already)
> 
> /mr
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Wed Nov 25 20:29:43 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:29:43 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle analogue & digital groundplanes
In-Reply-To: <96642C5F098248C187F1156C1FB795C6@RichiePC>
References: <96642C5F098248C187F1156C1FB795C6@RichiePC>
Message-ID: <44FD76D0-9121-4051-BB72-B1FFE61A12B6@audiobanshee.com>

I typically place an 0805 inductor link between analog and digital ground, near the analog supply regulator. In some cases, I've had to change the BoM from inductor to resistor or jumper. I think that placing the SMD pads there, in 0805 sizing, is a good step no matter how you connect the grounds.

Professional layout engineers seem to do a lot of manual work, in which case I'd imagine that they just live with the DRC violations.

I've read articles which claim that separate ground planes are not necessary - when placement and ground paths are properly controlled. However, I like to have the separate ground planes anyway, because it at least gives me a reminder of the ground paths that I've planned during placement. These articles talk about lots of stitching via links between layers for multiple ground planes, but that's only an option when you have the luxury of more than four layers, I'd say.

Brian Willoughby
Sound Consulting


On Nov 25, 2015, at 8:18 AM, Richie Burnett <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
> Out of interest what are Eagle PCB CAD users doing to connect together their analogue and digital ground-planes?
> 
> A wire-link, 0805 zero-ohm link, or over-lapping the polygons for the analog and digital ground-planes and accepting a DRC violation at the point where they're connected?
> 
> Those are the best ideas I had, but wondered if there's a clever way to do it.




From simon.o at brousant.nl  Wed Nov 25 20:45:31 2015
From: simon.o at brousant.nl (Simon Brouwer)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 20:45:31 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [sdiy] 2164 -> TL074, 100 pF in feedback needed?
In-Reply-To: <CAP92RBXc5bK3qjwjbmxM4=NE1fEGnanjLVDhqLUU9LyrNLTyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAP92RBXc5bK3qjwjbmxM4=NE1fEGnanjLVDhqLUU9LyrNLTyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2006322651.3697793.1448480731653.JavaMail.open-xchange@omgreatgod.store>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151125/f93cbb9e/attachment.htm>

From dixon at mail.ubc.ca  Wed Nov 25 20:53:15 2015
From: dixon at mail.ubc.ca (David G Dixon)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:53:15 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] 2164 -> TL074, 100 pF in feedback needed?
In-Reply-To: <CAP92RBXc5bK3qjwjbmxM4=NE1fEGnanjLVDhqLUU9LyrNLTyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAP92RBXc5bK3qjwjbmxM4=NE1fEGnanjLVDhqLUU9LyrNLTyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2E2D7D9D79154FB7A32A1C730447FB6B@galvanox01>

I believe a value as low as 22pF works fine.

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Synth-diy [mailto:synth-diy-bounces at dropmix.xs4all.nl] 
> On Behalf Of Mattias Rickardsson
> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 8:44 AM
> To: synthdiy diy
> Subject: [sdiy] 2164 -> TL074, 100 pF in feedback needed?
> 
> Hi fellow 2164 addicts,  ;-)
> 
> the typical application circuit in the SSM2164 datasheet 
> shows a 100 pF capacitor in parallel with the 30k feedback 
> resistor on the op-amp, saying
> 
> "The 100 pF capacitors ensure stability and reduce high 
> frequency noise.
> They can be increased to reduce the low pass cutoff frequency 
> for further noise reduction."
> 
> [...]
> 
> "If additional SSM2164s are added, the 100 pF capacitor may 
> need to be increased to ensure stability of the output amplifier.
> Most op amps are sensitive to capacitance on their inverting 
> inputs. The capacitance forms a pole with the feedback 
> resistor, which reduces the high frequency phase margin. As 
> more SSM2164?s are added to the mixer circuit, their output 
> capacitance and the parasitic trace capacitance add, 
> increasing the overall input capacitance. Increasing the 
> feedback capacitor will maintain the stability of the output 
> amplifier."
> 
> The problem is that they already lowpass filter the sound a little bit
> - more than ? dB rolloff at 20 kHz - and sometimes you might 
> need a bigger resistor than 30k in order to optimize other 
> aspects of the circuit, resulting in even more HF rolloff. 
> Not awfully much, but you might have several of these stages 
> in an audio path adding up to some decibels.
> 
> But is 100 pF really needed?
> Is TL07x sensitive to capacitance on their inverting inputs?
> How about other common op-amps?
> 
> Using the bread-and-butter op-amp TL074, has anybody tried 
> out any variations on the 100 pF theme and run into problems?
> 
> I've used as low value as 33 pF & 47k after *two* summed 
> 2164s, withouth known problems yet. The datasheet pole 
> recommendation would be 127 pF for this scenario. Should I worry? :-)
> 
> (I'm sorry if this has been discussed already)
> 
> /mr
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> 



From dave at westphila.net  Wed Nov 25 23:01:57 2015
From: dave at westphila.net (David Moylan)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 14:01:57 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
Message-ID: <56562FD5.5000000@westphila.net>

I remember coming across scans of a series of articles primarily related 
to effects that had fairly detailed analysis of circuits and a bunch of 
schematics.  I think they were all by one author.  Usually, one type of 
effect would be analyzed per article and different variations would be 
described.

I think these were from late seventies or eighties.  But for the life of 
me I can't remember any other information such as the author, magazine, 
or titles.  Googling hasn't helped.

Does this ring a bell for anyone?  It's not Electronotes or Device.

Going crazy trying to recall more info...

Thanks.

Dave


From synth1 at airmail.net  Wed Nov 25 23:04:58 2015
From: synth1 at airmail.net (Paul Schreiber)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 14:04:58 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
Message-ID: <20151125140458.282981D5@m0087794.ppops.net>

http://www.geofex.com/

Paul S.


--- dave at westphila.net wrote:

From: David Moylan <dave at westphila.net>
To: 'synthdiy diy' <synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl>
Subject: [sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 14:01:57 -0800

I remember coming across scans of a series of articles primarily related 
to effects that had fairly detailed analysis of circuits and a bunch of 
schematics.  I think they were all by one author.  Usually, one type of 
effect would be analyzed per article and different variations would be 
described.

I think these were from late seventies or eighties.  But for the life of 
me I can't remember any other information such as the author, magazine, 
or titles.  Googling hasn't helped.

Does this ring a bell for anyone?  It's not Electronotes or Device.

Going crazy trying to recall more info...

Thanks.

Dave
_______________________________________________
Synth-diy mailing list
Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy




From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Wed Nov 25 23:10:53 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 14:10:53 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
In-Reply-To: <56562FD5.5000000@westphila.net>
References: <56562FD5.5000000@westphila.net>
Message-ID: <CFAB231C-6BB0-4D21-93BC-D47313CFEF5D@audiobanshee.com>

Although it's not precisely what you describe, Craig Anderton's "Electronic Projects for Musicians" has chapters devoted each to a single effect, with design theory, schematics and variations.

I also remember that Polyphony magazine had some articles on synth modules with schematics.

I only remember synth circuits, but if you find your guitar effects article series, then please share!

Brian


On Nov 25, 2015, at 2:01 PM, David Moylan <dave at westphila.net> wrote:
> I remember coming across scans of a series of articles primarily related to effects that had fairly detailed analysis of circuits and a bunch of schematics.  I think they were all by one author.  Usually, one type of effect would be analyzed per article and different variations would be described.
> 
> I think these were from late seventies or eighties.  But for the life of me I can't remember any other information such as the author, magazine, or titles.  Googling hasn't helped.
> 
> Does this ring a bell for anyone?  It's not Electronotes or Device.
> 
> Going crazy trying to recall more info?



From dave at westphila.net  Wed Nov 25 23:10:55 2015
From: dave at westphila.net (David Moylan)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 14:10:55 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
In-Reply-To: <20151125140458.282981D5@m0087794.ppops.net>
References: <20151125140458.282981D5@m0087794.ppops.net>
Message-ID: <565631EF.80507@westphila.net>

Nope, they were definitely scans from a print publication.  Good guess 
though.


On 11/25/2015 02:04 PM, Paul Schreiber wrote:
> http://www.geofex.com/
>
> Paul S.
>
>
> --- dave at westphila.net wrote:
>
> From: David Moylan <dave at westphila.net>
> To: 'synthdiy diy' <synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl>
> Subject: [sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
> Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 14:01:57 -0800
>
> I remember coming across scans of a series of articles primarily related
> to effects that had fairly detailed analysis of circuits and a bunch of
> schematics.  I think they were all by one author.  Usually, one type of
> effect would be analyzed per article and different variations would be
> described.
>
> I think these were from late seventies or eighties.  But for the life of
> me I can't remember any other information such as the author, magazine,
> or titles.  Googling hasn't helped.
>
> Does this ring a bell for anyone?  It's not Electronotes or Device.
>
> Going crazy trying to recall more info...
>
> Thanks.
>
> Dave
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
>



From dave at westphila.net  Wed Nov 25 23:20:14 2015
From: dave at westphila.net (David Moylan)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 14:20:14 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
In-Reply-To: <CFAB231C-6BB0-4D21-93BC-D47313CFEF5D@audiobanshee.com>
References: <56562FD5.5000000@westphila.net>
 <CFAB231C-6BB0-4D21-93BC-D47313CFEF5D@audiobanshee.com>
Message-ID: <5656341E.8080103@westphila.net>

Also good guesses, but it's definitely not any of Anderton's stuff. 
Pretty sure it's not Polyphony...this was definitely all effects all the 
time, no real synth circuits.

On 11/25/2015 02:10 PM, rsdio at audiobanshee.com wrote:
> Although it's not precisely what you describe, Craig Anderton's "Electronic Projects for Musicians" has chapters devoted each to a single effect, with design theory, schematics and variations.
>
> I also remember that Polyphony magazine had some articles on synth modules with schematics.
>
> I only remember synth circuits, but if you find your guitar effects article series, then please share!
>
> Brian
>
>
> On Nov 25, 2015, at 2:01 PM, David Moylan <dave at westphila.net> wrote:
>> I remember coming across scans of a series of articles primarily related to effects that had fairly detailed analysis of circuits and a bunch of schematics.  I think they were all by one author.  Usually, one type of effect would be analyzed per article and different variations would be described.
>>
>> I think these were from late seventies or eighties.  But for the life of me I can't remember any other information such as the author, magazine, or titles.  Googling hasn't helped.
>>
>> Does this ring a bell for anyone?  It's not Electronotes or Device.
>>
>> Going crazy trying to recall more info?
>
>



From loscha at gmail.com  Wed Nov 25 23:21:38 2015
From: loscha at gmail.com (Loscha)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 09:21:38 +1100
Subject: [sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
In-Reply-To: <56562FD5.5000000@westphila.net>
References: <56562FD5.5000000@westphila.net>
Message-ID: <CAA25cvfU1W-vEnu-DFS8Ld0E4ua0q9a5XeqFptDRgZmfRtyc=Q@mail.gmail.com>

Mark Hamer's pages at Ampage is also a must see, although it's not the one
you're after.

http://hammer.ampage.org/

It's possible you're thinking of Craig Anderton's articles?

On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 9:01 AM, David Moylan <dave at westphila.net> wrote:

> I remember coming across scans of a series of articles primarily related
> to effects that had fairly detailed analysis of circuits and a bunch of
> schematics.  I think they were all by one author.  Usually, one type of
> effect would be analyzed per article and different variations would be
> described.
>
> I think these were from late seventies or eighties.  But for the life of
> me I can't remember any other information such as the author, magazine, or
> titles.  Googling hasn't helped.
>
> Does this ring a bell for anyone?  It's not Electronotes or Device.
>
> Going crazy trying to recall more info...
>
> Thanks.
>
> Dave
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151126/ac4a0c55/attachment.htm>

From jarno.verhoeven at ziggo.nl  Wed Nov 25 23:40:03 2015
From: jarno.verhoeven at ziggo.nl (jarno.verhoeven at ziggo.nl)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 23:40:03 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
Message-ID: <u7vpjlkvup4f4tda3dr1d6aa.1448491203171@email.lge.com>

Stompboxology?
You can find them on www.moosapotamus.net
Regards,Jarno.
------ Origineel bericht------Van: David MoylanDatum: wo, 25 nov. 2015 23:09Naar: 'synthdiy diy';CC: Onderwerp:[sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
I remember coming across scans of a series of articles primarily related to effects that had fairly detailed analysis of circuits and a bunch of schematics.  I think they were all by one author.  Usually, one type of effect would be analyzed per article and different variations would be described.I think these were from late seventies or eighties.  But for the life of me I can't remember any other information such as the author, magazine, or titles.  Googling hasn't helped.Does this ring a bell for anyone?  It's not Electronotes or Device.Going crazy trying to recall more info...Thanks.Dave_______________________________________________Synth-diy mailing listSynth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nlhttp://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151125/c132611c/attachment.htm>

From dave at westphila.net  Wed Nov 25 23:48:08 2015
From: dave at westphila.net (David Moylan)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 14:48:08 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
In-Reply-To: <u7vpjlkvup4f4tda3dr1d6aa.1448491203171@email.lge.com>
References: <u7vpjlkvup4f4tda3dr1d6aa.1448491203171@email.lge.com>
Message-ID: <56563AA8.5000402@westphila.net>

YES!  Thanks so much for figuring this out.  It was like a needle 
stabbing me... :)

On 11/25/2015 02:40 PM, jarno.verhoeven at ziggo.nl wrote:
> Stompboxology?
>
>
> You can find them on www.moosapotamus.net <http://www.moosapotamus.net>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Jarno.
>
>
> ------ Origineel bericht------
>
> *Van: *David Moylan
>
> *Datum: *wo, 25 nov. 2015 23:09
>
> *Naar: *'synthdiy diy';
>
> *CC: *
>
> *Onderwerp:*[sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
>
>
> I remember coming across scans of a series of articles primarily related to effects that had fairly detailed analysis of circuits and a bunch of schematics.  I think they were all by one author.  Usually, one type of effect would be analyzed per article and different variations would be described.I think these were from late seventies or eighties.  But for the life of me I can't remember any other information such as the author, magazine, or titles.  Googling hasn'thelped.Do <http://helped.Do>es this ring a bell for anyone?  It's not Electronotes or Device.Going crazy trying to recall more info...Thanks.Dave_______________________________________________Synth-diy mailinglistSynth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nlhttp://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> <http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy>
>



From tom at electricdruid.net  Wed Nov 25 23:57:56 2015
From: tom at electricdruid.net (Tom Wiltshire)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 22:57:56 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Harry Bissell's guitar synth envelope follower
Message-ID: <C7A068AE-D048-461D-AB4B-B927971A0AEB@electricdruid.net>

Hi All,

I've been studying Harry Bissell's clever envelope follower, as described in full here, if you haven't seen it:

	http://m.eet.com/media/1141271/18042-122602di.pdf

I've got a question about the output filtering. The relevant section is here:

	http://electricdruid.net/images/HarryBisselEnvFollow.png

I understand the round-robin resetting of the three peak detectors. That bit is ok. Please give me a hand getting my head around the next bit;

The three diodes provide the highest of the peak detector outputs (minus the diode drop, presumably) to the filter network.
The filter network consists of D28+R208, R205, C67, and R321 (note that this is 10K here, but 1K in the article).

Now, what I don't get is what the time constants of the filter are. Would it be the following? -

1) R205 + C67 provide the attack constant, except?
2) When D28 conducts (e.g. large rapid attacks) R208 will dominate the attack constant ( R208 and R205 in parallel)
3) R321 + C67 provide the decay constant.

Have I got this right?

Thanks!
Tom



From jdec at mindspring.com  Thu Nov 26 00:22:04 2015
From: jdec at mindspring.com (BrightBoy)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 18:22:04 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [sdiy] Harry Bissell's guitar synth envelope follower
Message-ID: <29010583.1448493724536.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Here's a burning question I've had lately....

What happened to Harry?

He used to be quite active on this list and Analogue Heaven
and then suddenly disappeared.

Has he moved his participation to a different forum(s)?

