Link and I received the first prototype PCBs from MyroPCB at the end of October, 2012. Since then, we've been testing and tweaking the circuit as detailed in Part 2: Going Modular. It works! Which is nice. But a lot of problems and opportunities for improvement have emerged during the prototyping process. Today, we'll discuss the biggest changes to the motherboard and the direction of the project.
Making the Color Modules Larger
Our primary aim in making the distortion stages modular is to make "Colour" into an open platform for design and experimentation. With this in mind, we realized that we should make the modules as large as possible for more complex circuits and bigger toys like large caps, transformers, and optical cells. In order to make the modules bigger, however, we need to make some room on the motherboard. Most of the following revisions will probably make their way onto the 0.2 PCB:
- Using DIP8 rectifiers instead of discrete diodes
- Changing mounting holes from #6 to #4 drill size
- Removing some of the test points
- Placing some low-profile components under the modules (.25" clearance)
- Using 16-pin IDC connectors rather than MTA for the stereo link
Standardizing the Connectors
Because we are opening up the color modules to third-party developers, it's essential that we specify a standard, off-the-shelf connector for mating the modules with the motherboard. We settled on 6-pin, single row, 0.1" (2.54mm) pitch pins and headers.These are the same used to plug Arduino "shields" into the motherboard and are available cheaply from countless parts distributors.
Arduino shield connected to motherboard
Rethinking the Interface
Since the concept phase, we've heard a lot of feedback, floated a lot of ideas, and even had some mildly heated debates about which controls to include on the front panel. The various controls we've at one point considered including are:
- Input gain (master or for each module)
- Output trim
- Wet/dry mix for each module
- Bypass (master or for each module)
The front panel layout for our current prototype consists of:
- Master bypass
- Three wet/dry mix controls (one for each module)
- Master output trim
And, following a suggestion from GroupDIY member "kevinkace," we added input trim controls for each module on the PCB, not accessible from the front panel. In theory this setup seemed pretty close to ideal; in practice we weren't thrilled with it. The input trim pots proved to be redundant early on, as we found that we almost never wanted less than the full input signal going to each module. We could, however, envision a scenario in which we might want
more signal to get some more love from the modules. So, for the next revision we're looking at integrating a master "Saturation" switch to select between unity, +3dB, and +6dB input drive. We also haven't found the wet/dry mix controls to be a very satisfying way to interact with unit. A common practice when adding an effect is to first hear it "completely wet" to evaluate the tone before mixing it in with the dry signal. This leads to a lot of sweeping back and forth with the wet/dry knobs: first to hear what each module is doing to the signal, then to hear how the modules blend together, then to get a nice mix with the dry signal, etc. Link proposed that a more elegant solution would be to switch to individual volume controls for each module and one for the dry signal. This way, one can tailor the harmonics with the three "color" controls, and then bring in the dry signal to taste. This brings the total front panel controls for the next revision to five knobs and one two switches:
- Master bypass switch
- "Saturation" Input drive switch
- Three module volume controls
- Dry signal volume
- Output trim
Dropping