Jeff

-----Original Message-----

>From: Tom Wiltshire <tom at electricdruid.net>
>Sent: Nov 25, 2015 5:57 PM
>To: synthdiy diy <synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl>
>Subject: [sdiy] Harry Bissell's guitar synth envelope follower
>
>Hi All,
>
>I've been studying Harry Bissell's clever envelope follower, as described in full here, if you haven't seen it:
>
>	http://m.eet.com/media/1141271/18042-122602di.pdf
>
>I've got a question about the output filtering. The relevant section is here:
>
>	http://electricdruid.net/images/HarryBisselEnvFollow.png
>
>I understand the round-robin resetting of the three peak detectors. That bit is ok. Please give me a hand getting my head around the next bit;
>
>The three diodes provide the highest of the peak detector outputs (minus the diode drop, presumably) to the filter network.
>The filter network consists of D28+R208, R205, C67, and R321 (note that this is 10K here, but 1K in the article).
>
>Now, what I don't get is what the time constants of the filter are. Would it be the following? -
>
>1) R205 + C67 provide the attack constant, except?
>2) When D28 conducts (e.g. large rapid attacks) R208 will dominate the attack constant ( R208 and R205 in parallel)
>3) R321 + C67 provide the decay constant.
>
>Have I got this right?
>
>Thanks!
>Tom
>
>_______________________________________________
>Synth-diy mailing list
>Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



From barryklein at cox.net  Thu Nov 26 01:25:04 2015
From: barryklein at cox.net (Barry Klein)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 16:25:04 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
In-Reply-To: <lyV91r00v4AXc3W01yVD2j>
References: <56562FD5.5000000@westphila.net> <lyV91r00v4AXc3W01yVD2j>
Message-ID: <9B7E35FB-83A1-4DC4-9B9B-B105E6A8C297@cox.net>

The Stompbox Cookbook is quite good but unreal prices for it on Amazon. Anyone know the author : Nicholas Boscorelli?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 25, 2015, at 2:21 PM, Loscha <loscha at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Mark Hamer's pages at Ampage is also a must see, although it's not the one you're after.
> 
> http://hammer.ampage.org/
> 
> It's possible you're thinking of Craig Anderton's articles?
> 
>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 9:01 AM, David Moylan <dave at westphila.net> wrote:
>> I remember coming across scans of a series of articles primarily related to effects that had fairly detailed analysis of circuits and a bunch of schematics.  I think they were all by one author.  Usually, one type of effect would be analyzed per article and different variations would be described.
>> 
>> I think these were from late seventies or eighties.  But for the life of me I can't remember any other information such as the author, magazine, or titles.  Googling hasn't helped.
>> 
>> Does this ring a bell for anyone?  It's not Electronotes or Device.
>> 
>> Going crazy trying to recall more info...
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> 
>> Dave
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151125/4c6e00c4/attachment.htm>

From subjectivity at hotmail.com  Thu Nov 26 01:30:36 2015
From: subjectivity at hotmail.com (Dan Snazelle)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 19:30:36 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
In-Reply-To: <9B7E35FB-83A1-4DC4-9B9B-B105E6A8C297@cox.net>
References: <56562FD5.5000000@westphila.net> <lyV91r00v4AXc3W01yVD2j>
 <9B7E35FB-83A1-4DC4-9B9B-B105E6A8C297@cox.net>
Message-ID: <SNT405-EAS170003DAAF02BEE201CF93AC8040@phx.gbl>

A lot of people think that name is a pen-name 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 25, 2015, at 7:27 PM, Barry Klein <barryklein at cox.net> wrote:
> 
> The Stompbox Cookbook is quite good but unreal prices for it on Amazon. Anyone know the author : Nicholas Boscorelli?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 2:21 PM, Loscha <loscha at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Mark Hamer's pages at Ampage is also a must see, although it's not the one you're after.
>> 
>> http://hammer.ampage.org/
>> 
>> It's possible you're thinking of Craig Anderton's articles?
>> 
>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 9:01 AM, David Moylan <dave at westphila.net> wrote:
>>> I remember coming across scans of a series of articles primarily related to effects that had fairly detailed analysis of circuits and a bunch of schematics.  I think they were all by one author.  Usually, one type of effect would be analyzed per article and different variations would be described.
>>> 
>>> I think these were from late seventies or eighties.  But for the life of me I can't remember any other information such as the author, magazine, or titles.  Googling hasn't helped.
>>> 
>>> Does this ring a bell for anyone?  It's not Electronotes or Device.
>>> 
>>> Going crazy trying to recall more info...
>>> 
>>> Thanks.
>>> 
>>> Dave
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Synth-diy mailing list
>>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151125/775bad87/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Synth-diy mailing list
Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

From djthomaswhite at gmail.com  Thu Nov 26 04:33:53 2015
From: djthomaswhite at gmail.com (Thomas White)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 19:33:53 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Paia: John Simonton, 10 years ago...
Message-ID: <72CD0E74-A41B-4758-BDAF-9D6EB7AABF26@gmail.com>

Hard to believe it's been 10 years to the day since John at Paia died. He was a great mentor for me and many and the Fatman was my first mono synth. I miss the old days. 

Thomas White
Natural Rhythm Music
www.naturalrhythmmusic.com

From dlmanley at sonic.net  Thu Nov 26 05:45:57 2015
From: dlmanley at sonic.net (Dave Manley)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 20:45:57 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Paia: John Simonton, 10 years ago...
In-Reply-To: <72CD0E74-A41B-4758-BDAF-9D6EB7AABF26@gmail.com>
References: <72CD0E74-A41B-4758-BDAF-9D6EB7AABF26@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D28D46A0-B560-4170-9EEA-7D741E59159E@sonic.net>

2720 as featured in a Radio Electronics Magazine article for me.  Later I had the good fortune to work with Marvin Jones. See: http://sonic.net/mjones/paia/index.html.

-Dave



On November 25, 2015 7:33:53 PM PST, Thomas White <djthomaswhite at gmail.com> wrote:
>Hard to believe it's been 10 years to the day since John at Paia died.
>He was a great mentor for me and many and the Fatman was my first mono
>synth. I miss the old days. 
>
>Thomas White
>Natural Rhythm Music
>www.naturalrhythmmusic.com
>_______________________________________________
>Synth-diy mailing list
>Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



From dave at westphila.net  Thu Nov 26 06:36:06 2015
From: dave at westphila.net (David Moylan)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 21:36:06 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Paia: John Simonton, 10 years ago...
In-Reply-To: <D28D46A0-B560-4170-9EEA-7D741E59159E@sonic.net>
References: <72CD0E74-A41B-4758-BDAF-9D6EB7AABF26@gmail.com>
 <D28D46A0-B560-4170-9EEA-7D741E59159E@sonic.net>
Message-ID: <56569A46.2080400@westphila.net>

I think they were a catalyst for so many.  A lot of unique ideas came 
from Paia: Oz, Gnome, Chord Egg, Organtua.  A great balance of funky and 
low cost.  I still have an Ebay search for "Paia" bookmarked just to see 
what pops up...

On 11/25/2015 08:45 PM, Dave Manley wrote:
> 2720 as featured in a Radio Electronics Magazine article for me.  Later I had the good fortune to work with Marvin Jones. See: http://sonic.net/mjones/paia/index.html.
>
> -Dave
>
>
>
> On November 25, 2015 7:33:53 PM PST, Thomas White <djthomaswhite at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hard to believe it's been 10 years to the day since John at Paia died.
>> He was a great mentor for me and many and the Fatman was my first mono
>> synth. I miss the old days.
>>
>> Thomas White
>> Natural Rhythm Music
>> www.naturalrhythmmusic.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>



From mec.forumreader at gmail.com  Thu Nov 26 07:55:47 2015
From: mec.forumreader at gmail.com (Michael E Caloroso)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 01:55:47 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] Harry Bissell's guitar synth envelope follower
In-Reply-To: <29010583.1448493724536.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <29010583.1448493724536.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <CAAv6=UDxmLGxaLz1SYZ8zuD-3pCGEu6G6aWRAseYD-+QkUVGzg@mail.gmail.com>

Harry remarried and had a child.  His priorities changed rather abruptly.

MC

On 11/25/15, BrightBoy <jdec at mindspring.com> wrote:
> Here's a burning question I've had lately....
>
> What happened to Harry?
>
> He used to be quite active on this list and Analogue Heaven
> and then suddenly disappeared.
>
> Has he moved his participation to a different forum(s)?
>
> Jeff
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
>>From: Tom Wiltshire <tom at electricdruid.net>
>>Sent: Nov 25, 2015 5:57 PM
>>To: synthdiy diy <synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl>
>>Subject: [sdiy] Harry Bissell's guitar synth envelope follower
>>
>>Hi All,
>>
>>I've been studying Harry Bissell's clever envelope follower, as described
>> in full here, if you haven't seen it:
>>
>>	http://m.eet.com/media/1141271/18042-122602di.pdf
>>
>>I've got a question about the output filtering. The relevant section is
>> here:
>>
>>	http://electricdruid.net/images/HarryBisselEnvFollow.png
>>
>>I understand the round-robin resetting of the three peak detectors. That
>> bit is ok. Please give me a hand getting my head around the next bit;
>>
>>The three diodes provide the highest of the peak detector outputs (minus
>> the diode drop, presumably) to the filter network.
>>The filter network consists of D28+R208, R205, C67, and R321 (note that
>> this is 10K here, but 1K in the article).
>>
>>Now, what I don't get is what the time constants of the filter are. Would
>> it be the following? -
>>
>>1) R205 + C67 provide the attack constant, except?
>>2) When D28 conducts (e.g. large rapid attacks) R208 will dominate the
>> attack constant ( R208 and R205 in parallel)
>>3) R321 + C67 provide the decay constant.
>>
>>Have I got this right?
>>
>>Thanks!
>>Tom
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Synth-diy mailing list
>>Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>>http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>


From mec.forumreader at gmail.com  Thu Nov 26 07:58:19 2015
From: mec.forumreader at gmail.com (Michael E Caloroso)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 01:58:19 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] Paia: John Simonton, 10 years ago...
In-Reply-To: <56569A46.2080400@westphila.net>
References: <72CD0E74-A41B-4758-BDAF-9D6EB7AABF26@gmail.com>
 <D28D46A0-B560-4170-9EEA-7D741E59159E@sonic.net>
 <56569A46.2080400@westphila.net>
Message-ID: <CAAv6=UAC_83EZ9RjRWS5q2+ZEqGOuhSrQQ48jMcOd_H8rZOKGQ@mail.gmail.com>

Building my 4700 modular just after high school started me down my
engineering career path.  John had many engineers tell him that their
first start was building PAiA stuff.  He said he always apologized.

MC

On 11/26/15, David Moylan <dave at westphila.net> wrote:
> I think they were a catalyst for so many.  A lot of unique ideas came
> from Paia: Oz, Gnome, Chord Egg, Organtua.  A great balance of funky and
> low cost.  I still have an Ebay search for "Paia" bookmarked just to see
> what pops up...
>
> On 11/25/2015 08:45 PM, Dave Manley wrote:
>> 2720 as featured in a Radio Electronics Magazine article for me.  Later I
>> had the good fortune to work with Marvin Jones. See:
>> http://sonic.net/mjones/paia/index.html.
>>
>> -Dave
>>
>>
>>
>> On November 25, 2015 7:33:53 PM PST, Thomas White
>> <djthomaswhite at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hard to believe it's been 10 years to the day since John at Paia died.
>>> He was a great mentor for me and many and the Fatman was my first mono
>>> synth. I miss the old days.
>>>
>>> Thomas White
>>> Natural Rhythm Music
>>> www.naturalrhythmmusic.com
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Synth-diy mailing list
>>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>


From jarno.verhoeven at ziggo.nl  Thu Nov 26 08:04:20 2015
From: jarno.verhoeven at ziggo.nl (jarno.verhoeven at ziggo.nl)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 08:04:20 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
Message-ID: <0ndvtfoqrktlack3b3ismsbl.1448521460262@email.lge.com>

IIRC, a PDF of that book can be found, I've seen it. Freestompboxes forum?
------ Origineel bericht------Van: Dan SnazelleDatum: do, 26 nov. 2015 01:34Naar: Barry Klein;CC: synthdiy diy;Onderwerp:Re: [sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
A lot of people think that name is a pen-name?

Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 25, 2015, at 7:27 PM, Barry Klein <barryklein at cox.net> wrote:

The Stompbox Cookbook is quite good but unreal prices for it on Amazon. Anyone know the author : Nicholas Boscorelli?

Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 25, 2015, at 2:21 PM, Loscha <loscha at gmail.com> wrote:

Mark Hamer's pages at Ampage is also a must see, although it's not the one you're after.

http://hammer.ampage.org/

It's possible you're thinking of Craig Anderton's articles?

On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 9:01 AM, David Moylan <dave at westphila.net> wrote:
I remember coming across scans of a series of articles primarily related to effects that had fairly detailed analysis of circuits and a bunch of schematics.? I think they were all by one author.? Usually, one type of effect would be analyzed per article and different variations would be described.

I think these were from late seventies or eighties.? But for the life of me I can't remember any other information such as the author, magazine, or titles.? Googling hasn't helped.

Does this ring a bell for anyone?? It's not Electronotes or Device.

Going crazy trying to recall more info...

Thanks.

Dave
_______________________________________________
Synth-diy mailing list
Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

_______________________________________________
Synth-diy mailing list
Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
_______________________________________________
Synth-diy mailing list
Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151126/2c71e235/attachment.htm>

From maohelin at gmail.com  Thu Nov 26 08:08:05 2015
From: maohelin at gmail.com (Mikko Helin)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 09:08:05 +0200
Subject: [sdiy] Old guitar effects articles/series?
In-Reply-To: <SNT405-EAS170003DAAF02BEE201CF93AC8040@phx.gbl>
References: <56562FD5.5000000@westphila.net>
 <9B7E35FB-83A1-4DC4-9B9B-B105E6A8C297@cox.net>
 <SNT405-EAS170003DAAF02BEE201CF93AC8040@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <CAJ5nAj4G_v__Zh22Ww5t_HhQqR=qfxF5+RtY9ZQp_8=BJbYnEg@mail.gmail.com>

Good analysis of various stomp boxes can be found here:

http://www.electrosmash.com/

-Mikko

On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 2:30 AM, Dan Snazelle <subjectivity at hotmail.com>
wrote:

> A lot of people think that name is a pen-name
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 25, 2015, at 7:27 PM, Barry Klein <barryklein at cox.net> wrote:
>
> The Stompbox Cookbook is quite good but unreal prices for it on Amazon.
> Anyone know the author : Nicholas Boscorelli?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 25, 2015, at 2:21 PM, Loscha <loscha at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Mark Hamer's pages at Ampage is also a must see, although it's not the one
> you're after.
>
> http://hammer.ampage.org/
>
> It's possible you're thinking of Craig Anderton's articles?
>
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 9:01 AM, David Moylan <dave at westphila.net> wrote:
>
>> I remember coming across scans of a series of articles primarily related
>> to effects that had fairly detailed analysis of circuits and a bunch of
>> schematics.  I think they were all by one author.  Usually, one type of
>> effect would be analyzed per article and different variations would be
>> described.
>>
>> I think these were from late seventies or eighties.  But for the life of
>> me I can't remember any other information such as the author, magazine, or
>> titles.  Googling hasn't helped.
>>
>> Does this ring a bell for anyone?  It's not Electronotes or Device.
>>
>> Going crazy trying to recall more info...
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Dave
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151126/cfb6a4c5/attachment.htm>

From sdiy-mz01 at blauwurf.info  Thu Nov 26 11:36:49 2015
From: sdiy-mz01 at blauwurf.info (Michael Zacherl)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 11:36:49 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Harry Bissell's guitar synth envelope follower
In-Reply-To: <CAAv6=UDxmLGxaLz1SYZ8zuD-3pCGEu6G6aWRAseYD-+QkUVGzg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <29010583.1448493724536.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
 <CAAv6=UDxmLGxaLz1SYZ8zuD-3pCGEu6G6aWRAseYD-+QkUVGzg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D51C9120-A603-4E8A-A583-D7C361727334@blauwurf.info>


On 26.Nov 2015, at 7:55 , Michael E Caloroso <mec.forumreader at gmail.com> wrote:

> Harry remarried and had a child.  His priorities changed rather abruptly.

I think we can take that as that's good news!  :)

> On 11/25/15, BrightBoy <jdec at mindspring.com> wrote:
>> Here's a burning question I've had lately....
>> 
>> What happened to Harry?
>> 
>> He used to be quite active on this list and Analogue Heaven
>> and then suddenly disappeared.
>> 
>> Has he moved his participation to a different forum(s)?



--
http://mz.klingt.org



From plodger at gmail.com  Thu Nov 26 12:51:14 2015
From: plodger at gmail.com (Sarah Thompson)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 03:51:14 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle analogue & digital groundplanes
In-Reply-To: <44FD76D0-9121-4051-BB72-B1FFE61A12B6@audiobanshee.com>
References: <96642C5F098248C187F1156C1FB795C6@RichiePC>
 <44FD76D0-9121-4051-BB72-B1FFE61A12B6@audiobanshee.com>
Message-ID: <74F13860-0CEA-4818-8F53-D673E69E5DED@gmail.com>

I got weened off my previous tendency to use split ground planes due to the EMC training I got courtesy NASA Goddard (I works at NASA Ames -- a lot of Goddard's courses are available online if you go digging for them -- I'd recommend it, they made me a much better designer). 

Basically, split ground planes do work at audio frequencies up to a point, but they are terrible at higher frequencies. The short version is all signals have a current return path across any adjacent ground and/or power plane(s), which gets more localized as frequencies increase. Once you are into a few MHz, this is sufficient that if you try to make a signal span a gap across two planes it will pretty much get lost in the process -- all of this energy ends up either radiated as unintended EMI or splattered across your other signals or both. In one case I saw a board, just about 4 inches square, where a 2.5V LVDS clock at just 10MHz failed to get from one side of the board to the other because it had to cross a couple of splits -- the effect is actually very strong indeed. The right way to deal with this is to use a single ground plane whilst being VERY careful with routing, being cognizant of where the ground return paths are going and treating them effectively as signals in their own right, with particular attention to signals that cross each other on adjacent planes.

Where budget allows, adding extra ground planes is the secret special sauce that makes problems go away. On one of my recent projects I did a 12 layer stackup which went (top to bottom) signal, ground, signal, ground, signal, ground, power, power, power, power, ground, signal. All four signal layers were impedance controlled so that 0.003" traces were 50 ohm to ground and 100 ohm between adjacent LVDS pairs. This basically let me safely have multiple splits in the power planes, since signals only ever ran adjacent to ground planes and no signals ever crossed each other in adjacent planes. This was expensive, I'll admit, but it allowed for a very small board with lots of high speed digital, precision analog and 8 switching DC-DC converters with absolutely no signal integrity issues even on the first spin. It was all just done on EAGLE, no fancy SI tools were used.

Sarah 

> On Nov 25, 2015, at 11:29 AM, rsdio at audiobanshee.com wrote:
> 
> I typically place an 0805 inductor link between analog and digital ground, near the analog supply regulator. In some cases, I've had to change the BoM from inductor to resistor or jumper. I think that placing the SMD pads there, in 0805 sizing, is a good step no matter how you connect the grounds.
> 
> Professional layout engineers seem to do a lot of manual work, in which case I'd imagine that they just live with the DRC violations.
> 
> I've read articles which claim that separate ground planes are not necessary - when placement and ground paths are properly controlled. However, I like to have the separate ground planes anyway, because it at least gives me a reminder of the ground paths that I've planned during placement. These articles talk about lots of stitching via links between layers for multiple ground planes, but that's only an option when you have the luxury of more than four layers, I'd say.
> 
> Brian Willoughby
> Sound Consulting
> 
> 
>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 8:18 AM, Richie Burnett <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
>> Out of interest what are Eagle PCB CAD users doing to connect together their analogue and digital ground-planes?
>> 
>> A wire-link, 0805 zero-ohm link, or over-lapping the polygons for the analog and digital ground-planes and accepting a DRC violation at the point where they're connected?
>> 
>> Those are the best ideas I had, but wondered if there's a clever way to do it.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


From modular at go2.pl  Thu Nov 26 14:33:59 2015
From: modular at go2.pl (Roman Sowa)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 14:33:59 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle analogue & digital groundplanes
In-Reply-To: <74F13860-0CEA-4818-8F53-D673E69E5DED@gmail.com>
References: <96642C5F098248C187F1156C1FB795C6@RichiePC>
 <44FD76D0-9121-4051-BB72-B1FFE61A12B6@audiobanshee.com>
 <74F13860-0CEA-4818-8F53-D673E69E5DED@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <56570A47.9040109@go2.pl>

3 mils traces? Not every PCB fab can make this. And at that trace width 
the edges will be relatively ragged quite a bit, so not so much 
controlled impedance.

I want a job at NASA too :)

Roman

W dniu 2015-11-26 o 12:51, Sarah Thompson pisze:
> I got weened off my previous tendency to use split ground planes due to the EMC training I got courtesy NASA Goddard (I works at NASA Ames -- a lot of Goddard's courses are available online if you go digging for them -- I'd recommend it, they made me a much better designer).
>
> Basically, split ground planes do work at audio frequencies up to a point, but they are terrible at higher frequencies. The short version is all signals have a current return path across any adjacent ground and/or power plane(s), which gets more localized as frequencies increase. Once you are into a few MHz, this is sufficient that if you try to make a signal span a gap across two planes it will pretty much get lost in the process -- all of this energy ends up either radiated as unintended EMI or splattered across your other signals or both. In one case I saw a board, just about 4 inches square, where a 2.5V LVDS clock at just 10MHz failed to get from one side of the board to the other because it had to cross a couple of splits -- the effect is actually very strong indeed. The right way to deal with this is to use a single ground plane whilst being VERY careful with routing, being cognizant of where the ground return paths are going and treating them effectively as signals in
>    their own right, with particular attention to signals that cross each other on adjacent planes.
>
> Where budget allows, adding extra ground planes is the secret special sauce that makes problems go away. On one of my recent projects I did a 12 layer stackup which went (top to bottom) signal, ground, signal, ground, signal, ground, power, power, power, power, ground, signal. All four signal layers were impedance controlled so that 0.003" traces were 50 ohm to ground and 100 ohm between adjacent LVDS pairs. This basically let me safely have multiple splits in the power planes, since signals only ever ran adjacent to ground planes and no signals ever crossed each other in adjacent planes. This was expensive, I'll admit, but it allowed for a very small board with lots of high speed digital, precision analog and 8 switching DC-DC converters with absolutely no signal integrity issues even on the first spin. It was all just done on EAGLE, no fancy SI tools were used.
>
> Sarah
>
>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 11:29 AM, rsdio at audiobanshee.com wrote:
>>
>> I typically place an 0805 inductor link between analog and digital ground, near the analog supply regulator. In some cases, I've had to change the BoM from inductor to resistor or jumper. I think that placing the SMD pads there, in 0805 sizing, is a good step no matter how you connect the grounds.
>>
>> Professional layout engineers seem to do a lot of manual work, in which case I'd imagine that they just live with the DRC violations.
>>
>> I've read articles which claim that separate ground planes are not necessary - when placement and ground paths are properly controlled. However, I like to have the separate ground planes anyway, because it at least gives me a reminder of the ground paths that I've planned during placement. These articles talk about lots of stitching via links between layers for multiple ground planes, but that's only an option when you have the luxury of more than four layers, I'd say.
>>
>> Brian Willoughby
>> Sound Consulting
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 8:18 AM, Richie Burnett <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Out of interest what are Eagle PCB CAD users doing to connect together their analogue and digital ground-planes?
>>>
>>> A wire-link, 0805 zero-ohm link, or over-lapping the polygons for the analog and digital ground-planes and accepting a DRC violation at the point where they're connected?
>>>
>>> Those are the best ideas I had, but wondered if there's a clever way to do it.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>


From mr at analogue.org  Thu Nov 26 17:50:56 2015
From: mr at analogue.org (Mattias Rickardsson)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 17:50:56 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Harry Bissell's guitar synth envelope follower
In-Reply-To: <D51C9120-A603-4E8A-A583-D7C361727334@blauwurf.info>
References: <29010583.1448493724536.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
 <CAAv6=UDxmLGxaLz1SYZ8zuD-3pCGEu6G6aWRAseYD-+QkUVGzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <D51C9120-A603-4E8A-A583-D7C361727334@blauwurf.info>
Message-ID: <CAP92RBUNKLLNdDCPwpo9MgAEZaknC7rMXEjV2rQWGPUiddZ6bQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 26 November 2015 at 11:36, Michael Zacherl <sdiy-mz01 at blauwurf.info> wrote:
> On 26.Nov 2015, at 7:55 , Michael E Caloroso <mec.forumreader at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Harry remarried and had a child.  His priorities changed rather abruptly.
>
> I think we can take that as that's good news!  :)

Ah, good to hear. That's good news.
I miss Harry from time to time.
Great little circuit idea there! :-)

/mr


From rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk  Thu Nov 26 18:45:34 2015
From: rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk (rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 17:45:34 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle analogue & digital groundplanes
In-Reply-To: <74F13860-0CEA-4818-8F53-D673E69E5DED@gmail.com>
References: <96642C5F098248C187F1156C1FB795C6@RichiePC>
 <44FD76D0-9121-4051-BB72-B1FFE61A12B6@audiobanshee.com>
 <74F13860-0CEA-4818-8F53-D673E69E5DED@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3c5a1e69e0fb187e6484b93480385057@richieburnett.co.uk>

Hi Sarah,

Thanks for the detailed reply.  I totally agree with everything you said 
about tracking from an EMC compliance point of view.

The only line I find strange is this one "Once you are into a few MHz, 
this is sufficient that if you try to make a signal span a gap across 
two planes it will pretty much get lost in the process".  Surely the 
whole idea of using separate ground-plane areas is that you DON'T try to 
make high-frequency signals cross a gap between two different planes?

All your low-frequency analogue things have return paths in the analogue 
ground plane, and all your multi-MHz HF things have return paths in the 
digital ground plane, and in an ideal world the two don't cross.  (The 
ADCs and DACs sit on the boundary of the two ground planes with digital 
traces leaving over the digital ground-plane and analogue traces leaving 
the other direction over the analogue ground-plane?)

Or are you saying that your design wasn't as simple as:  Analogue = 
Low-frequency,  Digital = High-frequency

I can imagine that things get a whole lot more complicated (and harder 
from an EMC compliance point of view) if you have to deal with very 
high-frequency analogue signals too!?

Best regards,

-Richie,

On 2015-11-26 11:51, Sarah Thompson wrote:
> I got weened off my previous tendency to use split ground planes due
> to the EMC training I got courtesy NASA Goddard (I works at NASA Ames
> -- a lot of Goddard's courses are available online if you go digging
> for them -- I'd recommend it, they made me a much better designer).
> 
> Basically, split ground planes do work at audio frequencies up to a
> point, but they are terrible at higher frequencies. The short version
> is all signals have a current return path across any adjacent ground
> and/or power plane(s), which gets more localized as frequencies
> increase. Once you are into a few MHz, this is sufficient that if you
> try to make a signal span a gap across two planes it will pretty much
> get lost in the process -- all of this energy ends up either radiated
> as unintended EMI or splattered across your other signals or both. In
> one case I saw a board, just about 4 inches square, where a 2.5V LVDS
> clock at just 10MHz failed to get from one side of the board to the
> other because it had to cross a couple of splits -- the effect is
> actually very strong indeed. The right way to deal with this is to use
> a single ground plane whilst being VERY careful with routing, being
> cognizant of where the ground return paths are going and treating them
> effectively as signals in their own right, with particular attention
> to signals that cross each other on adjacent planes.
> 
> Where budget allows, adding extra ground planes is the secret special
> sauce that makes problems go away. On one of my recent projects I did
> a 12 layer stackup which went (top to bottom) signal, ground, signal,
> ground, signal, ground, power, power, power, power, ground, signal.
> All four signal layers were impedance controlled so that 0.003" traces
> were 50 ohm to ground and 100 ohm between adjacent LVDS pairs. This
> basically let me safely have multiple splits in the power planes,
> since signals only ever ran adjacent to ground planes and no signals
> ever crossed each other in adjacent planes. This was expensive, I'll
> admit, but it allowed for a very small board with lots of high speed
> digital, precision analog and 8 switching DC-DC converters with
> absolutely no signal integrity issues even on the first spin. It was
> all just done on EAGLE, no fancy SI tools were used.
> 
> Sarah
> 
>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 11:29 AM, rsdio at audiobanshee.com wrote:
>> 
>> I typically place an 0805 inductor link between analog and digital 
>> ground, near the analog supply regulator. In some cases, I've had to 
>> change the BoM from inductor to resistor or jumper. I think that 
>> placing the SMD pads there, in 0805 sizing, is a good step no matter 
>> how you connect the grounds.
>> 
>> Professional layout engineers seem to do a lot of manual work, in 
>> which case I'd imagine that they just live with the DRC violations.
>> 
>> I've read articles which claim that separate ground planes are not 
>> necessary - when placement and ground paths are properly controlled. 
>> However, I like to have the separate ground planes anyway, because it 
>> at least gives me a reminder of the ground paths that I've planned 
>> during placement. These articles talk about lots of stitching via 
>> links between layers for multiple ground planes, but that's only an 
>> option when you have the luxury of more than four layers, I'd say.
>> 
>> Brian Willoughby
>> Sound Consulting
>> 
>> 
>>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 8:18 AM, Richie Burnett 
>>> <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Out of interest what are Eagle PCB CAD users doing to connect 
>>> together their analogue and digital ground-planes?
>>> 
>>> A wire-link, 0805 zero-ohm link, or over-lapping the polygons for the 
>>> analog and digital ground-planes and accepting a DRC violation at the 
>>> point where they're connected?
>>> 
>>> Those are the best ideas I had, but wondered if there's a clever way 
>>> to do it.
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Thu Nov 26 21:28:46 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 12:28:46 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle analogue & digital groundplanes
In-Reply-To: <3c5a1e69e0fb187e6484b93480385057@richieburnett.co.uk>
References: <96642C5F098248C187F1156C1FB795C6@RichiePC>
 <44FD76D0-9121-4051-BB72-B1FFE61A12B6@audiobanshee.com>
 <74F13860-0CEA-4818-8F53-D673E69E5DED@gmail.com>
 <3c5a1e69e0fb187e6484b93480385057@richieburnett.co.uk>
Message-ID: <D342E80F-38A0-4D96-B382-FBEAC57C7F3B@audiobanshee.com>

Yes, thanks, Sarah. Lots of good information in your write-up, especially mentioning the online Goddard training courses.

I was going to bring up the same point as Richie. When I design four-layer boards with split ground planes, I never have signals cross planes. Even the mixed-signal chips that I use, like 1-to-16 analog multiplexers, keep the digital signals separate from the analog signals. I just place those chips so that the digital pins are over the digital plane and the analog pins are over the analog ground plane. Thus, no signal traces need to cross the gaps between ground planes. There have been a few exceptions that require strangely-shaped polygons for the ground planes, but after I get the shape right I still never need traces to cross gaps. I'm dealing with 4 MHz to 20 MHz digital signals and upwards of 60 kHz analog signals.

Brian


On Nov 26, 2015, at 9:45 AM, rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk wrote:
> Hi Sarah,
> 
> Thanks for the detailed reply.  I totally agree with everything you said about tracking from an EMC compliance point of view.
> 
> The only line I find strange is this one "Once you are into a few MHz, this is sufficient that if you try to make a signal span a gap across two planes it will pretty much get lost in the process".  Surely the whole idea of using separate ground-plane areas is that you DON'T try to make high-frequency signals cross a gap between two different planes?
> 
> All your low-frequency analogue things have return paths in the analogue ground plane, and all your multi-MHz HF things have return paths in the digital ground plane, and in an ideal world the two don't cross.  (The ADCs and DACs sit on the boundary of the two ground planes with digital traces leaving over the digital ground-plane and analogue traces leaving the other direction over the analogue ground-plane?)
> 
> Or are you saying that your design wasn't as simple as:  Analogue = Low-frequency,  Digital = High-frequency
> 
> I can imagine that things get a whole lot more complicated (and harder from an EMC compliance point of view) if you have to deal with very high-frequency analogue signals too!?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> -Richie,
> 
> On 2015-11-26 11:51, Sarah Thompson wrote:
>> I got weened off my previous tendency to use split ground planes due
>> to the EMC training I got courtesy NASA Goddard (I works at NASA Ames
>> -- a lot of Goddard's courses are available online if you go digging
>> for them -- I'd recommend it, they made me a much better designer).
>> Basically, split ground planes do work at audio frequencies up to a
>> point, but they are terrible at higher frequencies. The short version
>> is all signals have a current return path across any adjacent ground
>> and/or power plane(s), which gets more localized as frequencies
>> increase. Once you are into a few MHz, this is sufficient that if you
>> try to make a signal span a gap across two planes it will pretty much
>> get lost in the process -- all of this energy ends up either radiated
>> as unintended EMI or splattered across your other signals or both. In
>> one case I saw a board, just about 4 inches square, where a 2.5V LVDS
>> clock at just 10MHz failed to get from one side of the board to the
>> other because it had to cross a couple of splits -- the effect is
>> actually very strong indeed. The right way to deal with this is to use
>> a single ground plane whilst being VERY careful with routing, being
>> cognizant of where the ground return paths are going and treating them
>> effectively as signals in their own right, with particular attention
>> to signals that cross each other on adjacent planes.
>> Where budget allows, adding extra ground planes is the secret special
>> sauce that makes problems go away. On one of my recent projects I did
>> a 12 layer stackup which went (top to bottom) signal, ground, signal,
>> ground, signal, ground, power, power, power, power, ground, signal.
>> All four signal layers were impedance controlled so that 0.003" traces
>> were 50 ohm to ground and 100 ohm between adjacent LVDS pairs. This
>> basically let me safely have multiple splits in the power planes,
>> since signals only ever ran adjacent to ground planes and no signals
>> ever crossed each other in adjacent planes. This was expensive, I'll
>> admit, but it allowed for a very small board with lots of high speed
>> digital, precision analog and 8 switching DC-DC converters with
>> absolutely no signal integrity issues even on the first spin. It was
>> all just done on EAGLE, no fancy SI tools were used.
>> Sarah
>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 11:29 AM, rsdio at audiobanshee.com wrote:
>>> I typically place an 0805 inductor link between analog and digital ground, near the analog supply regulator. In some cases, I've had to change the BoM from inductor to resistor or jumper. I think that placing the SMD pads there, in 0805 sizing, is a good step no matter how you connect the grounds.
>>> Professional layout engineers seem to do a lot of manual work, in which case I'd imagine that they just live with the DRC violations.
>>> I've read articles which claim that separate ground planes are not necessary - when placement and ground paths are properly controlled. However, I like to have the separate ground planes anyway, because it at least gives me a reminder of the ground paths that I've planned during placement. These articles talk about lots of stitching via links between layers for multiple ground planes, but that's only an option when you have the luxury of more than four layers, I'd say.
>>> Brian Willoughby
>>> Sound Consulting
>>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 8:18 AM, Richie Burnett <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Out of interest what are Eagle PCB CAD users doing to connect together their analogue and digital ground-planes?
>>>> A wire-link, 0805 zero-ohm link, or over-lapping the polygons for the analog and digital ground-planes and accepting a DRC violation at the point where they're connected?
>>>> Those are the best ideas I had, but wondered if there's a clever way to do it.
> 


From plodger at gmail.com  Fri Nov 27 02:12:38 2015
From: plodger at gmail.com (Sarah Thompson)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 17:12:38 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle analogue & digital groundplanes
In-Reply-To: <3c5a1e69e0fb187e6484b93480385057@richieburnett.co.uk>
References: <96642C5F098248C187F1156C1FB795C6@RichiePC>
 <44FD76D0-9121-4051-BB72-B1FFE61A12B6@audiobanshee.com>
 <74F13860-0CEA-4818-8F53-D673E69E5DED@gmail.com>
 <3c5a1e69e0fb187e6484b93480385057@richieburnett.co.uk>
Message-ID: <CACVQNWU6fAs1YAnr=LN==2sYTbVo0nzDS6NCf5883nXN63C8yA@mail.gmail.com>

Not my design! It was due to someone who won't do it like that a second
time!

A lot of real designs don't have an easy demarcation between analog and
digital, so the Goddard training was basically in favor of unspaghettifying
(my word, not theirs) the circuit so that the return paths don't cross, but
they basically made the argument that if you were tying the planes
together, you are still better off with a single plane. They backed it up
with experimental data.

Sarah

On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 9:45 AM, <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:

> Hi Sarah,
>
> Thanks for the detailed reply.  I totally agree with everything you said
> about tracking from an EMC compliance point of view.
>
> The only line I find strange is this one "Once you are into a few MHz,
> this is sufficient that if you try to make a signal span a gap across two
> planes it will pretty much get lost in the process".  Surely the whole idea
> of using separate ground-plane areas is that you DON'T try to make
> high-frequency signals cross a gap between two different planes?
>
> All your low-frequency analogue things have return paths in the analogue
> ground plane, and all your multi-MHz HF things have return paths in the
> digital ground plane, and in an ideal world the two don't cross.  (The ADCs
> and DACs sit on the boundary of the two ground planes with digital traces
> leaving over the digital ground-plane and analogue traces leaving the other
> direction over the analogue ground-plane?)
>
> Or are you saying that your design wasn't as simple as:  Analogue =
> Low-frequency,  Digital = High-frequency
>
> I can imagine that things get a whole lot more complicated (and harder
> from an EMC compliance point of view) if you have to deal with very
> high-frequency analogue signals too!?
>
> Best regards,
>
> -Richie,
>
>
> On 2015-11-26 11:51, Sarah Thompson wrote:
>
>> I got weened off my previous tendency to use split ground planes due
>> to the EMC training I got courtesy NASA Goddard (I works at NASA Ames
>> -- a lot of Goddard's courses are available online if you go digging
>> for them -- I'd recommend it, they made me a much better designer).
>>
>> Basically, split ground planes do work at audio frequencies up to a
>> point, but they are terrible at higher frequencies. The short version
>> is all signals have a current return path across any adjacent ground
>> and/or power plane(s), which gets more localized as frequencies
>> increase. Once you are into a few MHz, this is sufficient that if you
>> try to make a signal span a gap across two planes it will pretty much
>> get lost in the process -- all of this energy ends up either radiated
>> as unintended EMI or splattered across your other signals or both. In
>> one case I saw a board, just about 4 inches square, where a 2.5V LVDS
>> clock at just 10MHz failed to get from one side of the board to the
>> other because it had to cross a couple of splits -- the effect is
>> actually very strong indeed. The right way to deal with this is to use
>> a single ground plane whilst being VERY careful with routing, being
>> cognizant of where the ground return paths are going and treating them
>> effectively as signals in their own right, with particular attention
>> to signals that cross each other on adjacent planes.
>>
>> Where budget allows, adding extra ground planes is the secret special
>> sauce that makes problems go away. On one of my recent projects I did
>> a 12 layer stackup which went (top to bottom) signal, ground, signal,
>> ground, signal, ground, power, power, power, power, ground, signal.
>> All four signal layers were impedance controlled so that 0.003" traces
>> were 50 ohm to ground and 100 ohm between adjacent LVDS pairs. This
>> basically let me safely have multiple splits in the power planes,
>> since signals only ever ran adjacent to ground planes and no signals
>> ever crossed each other in adjacent planes. This was expensive, I'll
>> admit, but it allowed for a very small board with lots of high speed
>> digital, precision analog and 8 switching DC-DC converters with
>> absolutely no signal integrity issues even on the first spin. It was
>> all just done on EAGLE, no fancy SI tools were used.
>>
>> Sarah
>>
>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 11:29 AM, rsdio at audiobanshee.com wrote:
>>>
>>> I typically place an 0805 inductor link between analog and digital
>>> ground, near the analog supply regulator. In some cases, I've had to change
>>> the BoM from inductor to resistor or jumper. I think that placing the SMD
>>> pads there, in 0805 sizing, is a good step no matter how you connect the
>>> grounds.
>>>
>>> Professional layout engineers seem to do a lot of manual work, in which
>>> case I'd imagine that they just live with the DRC violations.
>>>
>>> I've read articles which claim that separate ground planes are not
>>> necessary - when placement and ground paths are properly controlled.
>>> However, I like to have the separate ground planes anyway, because it at
>>> least gives me a reminder of the ground paths that I've planned during
>>> placement. These articles talk about lots of stitching via links between
>>> layers for multiple ground planes, but that's only an option when you have
>>> the luxury of more than four layers, I'd say.
>>>
>>> Brian Willoughby
>>> Sound Consulting
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 8:18 AM, Richie Burnett <
>>>> rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Out of interest what are Eagle PCB CAD users doing to connect together
>>>> their analogue and digital ground-planes?
>>>>
>>>> A wire-link, 0805 zero-ohm link, or over-lapping the polygons for the
>>>> analog and digital ground-planes and accepting a DRC violation at the point
>>>> where they're connected?
>>>>
>>>> Those are the best ideas I had, but wondered if there's a clever way to
>>>> do it.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Synth-diy mailing list
>>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>>
>>
>


-- 
[s]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151126/a2d9eefe/attachment.htm>

From plodger at gmail.com  Fri Nov 27 02:19:32 2015
From: plodger at gmail.com (Sarah Thompson)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 17:19:32 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle analogue & digital groundplanes
In-Reply-To: <56570A47.9040109@go2.pl>
References: <96642C5F098248C187F1156C1FB795C6@RichiePC>
 <44FD76D0-9121-4051-BB72-B1FFE61A12B6@audiobanshee.com>
 <74F13860-0CEA-4818-8F53-D673E69E5DED@gmail.com>
 <56570A47.9040109@go2.pl>
Message-ID: <CACVQNWX=cp3BUzMYmK5R-Y-iSLBok_gRzEv2oHeOcc=Qjj9fKg@mail.gmail.com>

Yes, that was a spendy board, I think about $1k each as I remember, but
they had to make the thing small (500+ components on a 2.5" square board is
challenging). The reason for the 0.003" traces was partly dealing with mil
spec vias which are bigger than normal, so thinning the traces made it
easier to get everything in. Impedance wise the board house did a really
good job -- the TDR tests came out pretty much dead on. The board has 8
DC-DC converters on it, so there's a bit of power and switching going on,
as well as some RAM, a big-ish FPGA, some analog stuff, some comms, etc,
and it was really too small to easily separate all of that. I didn't do too
badly, but adding the extra power and ground planes made everything a lot
more straightforward. Frequencies on there are up to about 100MHz digital
with a mixture of LVTTL and LVDS, maybe 50MHz analog though there's also
some DC-100KHz stuff. Something for everyone, I suppose... :)

Sarah

On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 5:33 AM, Roman Sowa <modular at go2.pl> wrote:

> 3 mils traces? Not every PCB fab can make this. And at that trace width
> the edges will be relatively ragged quite a bit, so not so much controlled
> impedance.
>
> I want a job at NASA too :)
>
> Roman
>
> W dniu 2015-11-26 o 12:51, Sarah Thompson pisze:
>
> I got weened off my previous tendency to use split ground planes due to
>> the EMC training I got courtesy NASA Goddard (I works at NASA Ames -- a lot
>> of Goddard's courses are available online if you go digging for them -- I'd
>> recommend it, they made me a much better designer).
>>
>> Basically, split ground planes do work at audio frequencies up to a
>> point, but they are terrible at higher frequencies. The short version is
>> all signals have a current return path across any adjacent ground and/or
>> power plane(s), which gets more localized as frequencies increase. Once you
>> are into a few MHz, this is sufficient that if you try to make a signal
>> span a gap across two planes it will pretty much get lost in the process --
>> all of this energy ends up either radiated as unintended EMI or splattered
>> across your other signals or both. In one case I saw a board, just about 4
>> inches square, where a 2.5V LVDS clock at just 10MHz failed to get from one
>> side of the board to the other because it had to cross a couple of splits
>> -- the effect is actually very strong indeed. The right way to deal with
>> this is to use a single ground plane whilst being VERY careful with
>> routing, being cognizant of where the ground return paths are going and
>> treating them effectively as signals in
>>    their own right, with particular attention to signals that cross each
>> other on adjacent planes.
>>
>> Where budget allows, adding extra ground planes is the secret special
>> sauce that makes problems go away. On one of my recent projects I did a 12
>> layer stackup which went (top to bottom) signal, ground, signal, ground,
>> signal, ground, power, power, power, power, ground, signal. All four signal
>> layers were impedance controlled so that 0.003" traces were 50 ohm to
>> ground and 100 ohm between adjacent LVDS pairs. This basically let me
>> safely have multiple splits in the power planes, since signals only ever
>> ran adjacent to ground planes and no signals ever crossed each other in
>> adjacent planes. This was expensive, I'll admit, but it allowed for a very
>> small board with lots of high speed digital, precision analog and 8
>> switching DC-DC converters with absolutely no signal integrity issues even
>> on the first spin. It was all just done on EAGLE, no fancy SI tools were
>> used.
>>
>> Sarah
>>
>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 11:29 AM, rsdio at audiobanshee.com wrote:
>>>
>>> I typically place an 0805 inductor link between analog and digital
>>> ground, near the analog supply regulator. In some cases, I've had to change
>>> the BoM from inductor to resistor or jumper. I think that placing the SMD
>>> pads there, in 0805 sizing, is a good step no matter how you connect the
>>> grounds.
>>>
>>> Professional layout engineers seem to do a lot of manual work, in which
>>> case I'd imagine that they just live with the DRC violations.
>>>
>>> I've read articles which claim that separate ground planes are not
>>> necessary - when placement and ground paths are properly controlled.
>>> However, I like to have the separate ground planes anyway, because it at
>>> least gives me a reminder of the ground paths that I've planned during
>>> placement. These articles talk about lots of stitching via links between
>>> layers for multiple ground planes, but that's only an option when you have
>>> the luxury of more than four layers, I'd say.
>>>
>>> Brian Willoughby
>>> Sound Consulting
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 8:18 AM, Richie Burnett <
>>>> rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Out of interest what are Eagle PCB CAD users doing to connect together
>>>> their analogue and digital ground-planes?
>>>>
>>>> A wire-link, 0805 zero-ohm link, or over-lapping the polygons for the
>>>> analog and digital ground-planes and accepting a DRC violation at the point
>>>> where they're connected?
>>>>
>>>> Those are the best ideas I had, but wondered if there's a clever way to
>>>> do it.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Synth-diy mailing list
>>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>
>>


-- 
[s]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151126/841b942a/attachment.htm>

From modular at go2.pl  Fri Nov 27 10:30:17 2015
From: modular at go2.pl (Roman Sowa)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 10:30:17 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle analogue & digital groundplanes
In-Reply-To: <CACVQNWX=cp3BUzMYmK5R-Y-iSLBok_gRzEv2oHeOcc=Qjj9fKg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <96642C5F098248C187F1156C1FB795C6@RichiePC>
 <44FD76D0-9121-4051-BB72-B1FFE61A12B6@audiobanshee.com>
 <74F13860-0CEA-4818-8F53-D673E69E5DED@gmail.com> <56570A47.9040109@go2.pl>
 <CACVQNWX=cp3BUzMYmK5R-Y-iSLBok_gRzEv2oHeOcc=Qjj9fKg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <565822A9.4070502@go2.pl>

I suppose you didn't make microscopic pictures of assembled board? And 
probably you will not get in troubles by publishing them?

You said "bigger than normal vias". I imagine they were huuge, like 10 
mils pad or so, right? What a waste of space ;)

Can't imagine 500 components on 2.5''sq. People call that alien 
technology, and who has access to real alien technology if not your 
employer...

Roman

W dniu 2015-11-27 o 02:19, Sarah Thompson pisze:
> Yes, that was a spendy board, I think about $1k each as I remember, but
> they had to make the thing small (500+ components on a 2.5" square board
> is challenging). The reason for the 0.003" traces was partly dealing
> with mil spec vias which are bigger than normal, so thinning the traces
> made it easier to get everything in. Impedance wise the board house did
> a really good job -- the TDR tests came out pretty much dead on. The
> board has 8 DC-DC converters on it, so there's a bit of power and
> switching going on, as well as some RAM, a big-ish FPGA, some analog
> stuff, some comms, etc, and it was really too small to easily separate
> all of that. I didn't do too badly, but adding the extra power and
> ground planes made everything a lot more straightforward. Frequencies on
> there are up to about 100MHz digital with a mixture of LVTTL and LVDS,
> maybe 50MHz analog though there's also some DC-100KHz stuff. Something
> for everyone, I suppose... :)
>
> Sarah
>
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 5:33 AM, Roman Sowa <modular at go2.pl
> <mailto:modular at go2.pl>> wrote:
>
>     3 mils traces? Not every PCB fab can make this. And at that trace
>     width the edges will be relatively ragged quite a bit, so not so
>     much controlled impedance.
>
>     I want a job at NASA too :)
>
>     Roman
>
>     W dniu 2015-11-26 o 12:51, Sarah Thompson pisze:
>


From indigoid at oldcorollas.org  Fri Nov 27 10:52:41 2015
From: indigoid at oldcorollas.org (john slee)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 20:52:41 +1100
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle analogue & digital groundplanes
In-Reply-To: <565822A9.4070502@go2.pl>
References: <96642C5F098248C187F1156C1FB795C6@RichiePC>
 <44FD76D0-9121-4051-BB72-B1FFE61A12B6@audiobanshee.com>
 <74F13860-0CEA-4818-8F53-D673E69E5DED@gmail.com> <56570A47.9040109@go2.pl>
 <CACVQNWX=cp3BUzMYmK5R-Y-iSLBok_gRzEv2oHeOcc=Qjj9fKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <565822A9.4070502@go2.pl>
Message-ID: <CAK+JDy3GrsjJQsFawJpC1br7xU_yH=V9ebLjVgLAgK0qvt5ncQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 27 November 2015 at 20:30, Roman Sowa <modular at go2.pl> wrote:

> Can't imagine 500 components on 2.5''sq. People call that alien
> technology, and who has access to real alien technology if not your
> employer...


+1, I would love to see this. I'd make it my desktop background.
Particularly if it was a nice white PCB!

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151127/86b81180/attachment.htm>

From tom at electricdruid.net  Fri Nov 27 12:05:03 2015
From: tom at electricdruid.net (Tom Wiltshire)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 11:05:03 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Reality versus simulation?
Message-ID: <E59B9991-9BF9-4568-8149-89CA4FCD914E@electricdruid.net>

Hi All,

I've been playing with the following circuit. It's a couple of simple passive filters to follow a digital noise generator. The LPF is set around 25KHz to smooth the digital pulses, and then the HPF acts as a DC blocker at about 15Hz.

http://electricdruid.net/images/PentaNoiseFilter.pdf

Now, the interesting thing is that in simulation, this works fine, and I have a flat frequency response between the two filters. However, in reality, there's a pronounced downward slope to the frequency response (high frequency rolloff) which amounts to about -10dB at 25KHz. This is measured by feeding the noise into my oscilloscope's FFT function. I know the rolloff isn't coming from the 'scope or the FFT, since feeding the digital noise in directly gives me a flat response out to 100KHz or so.

So what's going on with the real-life filters? Can I improve their performance?

Thanks,
Tom




From neil.johnson71 at gmail.com  Fri Nov 27 12:52:37 2015
From: neil.johnson71 at gmail.com (Neil Johnson)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 11:52:37 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Reality versus simulation?
In-Reply-To: <E59B9991-9BF9-4568-8149-89CA4FCD914E@electricdruid.net>
References: <E59B9991-9BF9-4568-8149-89CA4FCD914E@electricdruid.net>
Message-ID: <CACZGMxKaE3aoaoAY8af68aijJhmECepwFpYG4BBrgX8T5_Makg@mail.gmail.com>

Tom,

> So what's going on with the real-life filters? Can I improve their
performance?

What are the actual values of the capacitors and resistors in your circuit?

Neil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151127/ee1e2d54/attachment.htm>

From fanwander at mnet-online.de  Fri Nov 27 12:57:02 2015
From: fanwander at mnet-online.de (Florian Anwander)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 12:57:02 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Reality versus simulation?
In-Reply-To: <E59B9991-9BF9-4568-8149-89CA4FCD914E@electricdruid.net>
References: <E59B9991-9BF9-4568-8149-89CA4FCD914E@electricdruid.net>
Message-ID: <5658450E.8060502@mnet-online.de>

Having no electro-mathematical background at all:

What happens if one has the HPF as first stage and the LPF as second stage?

Floran

Am 27.11.2015 um 12:05 schrieb Tom Wiltshire:
> Hi All,
>
> I've been playing with the following circuit. It's a couple of simple passive filters to follow a digital noise generator. The LPF is set around 25KHz to smooth the digital pulses, and then the HPF acts as a DC blocker at about 15Hz.
>
> http://electricdruid.net/images/PentaNoiseFilter.pdf
>
> Now, the interesting thing is that in simulation, this works fine, and I have a flat frequency response between the two filters. However, in reality, there's a pronounced downward slope to the frequency response (high frequency rolloff) which amounts to about -10dB at 25KHz. This is measured by feeding the noise into my oscilloscope's FFT function. I know the rolloff isn't coming from the 'scope or the FFT, since feeding the digital noise in directly gives me a flat response out to 100KHz or so.
>
> So what's going on with the real-life filters? Can I improve their performance?
>
> Thanks,
> Tom
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



From phil.macphail at liivatera.com  Fri Nov 27 13:04:50 2015
From: phil.macphail at liivatera.com (Phil Macphail)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 13:04:50 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Reality versus simulation?
In-Reply-To: <E59B9991-9BF9-4568-8149-89CA4FCD914E@electricdruid.net>
References: <E59B9991-9BF9-4568-8149-89CA4FCD914E@electricdruid.net>
Message-ID: <6FA80472-32ED-4DDA-9133-4CAF51C48296@liivatera.com>

Is your digital output sufficiently low impedance to be ignored? Chances are it can't really source and sink the 10mA your schematic indicates.

Phil

Sent from my iPhone

> On 27 Nov 2015, at 12:05, Tom Wiltshire <tom at electricdruid.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> I've been playing with the following circuit. It's a couple of simple passive filters to follow a digital noise generator. The LPF is set around 25KHz to smooth the digital pulses, and then the HPF acts as a DC blocker at about 15Hz.
> 
> http://electricdruid.net/images/PentaNoiseFilter.pdf
> 
> Now, the interesting thing is that in simulation, this works fine, and I have a flat frequency response between the two filters. However, in reality, there's a pronounced downward slope to the frequency response (high frequency rolloff) which amounts to about -10dB at 25KHz. This is measured by feeding the noise into my oscilloscope's FFT function. I know the rolloff isn't coming from the 'scope or the FFT, since feeding the digital noise in directly gives me a flat response out to 100KHz or so.
> 
> So what's going on with the real-life filters? Can I improve their performance?
> 
> Thanks,
> Tom
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


From tom at electricdruid.net  Fri Nov 27 14:24:10 2015
From: tom at electricdruid.net (Tom Wiltshire)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 13:24:10 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Reality versus simulation?
In-Reply-To: <5658450E.8060502@mnet-online.de>
References: <E59B9991-9BF9-4568-8149-89CA4FCD914E@electricdruid.net>
 <5658450E.8060502@mnet-online.de>
Message-ID: <5C74DD5D-2242-4ABF-A1BC-9CD4C54A25A9@electricdruid.net>

Interesting idea. I'll swap it around on the breadboard and let you know.

On 27 Nov 2015, at 11:57, Florian Anwander <fanwander at mnet-online.de> wrote:

> Having no electro-mathematical background at all:
> 
> What happens if one has the HPF as first stage and the LPF as second stage?
> 
> Floran
> 
> Am 27.11.2015 um 12:05 schrieb Tom Wiltshire:
>> Hi All,
>> 
>> I've been playing with the following circuit. It's a couple of simple passive filters to follow a digital noise generator. The LPF is set around 25KHz to smooth the digital pulses, and then the HPF acts as a DC blocker at about 15Hz.
>> 
>> http://electricdruid.net/images/PentaNoiseFilter.pdf
>> 
>> Now, the interesting thing is that in simulation, this works fine, and I have a flat frequency response between the two filters. However, in reality, there's a pronounced downward slope to the frequency response (high frequency rolloff) which amounts to about -10dB at 25KHz. This is measured by feeding the noise into my oscilloscope's FFT function. I know the rolloff isn't coming from the 'scope or the FFT, since feeding the digital noise in directly gives me a flat response out to 100KHz or so.
>> 
>> So what's going on with the real-life filters? Can I improve their performance?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Tom
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> 



From tom at electricdruid.net  Fri Nov 27 14:28:13 2015
From: tom at electricdruid.net (Tom Wiltshire)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 13:28:13 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Reality versus simulation?
In-Reply-To: <6FA80472-32ED-4DDA-9133-4CAF51C48296@liivatera.com>
References: <E59B9991-9BF9-4568-8149-89CA4FCD914E@electricdruid.net>
 <6FA80472-32ED-4DDA-9133-4CAF51C48296@liivatera.com>
Message-ID: <758CACD6-C7D5-48F6-B7BC-85F078748BF9@electricdruid.net>

Another interesting idea. You think I might do better with 5.6K and 1n for the lowpass?

The output is from a PIC, so they're supposed to be able to sink/source 20 or 25mA (depends on the chip/package). I've pushed them to this in other circuits and found that they can actually do it.

On 27 Nov 2015, at 12:04, Phil Macphail <phil.macphail at liivatera.com> wrote:

> Is your digital output sufficiently low impedance to be ignored? Chances are it can't really source and sink the 10mA your schematic indicates.
> 
> Phil
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On 27 Nov 2015, at 12:05, Tom Wiltshire <tom at electricdruid.net> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi All,
>> 
>> I've been playing with the following circuit. It's a couple of simple passive filters to follow a digital noise generator. The LPF is set around 25KHz to smooth the digital pulses, and then the HPF acts as a DC blocker at about 15Hz.
>> 
>> http://electricdruid.net/images/PentaNoiseFilter.pdf
>> 
>> Now, the interesting thing is that in simulation, this works fine, and I have a flat frequency response between the two filters. However, in reality, there's a pronounced downward slope to the frequency response (high frequency rolloff) which amounts to about -10dB at 25KHz. This is measured by feeding the noise into my oscilloscope's FFT function. I know the rolloff isn't coming from the 'scope or the FFT, since feeding the digital noise in directly gives me a flat response out to 100KHz or so.
>> 
>> So what's going on with the real-life filters? Can I improve their performance?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Tom
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



From tom at electricdruid.net  Fri Nov 27 14:30:45 2015
From: tom at electricdruid.net (Tom Wiltshire)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 13:30:45 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Reality versus simulation?
In-Reply-To: <CACZGMxKaE3aoaoAY8af68aijJhmECepwFpYG4BBrgX8T5_Makg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E59B9991-9BF9-4568-8149-89CA4FCD914E@electricdruid.net>
 <CACZGMxKaE3aoaoAY8af68aijJhmECepwFpYG4BBrgX8T5_Makg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E6B98397-0BDF-43D5-919E-44A1B6EB70E4@electricdruid.net>

As per schematic, +/-10% for the caps, +/-1% for the resistors.

Values wobbling about would shift the cutoff points a bit, but shouldn't give the significant downhill slope I'm actually seeing. Should it?

For example, RC variations give me a lowpass cutoff of supposedly 28.4KHz, but actually 25.6 kHz ? 31.9 kHz.


On 27 Nov 2015, at 11:52, Neil Johnson <neil.johnson71 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Tom,
> 
> > So what's going on with the real-life filters? Can I improve their performance?
> 
> What are the actual values of the capacitors and resistors in your circuit?
> 
> Neil



From plodger at gmail.com  Fri Nov 27 16:05:33 2015
From: plodger at gmail.com (Sarah Thompson)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 07:05:33 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Reality versus simulation?
In-Reply-To: <E6B98397-0BDF-43D5-919E-44A1B6EB70E4@electricdruid.net>
References: <E59B9991-9BF9-4568-8149-89CA4FCD914E@electricdruid.net>
 <CACZGMxKaE3aoaoAY8af68aijJhmECepwFpYG4BBrgX8T5_Makg@mail.gmail.com>
 <E6B98397-0BDF-43D5-919E-44A1B6EB70E4@electricdruid.net>
Message-ID: <5F9B1752-A57A-4BAE-9425-FEDC441C80DB@gmail.com>

Another possibility would be stray capacitance from the breadboard itself causing loss at higher frequencies. Also, are you using a X1 or a X10 scope probe? If you are using X1, this might be the culprit, though 20kHz is a bit low to start seeing much difference there.

As an experiment, try putting opamps before, after and between the stages just configured as voltage followers. This will greatly reduce the distance any high impedance signals need to travel, and tends to make filter weirdness go away. I'm not necessarily suggesting this for a production version, but sometimes going for overkill then backing off is less pain. 

Sarah

Sent from my iPad

> On Nov 27, 2015, at 5:30 AM, Tom Wiltshire <tom at electricdruid.net> wrote:
> 
> As per schematic, +/-10% for the caps, +/-1% for the resistors.
> 
> Values wobbling about would shift the cutoff points a bit, but shouldn't give the significant downhill slope I'm actually seeing. Should it?
> 
> For example, RC variations give me a lowpass cutoff of supposedly 28.4KHz, but actually 25.6 kHz ? 31.9 kHz.
> 
> 
>> On 27 Nov 2015, at 11:52, Neil Johnson <neil.johnson71 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Tom,
>> 
>>> So what's going on with the real-life filters? Can I improve their performance?
>> 
>> What are the actual values of the capacitors and resistors in your circuit?
>> 
>> Neil
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


From walkershurlds at gmail.com  Fri Nov 27 16:50:50 2015
From: walkershurlds at gmail.com (Walker Shurlds)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 07:50:50 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [sdiy] Reality versus simulation?
In-Reply-To: <5F9B1752-A57A-4BAE-9425-FEDC441C80DB@gmail.com>
References: <5F9B1752-A57A-4BAE-9425-FEDC441C80DB@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1448639449917.006cc90a@Nodemailer>

Probe capacitance is the first thing I thought also. In addition, the relatively low impedance of the circuit could be shifting the oscope's pole(s) into a lower frequency.?




Another factor could just be windowing selection from the fft, or maybe the axes aren't logrithmic but are in spice, this only affects whether the response *appears* flat, of course. A few extra pictures might help with diagnosis.




Walker

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Sarah Thompson <plodger at gmail.com> wrote:

> Another possibility would be stray capacitance from the breadboard itself causing loss at higher frequencies. Also, are you using a X1 or a X10 scope probe? If you are using X1, this might be the culprit, though 20kHz is a bit low to start seeing much difference there.
> As an experiment, try putting opamps before, after and between the stages just configured as voltage followers. This will greatly reduce the distance any high impedance signals need to travel, and tends to make filter weirdness go away. I'm not necessarily suggesting this for a production version, but sometimes going for overkill then backing off is less pain. 
> Sarah
> Sent from my iPad
>> On Nov 27, 2015, at 5:30 AM, Tom Wiltshire <tom at electricdruid.net> wrote:
>> 
>> As per schematic, +/-10% for the caps, +/-1% for the resistors.
>> 
>> Values wobbling about would shift the cutoff points a bit, but shouldn't give the significant downhill slope I'm actually seeing. Should it?
>> 
>> For example, RC variations give me a lowpass cutoff of supposedly 28.4KHz, but actually 25.6 kHz ? 31.9 kHz.
>> 
>> 
>>> On 27 Nov 2015, at 11:52, Neil Johnson <neil.johnson71 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Tom,
>>> 
>>>> So what's going on with the real-life filters? Can I improve their performance?
>>> 
>>> What are the actual values of the capacitors and resistors in your circuit?
>>> 
>>> Neil
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151127/71ae83cd/attachment.htm>

From walkershurlds at gmail.com  Fri Nov 27 17:22:59 2015
From: walkershurlds at gmail.com (Walker Shurlds)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 08:22:59 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [sdiy] Reality versus simulation?
In-Reply-To: <1448639449917.006cc90a@Nodemailer>
References: <1448639449917.006cc90a@Nodemailer>
Message-ID: <1448641378931.8249b168@Nodemailer>

If this is what you are seeing:?https://flic.kr/p/BzkdV8





Then it is because the oscope's f axis is linear instead of logarithmic.




I got this in LTSpice when I changed the axis to linear.




hth,

Walker

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Walker Shurlds <walkershurlds at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Probe capacitance is the first thing I thought also. In addition, the relatively low impedance of the circuit could be shifting the oscope's pole(s) into a lower frequency.?
> Another factor could just be windowing selection from the fft, or maybe the axes aren't logrithmic but are in spice, this only affects whether the response *appears* flat, of course. A few extra pictures might help with diagnosis.
> Walker
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Sarah Thompson <plodger at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Another possibility would be stray capacitance from the breadboard itself causing loss at higher frequencies. Also, are you using a X1 or a X10 scope probe? If you are using X1, this might be the culprit, though 20kHz is a bit low to start seeing much difference there.
>> As an experiment, try putting opamps before, after and between the stages just configured as voltage followers. This will greatly reduce the distance any high impedance signals need to travel, and tends to make filter weirdness go away. I'm not necessarily suggesting this for a production version, but sometimes going for overkill then backing off is less pain. 
>> Sarah
>> Sent from my iPad
>>> On Nov 27, 2015, at 5:30 AM, Tom Wiltshire <tom at electricdruid.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> As per schematic, +/-10% for the caps, +/-1% for the resistors.
>>> 
>>> Values wobbling about would shift the cutoff points a bit, but shouldn't give the significant downhill slope I'm actually seeing. Should it?
>>> 
>>> For example, RC variations give me a lowpass cutoff of supposedly 28.4KHz, but actually 25.6 kHz ? 31.9 kHz.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 27 Nov 2015, at 11:52, Neil Johnson <neil.johnson71 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Tom,
>>>> 
>>>>> So what's going on with the real-life filters? Can I improve their performance?
>>>> 
>>>> What are the actual values of the capacitors and resistors in your circuit?
>>>> 
>>>> Neil
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Synth-diy mailing list
>>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151127/9431b57e/attachment.htm>

From tom at electricdruid.net  Fri Nov 27 17:32:45 2015
From: tom at electricdruid.net (Tom Wiltshire)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 16:32:45 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Reality versus simulation?
In-Reply-To: <1448639449917.006cc90a@Nodemailer>
References: <5F9B1752-A57A-4BAE-9425-FEDC441C80DB@gmail.com>
 <1448639449917.006cc90a@Nodemailer>
Message-ID: <0EECB075-86D4-47B7-BAF9-9D8C7D5F0670@electricdruid.net>

Sorry about the lack of images. I was trying to get 'scope shots off the scope last night, but the non-standard USB connection and software to do it is terrible and I couldn't get it to work. Why they couldn't just get the scope to appear as an external drive filled with however many saved images it'll store is beyond me?but I digress.

I tried swapping the filter stages around as per Florian's suggestion. No change.
I tried altering the values as per Phil's suggestion (from 560R/10n to 5K6/1n), and that gave a marked improvement. So increasing the impedance of the circuit seems to help.
On that basis, I'd expect that Sarah's suggestion of buffers between the stages as a test will give a still-better result, but I haven't done that experiment yet.

The scope's FFT Y-axis is dB, so that's the same as I've got in LTSpice. Changing FFT window (Blackman, Hanning, etc) doesn't alter the result. Scope probes are set to x1.


On 27 Nov 2015, at 15:50, Walker Shurlds <walkershurlds at gmail.com> wrote:

> Probe capacitance is the first thing I thought also. In addition, the relatively low impedance of the circuit could be shifting the oscope's pole(s) into a lower frequency. 
> 
> Another factor could just be windowing selection from the fft, or maybe the axes aren't logrithmic but are in spice, this only affects whether the response *appears* flat, of course. A few extra pictures might help with diagnosis.
> 
> Walker
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Sarah Thompson <plodger at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Another possibility would be stray capacitance from the breadboard itself causing loss at higher frequencies. Also, are you using a X1 or a X10 scope probe? If you are using X1, this might be the culprit, though 20kHz is a bit low to start seeing much difference there.
> 
> As an experiment, try putting opamps before, after and between the stages just configured as voltage followers. This will greatly reduce the distance any high impedance signals need to travel, and tends to make filter weirdness go away. I'm not necessarily suggesting this for a production version, but sometimes going for overkill then backing off is less pain. 
> 
> Sarah
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> > On Nov 27, 2015, at 5:30 AM, Tom Wiltshire <tom at electricdruid.net> wrote:
> > 
> > As per schematic, +/-10% for the caps, +/-1% for the resistors.
> > 
> > Values wobbling about would shift the cutoff points a bit, but shouldn't give the significant downhill slope I'm actually seeing. Should it?
> > 
> > For example, RC variations give me a lowpass cutoff of supposedly 28.4KHz, but actually 25.6 kHz ? 31.9 kHz.
> > 
> > 
> >> On 27 Nov 2015, at 11:52, Neil Johnson <neil.johnson71 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >> Tom,
> >> 
> >>> So what's going on with the real-life filters? Can I improve their performance?
> >> 
> >> What are the actual values of the capacitors and resistors in your circuit?
> >> 
> >> Neil
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Synth-diy mailing list
> > Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> > http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> 
> 



From rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk  Fri Nov 27 17:50:18 2015
From: rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk (rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 16:50:18 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] =?utf-8?q?Reality_versus_simulation=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <0EECB075-86D4-47B7-BAF9-9D8C7D5F0670@electricdruid.net>
References: <5F9B1752-A57A-4BAE-9425-FEDC441C80DB@gmail.com>
 <1448639449917.006cc90a@Nodemailer>
 <0EECB075-86D4-47B7-BAF9-9D8C7D5F0670@electricdruid.net>
Message-ID: <79dfcea781a635240117ba2e2d37c31e@richieburnett.co.uk>

Interesting.  Can you tie a whole load of the PIC I/O lines together and 
then output the same PRBS signal to the whole group?  For example, if 
you can send the same PRBS state *simultaneously* to all of PORTB and 
tie RB0-RB7 pins together then that should give you eight times more 
current sourcing and sinking ability than a single pin alone.  The lower 
output impedance should be closer to what your simulator shows, and the 
unwanted effect should be greatly diminished.

Or just make an estimate of the I/O line output impedance and then 
adjust the filter resistance to take this source impedance into account, 
maybe?

The other thing that I was going to suggest was that it might be due to 
"sinc rolloff" of the spectrum in the discrete-time white noise output, 
but I see that you said it had an acceptably flat response before being 
connected to the filter when you checked.  It might be worth double 
checking the "bit-rate" of the PRBS output is what you expect it to be 
though, just in case it was significantly less for some reason!

-Richie,



On 2015-11-27 16:32, Tom Wiltshire wrote:
> Sorry about the lack of images. I was trying to get 'scope shots off
> the scope last night, but the non-standard USB connection and software
> to do it is terrible and I couldn't get it to work. Why they couldn't
> just get the scope to appear as an external drive filled with however
> many saved images it'll store is beyond me?but I digress.
> 
> I tried swapping the filter stages around as per Florian's suggestion.
> No change.
> I tried altering the values as per Phil's suggestion (from 560R/10n to
> 5K6/1n), and that gave a marked improvement. So increasing the
> impedance of the circuit seems to help.
> On that basis, I'd expect that Sarah's suggestion of buffers between
> the stages as a test will give a still-better result, but I haven't
> done that experiment yet.
> 
> The scope's FFT Y-axis is dB, so that's the same as I've got in
> LTSpice. Changing FFT window (Blackman, Hanning, etc) doesn't alter
> the result. Scope probes are set to x1.
> 
> 
> On 27 Nov 2015, at 15:50, Walker Shurlds <walkershurlds at gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> 
>> Probe capacitance is the first thing I thought also. In addition, the 
>> relatively low impedance of the circuit could be shifting the oscope's 
>> pole(s) into a lower frequency.
>> 
>> Another factor could just be windowing selection from the fft, or 
>> maybe the axes aren't logrithmic but are in spice, this only affects 
>> whether the response *appears* flat, of course. A few extra pictures 
>> might help with diagnosis.
>> 
>> Walker
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Sarah Thompson <plodger at gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Another possibility would be stray capacitance from the breadboard 
>> itself causing loss at higher frequencies. Also, are you using a X1 or 
>> a X10 scope probe? If you are using X1, this might be the culprit, 
>> though 20kHz is a bit low to start seeing much difference there.
>> 
>> As an experiment, try putting opamps before, after and between the 
>> stages just configured as voltage followers. This will greatly reduce 
>> the distance any high impedance signals need to travel, and tends to 
>> make filter weirdness go away. I'm not necessarily suggesting this for 
>> a production version, but sometimes going for overkill then backing 
>> off is less pain.
>> 
>> Sarah
>> 
>> Sent from my iPad
>> 
>> > On Nov 27, 2015, at 5:30 AM, Tom Wiltshire <tom at electricdruid.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > As per schematic, +/-10% for the caps, +/-1% for the resistors.
>> >
>> > Values wobbling about would shift the cutoff points a bit, but shouldn't give the significant downhill slope I'm actually seeing. Should it?
>> >
>> > For example, RC variations give me a lowpass cutoff of supposedly 28.4KHz, but actually 25.6 kHz ? 31.9 kHz.
>> >
>> >
>> >> On 27 Nov 2015, at 11:52, Neil Johnson <neil.johnson71 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Tom,
>> >>
>> >>> So what's going on with the real-life filters? Can I improve their performance?
>> >>
>> >> What are the actual values of the capacitors and resistors in your circuit?
>> >>
>> >> Neil
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Synth-diy mailing list
>> > Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> > http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy



From tom at electricdruid.net  Fri Nov 27 18:50:19 2015
From: tom at electricdruid.net (Tom Wiltshire)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 17:50:19 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Reality versus simulation?
In-Reply-To: <1448641378931.8249b168@Nodemailer>
References: <1448639449917.006cc90a@Nodemailer>
 <1448641378931.8249b168@Nodemailer>
Message-ID: <6305E6DD-49DF-47A9-9A51-966CD7067FBE@electricdruid.net>

By golly, I think you've found it!

So the sim is actually accurate, but I couldn't see that effect because I was looking at a wider range with a log frequency axis. Between tweaking the values and changing the X-axis to log, this accounts for everything I was seeing.

Thanks everyone.


On 27 Nov 2015, at 16:22, Walker Shurlds <walkershurlds at gmail.com> wrote:

> If this is what you are seeing: https://flic.kr/p/BzkdV8
> 
> Then it is because the oscope's f axis is linear instead of logarithmic.
> 
> I got this in LTSpice when I changed the axis to linear.
> 
> hth,
> Walker
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Walker Shurlds <walkershurlds at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Probe capacitance is the first thing I thought also. In addition, the relatively low impedance of the circuit could be shifting the oscope's pole(s) into a lower frequency. 
> 
> Another factor could just be windowing selection from the fft, or maybe the axes aren't logrithmic but are in spice, this only affects whether the response *appears* flat, of course. A few extra pictures might help with diagnosis.
> 
> Walker
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Sarah Thompson <plodger at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Another possibility would be stray capacitance from the breadboard itself causing loss at higher frequencies. Also, are you using a X1 or a X10 scope probe? If you are using X1, this might be the culprit, though 20kHz is a bit low to start seeing much difference there.
> 
> As an experiment, try putting opamps before, after and between the stages just configured as voltage followers. This will greatly reduce the distance any high impedance signals need to travel, and tends to make filter weirdness go away. I'm not necessarily suggesting this for a production version, but sometimes going for overkill then backing off is less pain. 
> 
> Sarah
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> > On Nov 27, 2015, at 5:30 AM, Tom Wiltshire <tom at electricdruid.net> wrote:
> > 
> > As per schematic, +/-10% for the caps, +/-1% for the resistors.
> > 
> > Values wobbling about would shift the cutoff points a bit, but shouldn't give the significant downhill slope I'm actually seeing. Should it?
> > 
> > For example, RC variations give me a lowpass cutoff of supposedly 28.4KHz, but actually 25.6 kHz ? 31.9 kHz.
> > 
> > 
> >> On 27 Nov 2015, at 11:52, Neil Johnson <neil.johnson71 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >> Tom,
> >> 
> >>> So what's going on with the real-life filters? Can I improve their performance?
> >> 
> >> What are the actual values of the capacitors and resistors in your circuit?
> >> 
> >> Neil
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Synth-diy mailing list
> > Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> > http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> 
> 
> 



From subjectivity at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 28 00:54:22 2015
From: subjectivity at hotmail.com (Dan Snazelle)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 18:54:22 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] Reality versus simulation?
In-Reply-To: <6305E6DD-49DF-47A9-9A51-966CD7067FBE@electricdruid.net>
References: <1448639449917.006cc90a@Nodemailer>
 <1448641378931.8249b168@Nodemailer>
 <6305E6DD-49DF-47A9-9A51-966CD7067FBE@electricdruid.net>
Message-ID: <SNT405-EAS360314FD380216B3CCF9ACC8020@phx.gbl>

You know honestly I missed this entire thread but tonight it just made me happy to see people figuring things out on SDIY (no matter what else might be going on in the world ) 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 27, 2015, at 12:54 PM, Tom Wiltshire <tom at electricdruid.net> wrote:
> 
> By golly, I think you've found it!
> 
> So the sim is actually accurate, but I couldn't see that effect because I was looking at a wider range with a log frequency axis. Between tweaking the values and changing the X-axis to log, this accounts for everything I was seeing.
> 
> Thanks everyone.
> 
> 
>> On 27 Nov 2015, at 16:22, Walker Shurlds <walkershurlds at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> If this is what you are seeing: https://flic.kr/p/BzkdV8
>> 
>> Then it is because the oscope's f axis is linear instead of logarithmic.
>> 
>> I got this in LTSpice when I changed the axis to linear.
>> 
>> hth,
>> Walker
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Walker Shurlds <walkershurlds at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Probe capacitance is the first thing I thought also. In addition, the relatively low impedance of the circuit could be shifting the oscope's pole(s) into a lower frequency. 
>> 
>> Another factor could just be windowing selection from the fft, or maybe the axes aren't logrithmic but are in spice, this only affects whether the response *appears* flat, of course. A few extra pictures might help with diagnosis.
>> 
>> Walker
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Sarah Thompson <plodger at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Another possibility would be stray capacitance from the breadboard itself causing loss at higher frequencies. Also, are you using a X1 or a X10 scope probe? If you are using X1, this might be the culprit, though 20kHz is a bit low to start seeing much difference there.
>> 
>> As an experiment, try putting opamps before, after and between the stages just configured as voltage followers. This will greatly reduce the distance any high impedance signals need to travel, and tends to make filter weirdness go away. I'm not necessarily suggesting this for a production version, but sometimes going for overkill then backing off is less pain. 
>> 
>> Sarah
>> 
>> Sent from my iPad
>> 
>>> On Nov 27, 2015, at 5:30 AM, Tom Wiltshire <tom at electricdruid.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> As per schematic, +/-10% for the caps, +/-1% for the resistors.
>>> 
>>> Values wobbling about would shift the cutoff points a bit, but shouldn't give the significant downhill slope I'm actually seeing. Should it?
>>> 
>>> For example, RC variations give me a lowpass cutoff of supposedly 28.4KHz, but actually 25.6 kHz ? 31.9 kHz.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 27 Nov 2015, at 11:52, Neil Johnson <neil.johnson71 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Tom,
>>>> 
>>>>> So what's going on with the real-life filters? Can I improve their performance?
>>>> 
>>>> What are the actual values of the capacitors and resistors in your circuit?
>>>> 
>>>> Neil
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Synth-diy mailing list
>>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

From subjectivity at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 28 01:02:00 2015
From: subjectivity at hotmail.com (Dan Snazelle)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 19:02:00 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] Online Power sim tools versus spice ...or TI versus LINEAR
Message-ID: <SNT405-EAS634244DAA6E3D6444FD5AEC8020@phx.gbl>

You know for more than a year now I've been using TIs online power search tools and simulators


Ultimately this has still kept my from learning spice 

(As I mainly use Java based simulators when I need to try out an idea quickly )

But after having really great conversation with a linear representative last week, i'm think I might be better off  using linear's parts


The main stumbling block so far has just been the decidedly non OSX rich environment of the Linear (and probrably all ) spice software ...so keyboard command oriented 

Which is fine I guess but ultimately it's all about time 

So oh experts tell me 

Will I be better off with TI or linear for figuring out power stuff ??


It's obvious that for power you need better analysis tools 

So spice seems at least more open 


Thanks for the opinions 



Sent from my iPhone

From ebn303afxcut at email.com  Sat Nov 28 01:23:40 2015
From: ebn303afxcut at email.com (Justin Herrmann)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 01:23:40 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Online Power sim tools versus spice ...or TI versus
 LINEAR
Message-ID: <trinity-77c97460-4aa9-428a-b5c6-3a3e9faf34e5-1448670217571@msvc-mesg-gmx004>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151128/c7361d69/attachment.htm>

From walkershurlds at gmail.com  Sat Nov 28 01:41:22 2015
From: walkershurlds at gmail.com (Walker Shurlds)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 16:41:22 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [sdiy] Online Power sim tools versus spice ...or TI versus
 LINEAR
In-Reply-To: <trinity-77c97460-4aa9-428a-b5c6-3a3e9faf34e5-1448670217571@msvc-mesg-gmx004>
References: <trinity-77c97460-4aa9-428a-b5c6-3a3e9faf34e5-1448670217571@msvc-mesg-gmx004>
Message-ID: <1448671281974.da6e5443@Nodemailer>

I'm actually about 50% LTspice via wine in Debian and 50% ngspice right now. Ngspice (which is terminal only, so I assume there's a way to get OSX to handle it) because I like to be able to invoke it when I'm ssh'd into my main box, and also in theory I can write bash scripts that invoke it (which of course had never happened). And also because LTSpice has some really bizarre quirks (undo is F9, seriously?) despite being really powerful.





Anyway, I think LTSpice might have a steeper learning curve than others because of quirks but now that I already have a billion models I downloaded that I know it's happy with I'm probably stuck with it.







Walker
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151127/d2265dbb/attachment.htm>

From subjectivity at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 28 05:56:39 2015
From: subjectivity at hotmail.com (Dan Snazelle)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 23:56:39 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] Online Power sim tools versus spice ...or TI versus
	LINEAR
In-Reply-To: <1448671281974.da6e5443@Nodemailer>
References: <trinity-77c97460-4aa9-428a-b5c6-3a3e9faf34e5-1448670217571@msvc-mesg-gmx004>
 <1448671281974.da6e5443@Nodemailer>
Message-ID: <SNT405-EAS32939430C21A47B2285E46BC8020@phx.gbl>

Ok good to know
LTspice was the first OS X spice I had tried and yes...it's weird to get used to 

Thnx 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 27, 2015, at 7:41 PM, Walker Shurlds <walkershurlds at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I'm actually about 50% LTspice via wine in Debian and 50% ngspice right now. Ngspice (which is terminal only, so I assume there's a way to get OSX to handle it) because I like to be able to invoke it when I'm ssh'd into my main box, and also in theory I can write bash scripts that invoke it (which of course had never happened). And also because LTSpice has some really bizarre quirks (undo is F9, seriously?) despite being really powerful.
> 
> Anyway, I think LTSpice might have a steeper learning curve than others because of quirks but now that I already have a billion models I downloaded that I know it's happy with I'm probably stuck with it.
> 
> Walker
> 
> 
> 
>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Justin Herrmann <ebn303afxcut at email.com> wrote:
>> I use LTSpice with OSX (w/ Wine) all the time. Linear has also come out with LTSpice specifically for OSX, but I haven't tried it yet. And LTSpice is good as a general purpose Spice simulator, not just for Linear's power ICs.
>> 
>> Justin 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Dan Snazelle <subjectivity at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> You know for more than a year now I've been using TIs online power search tools and simulators
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Ultimately this has still kept my from learning spice
>>> 
>>> (As I mainly use Java based simulators when I need to try out an idea quickly )
>>> 
>>> But after having really great conversation with a linear representative last week, i'm think I might be better off using linear's parts
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The main stumbling block so far has just been the decidedly non OSX rich environment of the Linear (and probrably all ) spice software ...so keyboard command oriented
>>> 
>>> Which is fine I guess but ultimately it's all about time
>>> 
>>> So oh experts tell me
>>> 
>>> Will I be better off with TI or linear for figuring out power stuff ??
>>> 
>>> 
>>> It's obvious that for power you need better analysis tools
>>> 
>>> So spice seems at least more open
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks for the opinions
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Synth-diy mailing list
>>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ 
>> Synth-diy mailing list 
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl 
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151127/cad02fe0/attachment.htm>

From mr at analogue.org  Sat Nov 28 10:44:00 2015
From: mr at analogue.org (Mattias Rickardsson)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 10:44:00 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Online Power sim tools versus spice ...or TI versus
	LINEAR
In-Reply-To: <SNT405-EAS32939430C21A47B2285E46BC8020@phx.gbl>
References: <trinity-77c97460-4aa9-428a-b5c6-3a3e9faf34e5-1448670217571@msvc-mesg-gmx004>
 <1448671281974.da6e5443@Nodemailer>
 <SNT405-EAS32939430C21A47B2285E46BC8020@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <CAP92RBW83Z9WxremhBtKAixHbGR_SNs1Tsm6CPWWKN4b+_eNRA@mail.gmail.com>

LTspice on OS X is quirky, on Windows it's manageable.

Having undo on F9 is weird, but having no tool buttons on OS X is just
stupid. Why make the UI much worse than on Windows? Having to look for
everything via right-click on a system that doesn't really have
right-click... I don't get it. :-)

/mr
Ok good to know
LTspice was the first OS X spice I had tried and yes...it's weird to get
used to

Thnx

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 27, 2015, at 7:41 PM, Walker Shurlds <walkershurlds at gmail.com> wrote:

I'm actually about 50% LTspice via wine in Debian and 50% ngspice right
now. Ngspice (which is terminal only, so I assume there's a way to get OSX
to handle it) because I like to be able to invoke it when I'm ssh'd into my
main box, and also in theory I can write bash scripts that invoke it (which
of course had never happened). And also because LTSpice has some really
bizarre quirks (undo is F9, seriously?) despite being really powerful.

Anyway, I think LTSpice might have a steeper learning curve than others
because of quirks but now that I already have a billion models I downloaded
that I know it's happy with I'm probably stuck with it.

Walker



On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Justin Herrmann <ebn303afxcut at email.com>
wrote:

I use LTSpice with OSX (w/ Wine) all the time. Linear has also come out
> with LTSpice specifically for OSX, but I haven't tried it yet. And LTSpice
> is good as a general purpose Spice simulator, not just for Linear's power
> ICs.
>
> Justin
>
>
>
> Dan Snazelle <subjectivity at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> You know for more than a year now I've been using TIs online power search
>> tools and simulators
>>
>>
>> Ultimately this has still kept my from learning spice
>>
>> (As I mainly use Java based simulators when I need to try out an idea
>> quickly )
>>
>> But after having really great conversation with a linear representative
>> last week, i'm think I might be better off using linear's parts
>>
>>
>> The main stumbling block so far has just been the decidedly non OSX rich
>> environment of the Linear (and probrably all ) spice software ...so
>> keyboard command oriented
>>
>> Which is fine I guess but ultimately it's all about time
>>
>> So oh experts tell me
>>
>> Will I be better off with TI or linear for figuring out power stuff ??
>>
>>
>> It's obvious that for power you need better analysis tools
>>
>> So spice seems at least more open
>>
>>
>> Thanks for the opinions
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>

_______________________________________________
Synth-diy mailing list
Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151128/8f4132cd/attachment.htm>

From subjectivity at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 28 17:22:53 2015
From: subjectivity at hotmail.com (Dan Snazelle)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 11:22:53 -0500
Subject: [sdiy] Online Power sim tools versus spice ...or TI versus
	LINEAR
In-Reply-To: <CAP92RBW83Z9WxremhBtKAixHbGR_SNs1Tsm6CPWWKN4b+_eNRA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <trinity-77c97460-4aa9-428a-b5c6-3a3e9faf34e5-1448670217571@msvc-mesg-gmx004>
 <1448671281974.da6e5443@Nodemailer>
 <SNT405-EAS32939430C21A47B2285E46BC8020@phx.gbl>
 <CAP92RBW83Z9WxremhBtKAixHbGR_SNs1Tsm6CPWWKN4b+_eNRA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <SNT405-EAS1774BF131797542053C9EB2C8020@phx.gbl>

Ok good so it's not just me !!

I was so confused(where are the tools!!)

Maybe I need to (groan ) buy a copy of Windows and a copy of bootcamp 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 28, 2015, at 4:44 AM, Mattias Rickardsson <mr at analogue.org> wrote:
> 
> LTspice on OS X is quirky, on Windows it's manageable.
> 
> Having undo on F9 is weird, but having no tool buttons on OS X is just stupid. Why make the UI much worse than on Windows? Having to look for everything via right-click on a system that doesn't really have right-click... I don't get it. :-)
> 
> /mr
> Ok good to know
> LTspice was the first OS X spice I had tried and yes...it's weird to get used to 
> 
> Thnx 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Nov 27, 2015, at 7:41 PM, Walker Shurlds <walkershurlds at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> I'm actually about 50% LTspice via wine in Debian and 50% ngspice right now. Ngspice (which is terminal only, so I assume there's a way to get OSX to handle it) because I like to be able to invoke it when I'm ssh'd into my main box, and also in theory I can write bash scripts that invoke it (which of course had never happened). And also because LTSpice has some really bizarre quirks (undo is F9, seriously?) despite being really powerful.
>> 
>> Anyway, I think LTSpice might have a steeper learning curve than others because of quirks but now that I already have a billion models I downloaded that I know it's happy with I'm probably stuck with it.
>> 
>> Walker
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Justin Herrmann <ebn303afxcut at email.com> wrote:
>>> I use LTSpice with OSX (w/ Wine) all the time. Linear has also come out with LTSpice specifically for OSX, but I haven't tried it yet. And LTSpice is good as a general purpose Spice simulator, not just for Linear's power ICs.
>>> 
>>> Justin 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Dan Snazelle <subjectivity at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> You know for more than a year now I've been using TIs online power search tools and simulators
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Ultimately this has still kept my from learning spice
>>>> 
>>>> (As I mainly use Java based simulators when I need to try out an idea quickly )
>>>> 
>>>> But after having really great conversation with a linear representative last week, i'm think I might be better off using linear's parts
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The main stumbling block so far has just been the decidedly non OSX rich environment of the Linear (and probrably all ) spice software ...so keyboard command oriented
>>>> 
>>>> Which is fine I guess but ultimately it's all about time
>>>> 
>>>> So oh experts tell me
>>>> 
>>>> Will I be better off with TI or linear for figuring out power stuff ??
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> It's obvious that for power you need better analysis tools
>>>> 
>>>> So spice seems at least more open
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for the opinions
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Synth-diy mailing list
>>>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>>>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________ 
>>> Synth-diy mailing list 
>>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl 
>>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151128/3db226ad/attachment.htm>

From don at till.com  Sat Nov 28 17:45:07 2015
From: don at till.com (Donald Tillman)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 08:45:07 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Online Power sim tools versus spice ...or TI versus
	LINEAR
In-Reply-To: <SNT405-EAS634244DAA6E3D6444FD5AEC8020@phx.gbl>
References: <SNT405-EAS634244DAA6E3D6444FD5AEC8020@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <8731E5BC-7C81-4E09-A18C-AE86C4BC6B0B@till.com>


> On Nov 27, 2015, at 4:02 PM, Dan Snazelle <subjectivity at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> So oh experts tell me 
> Will I be better off with TI or linear for figuring out power stuff ??

I have no idea about those guys.

I've been using MacSpice for years and I'm pretty happy with it.

http://www.macspice.com

  -- Don

--
Don Tillman
Palo Alto, California
don at till.com
http://www.till.com






From thomas at pdp7.org  Sat Nov 28 17:54:03 2015
From: thomas at pdp7.org (Thomas Strathmann)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 17:54:03 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Online Power sim tools versus spice ...or TI versus
	LINEAR
In-Reply-To: <SNT405-EAS1774BF131797542053C9EB2C8020@phx.gbl>
References: <trinity-77c97460-4aa9-428a-b5c6-3a3e9faf34e5-1448670217571@msvc-mesg-gmx004>
 <1448671281974.da6e5443@Nodemailer>
 <SNT405-EAS32939430C21A47B2285E46BC8020@phx.gbl>
 <CAP92RBW83Z9WxremhBtKAixHbGR_SNs1Tsm6CPWWKN4b+_eNRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <SNT405-EAS1774BF131797542053C9EB2C8020@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <5659DC2B.6020703@pdp7.org>

On 28.11.15 17:22 , Dan Snazelle wrote:
> Maybe I need to (groan ) buy a copy of Windows and a copy of bootcamp 

LTspice runs just fine in Wine. In fact I much prefer using the Windows
version in Wine to the Mac version.

	Thomas


From igg.debus at t-online.de  Sun Nov 29 12:19:49 2015
From: igg.debus at t-online.de (Ingo Debus)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 12:19:49 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Online Power sim tools versus spice ...or TI versus
	LINEAR
In-Reply-To: <5659DC2B.6020703@pdp7.org>
References: <trinity-77c97460-4aa9-428a-b5c6-3a3e9faf34e5-1448670217571@msvc-mesg-gmx004>
 <1448671281974.da6e5443@Nodemailer>
 <SNT405-EAS32939430C21A47B2285E46BC8020@phx.gbl>
 <CAP92RBW83Z9WxremhBtKAixHbGR_SNs1Tsm6CPWWKN4b+_eNRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <SNT405-EAS1774BF131797542053C9EB2C8020@phx.gbl> <5659DC2B.6020703@pdp7.org>
Message-ID: <129921EF-D5A8-423F-B37F-DDEADFB2CA20@t-online.de>


> Am 28.11.2015 um 17:54 schrieb Thomas Strathmann <thomas at pdp7.org>:
> 
> LTspice runs just fine in Wine. In fact I much prefer using the Windows
> version in Wine to the Mac version.

I attended two seminars with Mike Engelhardt, the creator of LTSpice. He did all the presentations on a Mac, with the genuine Mac version. He said, he does the software development on the Mac version, that's why the Windows version is somewhat behind sometimes. He also said he doesn?t change the Windows version?s user interface to the Mac style because he doesn?t want to annoy all the Windows users ;-) Seems, it is a matter of taste...

Why the Mac is "a system that doesn't really have right-click?, as someone wrote here, is beyond me however. The OS9 days are gone, aren?t they?

Ingo

From tom at electricdruid.net  Sun Nov 29 12:45:08 2015
From: tom at electricdruid.net (Tom Wiltshire)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 11:45:08 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Online Power sim tools versus spice ...or TI versus
	LINEAR
In-Reply-To: <129921EF-D5A8-423F-B37F-DDEADFB2CA20@t-online.de>
References: <trinity-77c97460-4aa9-428a-b5c6-3a3e9faf34e5-1448670217571@msvc-mesg-gmx004>
 <1448671281974.da6e5443@Nodemailer>
 <SNT405-EAS32939430C21A47B2285E46BC8020@phx.gbl>
 <CAP92RBW83Z9WxremhBtKAixHbGR_SNs1Tsm6CPWWKN4b+_eNRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <SNT405-EAS1774BF131797542053C9EB2C8020@phx.gbl> <5659DC2B.6020703@pdp7.org>
 <129921EF-D5A8-423F-B37F-DDEADFB2CA20@t-online.de>
Message-ID: <50C0280A-2C2D-4EEC-B1FE-940E1BCCDAF5@electricdruid.net>


On 29 Nov 2015, at 11:19, Ingo Debus <igg.debus at t-online.de> wrote:
> 
> Why the Mac is "a system that doesn't really have right-click?, as someone wrote here, is beyond me however. The OS9 days are gone, aren?t they?

Without wanting to start the usual Mac/Win nonsense, whilst OSX software might recognise the "control-click" as a "right-click", there's still only one button on my MacBook's trackpad, and Mac software is usually written so you can use it without resorting to buttons and mouse clicks together. I don't *expect* to use "right-click" on a Mac, let's say.

In my opinion, Mike Engelhardt has an extremely idiosyncratic view of Mac usability. LTSpice on Mac is *weird* and I usually use it on my Windows PC because it's easier to use on that platform (where I have a two button mouse). Whilst I could move the mouse to the Mac, LTSpice's bizarre interface would be the only software I use regularly that requires it.

Tom

From Rob at gmsn.co.uk  Sun Nov 29 13:44:11 2015
From: Rob at gmsn.co.uk (Rob Spencer)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 12:44:11 +0000
Subject: [sdiy] Online Power sim tools versus spice ...or TI versus
	LINEAR
In-Reply-To: <50C0280A-2C2D-4EEC-B1FE-940E1BCCDAF5@electricdruid.net>
References: <trinity-77c97460-4aa9-428a-b5c6-3a3e9faf34e5-1448670217571@msvc-mesg-gmx004>
 <1448671281974.da6e5443@Nodemailer>
 <SNT405-EAS32939430C21A47B2285E46BC8020@phx.gbl>
 <CAP92RBW83Z9WxremhBtKAixHbGR_SNs1Tsm6CPWWKN4b+_eNRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <SNT405-EAS1774BF131797542053C9EB2C8020@phx.gbl> <5659DC2B.6020703@pdp7.org>
 <129921EF-D5A8-423F-B37F-DDEADFB2CA20@t-online.de>
 <50C0280A-2C2D-4EEC-B1FE-940E1BCCDAF5@electricdruid.net>
Message-ID: <321F82A9-DD63-4539-9CB8-D701768268DE@gmsn.co.uk>

Mac has a two finger click on the track pad and the mouse can be configured with a secondary button :)

IMHO the gestures and multi touch on the Mac are far more powerful that a right click, but I guess developers just aren't developing this kind of applications for OSX.

Kind regards 

Rob Spencer 
gmsn.co.uk 
07590 267835 

> On 29 Nov 2015, at 11:45, Tom Wiltshire <tom at electricdruid.net> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 29 Nov 2015, at 11:19, Ingo Debus <igg.debus at t-online.de> wrote:
>> 
>> Why the Mac is "a system that doesn't really have right-click?, as someone wrote here, is beyond me however. The OS9 days are gone, aren?t they?
> 
> Without wanting to start the usual Mac/Win nonsense, whilst OSX software might recognise the "control-click" as a "right-click", there's still only one button on my MacBook's trackpad, and Mac software is usually written so you can use it without resorting to buttons and mouse clicks together. I don't *expect* to use "right-click" on a Mac, let's say.
> 
> In my opinion, Mike Engelhardt has an extremely idiosyncratic view of Mac usability. LTSpice on Mac is *weird* and I usually use it on my Windows PC because it's easier to use on that platform (where I have a two button mouse). Whilst I could move the mouse to the Mac, LTSpice's bizarre interface would be the only software I use regularly that requires it.
> 
> Tom
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy


From mr at analogue.org  Sun Nov 29 15:16:57 2015
From: mr at analogue.org (Mattias Rickardsson)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 15:16:57 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Online Power sim tools versus spice ...or TI versus
	LINEAR
In-Reply-To: <129921EF-D5A8-423F-B37F-DDEADFB2CA20@t-online.de>
References: <trinity-77c97460-4aa9-428a-b5c6-3a3e9faf34e5-1448670217571@msvc-mesg-gmx004>
 <1448671281974.da6e5443@Nodemailer>
 <SNT405-EAS32939430C21A47B2285E46BC8020@phx.gbl>
 <CAP92RBW83Z9WxremhBtKAixHbGR_SNs1Tsm6CPWWKN4b+_eNRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <SNT405-EAS1774BF131797542053C9EB2C8020@phx.gbl>
 <5659DC2B.6020703@pdp7.org>
 <129921EF-D5A8-423F-B37F-DDEADFB2CA20@t-online.de>
Message-ID: <CAP92RBVx3whiFxO5ktwXmyz2ptbyTSTDGZJib=tR4wuEOzeLvg@mail.gmail.com>

Den 29 nov. 2015 12:20 em skrev "Ingo Debus" <igg.debus at t-online.de>:
> >
> > LTspice runs just fine in Wine. In fact I much prefer using the Windows
> > version in Wine to the Mac version.
>
> I attended two seminars with Mike Engelhardt, the creator of LTSpice. He
did all the presentations on a Mac, with the genuine Mac version. He said,
he does the software development on the Mac version, that's why the Windows
version is somewhat behind sometimes.

This is quite hard to believe. The Windows version has a basic UI level
with tool buttons *and* function key shortcuts, but on OS X all is hidden.

> He also said he doesn?t change the Windows version?s user interface to
the Mac style because he doesn?t want to annoy all the Windows users ;-)
Seems, it is a matter of taste...

They are already annoyed by the unfinished feeling that both versions have.
When plotting a voltage, who would ever prefer to have the grid set to -1.1
V to +7.9 V with 0.9 V between the grid lines?

I guess he's very interested in implementing the simulation, not the user
interface (or listening to user feedback about it). :-)

/mr
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151129/247bd3e1/attachment.htm>

From sdiy-mz01 at blauwurf.info  Mon Nov 30 03:03:57 2015
From: sdiy-mz01 at blauwurf.info (Michael Zacherl)
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 03:03:57 +0100
Subject: [sdiy] Online Power sim tools versus spice ...or TI versus
	LINEAR
In-Reply-To: <129921EF-D5A8-423F-B37F-DDEADFB2CA20@t-online.de>
References: <trinity-77c97460-4aa9-428a-b5c6-3a3e9faf34e5-1448670217571@msvc-mesg-gmx004>
 <1448671281974.da6e5443@Nodemailer>
 <SNT405-EAS32939430C21A47B2285E46BC8020@phx.gbl>
 <CAP92RBW83Z9WxremhBtKAixHbGR_SNs1Tsm6CPWWKN4b+_eNRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <SNT405-EAS1774BF131797542053C9EB2C8020@phx.gbl> <5659DC2B.6020703@pdp7.org>
 <129921EF-D5A8-423F-B37F-DDEADFB2CA20@t-online.de>
Message-ID: <22929BE2-4067-4C2A-AA62-C0D1A1A11CC1@blauwurf.info>


On 29.Nov 2015, at 12:19 , Ingo Debus <igg.debus at t-online.de> wrote:

> I attended two seminars with Mike Engelhardt, the creator of LTSpice. He did all the presentations on a Mac, with the genuine Mac version. He said, he does the software development on the Mac version, that's why the Windows version is somewhat behind sometimes. He also said he doesn?t change the Windows version?s user interface to the Mac style because he doesn?t want to annoy all the Windows users ;-) Seems, it is a matter of taste...

:) that's funny - as others stated, LTSpice is pretty much not compliant to Apple's UI design standards.
Then again, I don't care. I'm happy not being forced to run X11 to get what I want, like for InkScape for instance, 
with which I did all of the drawings for my final thesis. That was fun! 
I'm much more struggling with the Spice paradigm in general - so priorities are shifted a bit anyway. ;)


--
http://mz.klingt.org



From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Mon Nov 30 04:13:17 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 19:13:17 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Online Power sim tools versus spice ...or TI versus
	LINEAR
In-Reply-To: <22929BE2-4067-4C2A-AA62-C0D1A1A11CC1@blauwurf.info>
References: <trinity-77c97460-4aa9-428a-b5c6-3a3e9faf34e5-1448670217571@msvc-mesg-gmx004>
 <1448671281974.da6e5443@Nodemailer>
 <SNT405-EAS32939430C21A47B2285E46BC8020@phx.gbl>
 <CAP92RBW83Z9WxremhBtKAixHbGR_SNs1Tsm6CPWWKN4b+_eNRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <SNT405-EAS1774BF131797542053C9EB2C8020@phx.gbl> <5659DC2B.6020703@pdp7.org>
 <129921EF-D5A8-423F-B37F-DDEADFB2CA20@t-online.de>
 <22929BE2-4067-4C2A-AA62-C0D1A1A11CC1@blauwurf.info>
Message-ID: <60286DE9-B83F-4FB2-8A7B-324C1DECB3F0@audiobanshee.com>

SPICE (1973, 1975) is literally more than a decade older than the first release of Mac OS (Jan 1984) or Windows (Nov 1985). It really has no user interface at the core - users are required to create the text files for the circuits and models separately from the simulation and analysis. Although SPICE itself is open source, and was ported from Fortran to C in the late eighties, nobody seems to have written a definitive, open source GUI for it. Thus, all of the available programs are really bad at graphics and user interaction.

My impression is that the Windows version is quite lacking, but at least has a longer history. The Mac versions are even more lacking, but I guess we're all getting what we paid for, right?

I really wish someone would write an open-source schematic and model editor for the Mac so that we could finally be done with the bad UI.

The good news is that the expensive, professional circuit design programs can easily tack on the SPICE core code without too much work, and then engineers can use the tools they're already using for schematic capture to feed the simulation. That still leaves SPICE models as a difficult set of files to create.

It seems that it wouldn't be too hard for someone to use the various languages supported by EAGLE to translate a schematic into a SPICE circuit. That might make the process a little less problematic (although EAGLE doesn't comply with Apple's UI design standards, either).

? a quick internet search suggests that I should upgrade my copy of Eagle, because it now supports the FSpice Simulator via PCBSim. Anyone using that?

Brian Willoughby
Sound Consulting


On Nov 29, 2015, at 6:03 PM, Michael Zacherl <sdiy-mz01 at blauwurf.info> wrote:
> On 29.Nov 2015, at 12:19 , Ingo Debus <igg.debus at t-online.de> wrote:
>> I attended two seminars with Mike Engelhardt, the creator of LTSpice. He did all the presentations on a Mac, with the genuine Mac version. He said, he does the software development on the Mac version, that's why the Windows version is somewhat behind sometimes. He also said he doesn?t change the Windows version?s user interface to the Mac style because he doesn?t want to annoy all the Windows users ;-) Seems, it is a matter of taste...
> 
> :) that's funny - as others stated, LTSpice is pretty much not compliant to Apple's UI design standards.
> Then again, I don't care. I'm happy not being forced to run X11 to get what I want, like for InkScape for instance, 
> with which I did all of the drawings for my final thesis. That was fun! 
> I'm much more struggling with the Spice paradigm in general - so priorities are shifted a bit anyway. ;)



From alvitar at xavax.com  Mon Nov 30 05:51:28 2015
From: alvitar at xavax.com (Phillip Harbison)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 22:51:28 -0600
Subject: [sdiy] Online Power sim tools versus spice ...or TI versus
	LINEAR
In-Reply-To: <129921EF-D5A8-423F-B37F-DDEADFB2CA20@t-online.de>
References: <trinity-77c97460-4aa9-428a-b5c6-3a3e9faf34e5-1448670217571@msvc-mesg-gmx004>
 <1448671281974.da6e5443@Nodemailer>
 <SNT405-EAS32939430C21A47B2285E46BC8020@phx.gbl>
 <CAP92RBW83Z9WxremhBtKAixHbGR_SNs1Tsm6CPWWKN4b+_eNRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <SNT405-EAS1774BF131797542053C9EB2C8020@phx.gbl> <5659DC2B.6020703@pdp7.org>
 <129921EF-D5A8-423F-B37F-DDEADFB2CA20@t-online.de>
Message-ID: <565BD5D0.7070403@xavax.com>

Ingo Debus wrote:
> Why the Mac is "a system that doesn't really have right-click?,
> as someone wrote here, is beyond me however. [...]

The Apple UX team has always insisted that an N button mouse
has N-1 too many buttons. With a Mac you chord (e.g. control-
click) rather than right-click. With that said, if you have
a Magic Mouse, pressing the right side of the mouse behaves
like right-click. Different strokes. ;)

-- 
Phil Harbison




From plodger at gmail.com  Mon Nov 30 08:17:03 2015
From: plodger at gmail.com (Sarah Thompson)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 23:17:03 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle analogue & digital groundplanes
In-Reply-To: <CAK+JDy3GrsjJQsFawJpC1br7xU_yH=V9ebLjVgLAgK0qvt5ncQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <96642C5F098248C187F1156C1FB795C6@RichiePC>
 <44FD76D0-9121-4051-BB72-B1FFE61A12B6@audiobanshee.com>
 <74F13860-0CEA-4818-8F53-D673E69E5DED@gmail.com>
 <56570A47.9040109@go2.pl>
 <CACVQNWX=cp3BUzMYmK5R-Y-iSLBok_gRzEv2oHeOcc=Qjj9fKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <565822A9.4070502@go2.pl>
 <CAK+JDy3GrsjJQsFawJpC1br7xU_yH=V9ebLjVgLAgK0qvt5ncQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACVQNWW0AbvXBsa4TXXMRvg14FSa+wBeEy40q4Snufkvbe0RPQ@mail.gmail.com>

It's not *that* hard to get that many components into the space -- it would
have been easier if I could have used BGAs, but they are generally not
preferred for space applications so I had to get a waiver for the FPGA. It
basically means being REALLY careful about placement. If I could have used
standard vias it would have been easier too, but 4 routing layers and a
really fine pitch helps a lot. Looking at the board under a microscope
(sorry, I can't post photos!), there's not really much sign of any
variation in trace widths, even though the LVDS pairs are so fine that they
look like a single trace usually to the naked eye. The board house actually
could go even finer, believe it or not.

The main trick is that is *must* be assembled by a robot to stand any
reasonable chance of working first time. We had the assembly house do
flying probe tests after the board was populated to make sure it was
kosher, but the boards were all 100% tested before assembly too.

I'm a bit spoiled by being based in Silicon Valley -- it does make finding
that kind of crazy capability a lot easier.

Sarah

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 1:52 AM, john slee <indigoid at oldcorollas.org> wrote:

> On 27 November 2015 at 20:30, Roman Sowa <modular at go2.pl> wrote:
>
>> Can't imagine 500 components on 2.5''sq. People call that alien
>> technology, and who has access to real alien technology if not your
>> employer...
>
>
> +1, I would love to see this. I'd make it my desktop background.
> Particularly if it was a nice white PCB!
>
> John
>



-- 
[s]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151129/42985f94/attachment.htm>

From rsdio at audiobanshee.com  Mon Nov 30 09:00:06 2015
From: rsdio at audiobanshee.com (rsdio at audiobanshee.com)
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 00:00:06 -0800
Subject: [sdiy] Eagle analogue & digital groundplanes
In-Reply-To: <CACVQNWW0AbvXBsa4TXXMRvg14FSa+wBeEy40q4Snufkvbe0RPQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <96642C5F098248C187F1156C1FB795C6@RichiePC>
 <44FD76D0-9121-4051-BB72-B1FFE61A12B6@audiobanshee.com>
 <74F13860-0CEA-4818-8F53-D673E69E5DED@gmail.com> <56570A47.9040109@go2.pl>
 <CACVQNWX=cp3BUzMYmK5R-Y-iSLBok_gRzEv2oHeOcc=Qjj9fKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <565822A9.4070502@go2.pl>
 <CAK+JDy3GrsjJQsFawJpC1br7xU_yH=V9ebLjVgLAgK0qvt5ncQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACVQNWW0AbvXBsa4TXXMRvg14FSa+wBeEy40q4Snufkvbe0RPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FF717925-8ABB-467E-AEAB-3053179147A0@audiobanshee.com>

For folks who are in the Seattle area and are interested in crazy technology, Metrix Create Space has a LPKF Protolaser S that will cut PCBs with 2 mil traces and 2 mil spacing. The boards look great, but it might be tricky to do a multilayer board. Even though they can handle 16 layers, I think it becomes more difficult as there are more steps. I haven't been by there to see recent boards, but I designed the first PCB that they built - destined for wearable computing. This was for a DARPA project, but the facility is non-military and non-NASA. They charge $12.50/minute for use of the machine, so it's accessible to just about anyone who can produce Gerber files.

So far, I've not wanted to go that extreme for the projects I'm working on. The LPKF is actually a bit expensive if you're not in a hurry or working really small. But it's great to see such technology with widespread access.

Brian


On Nov 29, 2015, at 11:17 PM, Sarah Thompson <plodger at gmail.com> wrote:
> It's not *that* hard to get that many components into the space -- it would have been easier if I could have used BGAs, but they are generally not preferred for space applications so I had to get a waiver for the FPGA. It basically means being REALLY careful about placement. If I could have used standard vias it would have been easier too, but 4 routing layers and a really fine pitch helps a lot. Looking at the board under a microscope (sorry, I can't post photos!), there's not really much sign of any variation in trace widths, even though the LVDS pairs are so fine that they look like a single trace usually to the naked eye. The board house actually could go even finer, believe it or not.
> 
> The main trick is that is *must* be assembled by a robot to stand any reasonable chance of working first time. We had the assembly house do flying probe tests after the board was populated to make sure it was kosher, but the boards were all 100% tested before assembly too.
> 
> I'm a bit spoiled by being based in Silicon Valley -- it does make finding that kind of crazy capability a lot easier.
> 
> Sarah
> 
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 1:52 AM, john slee <indigoid at oldcorollas.org> wrote:
>> On 27 November 2015 at 20:30, Roman Sowa <modular at go2.pl> wrote:
>>> Can't imagine 500 components on 2.5''sq. People call that alien technology, and who has access to real alien technology if not your employer...
>>> 
>> +1, I would love to see this. I'd make it my desktop background. Particularly if it was a nice white PCB!
>> 
>> John
>> 
> 



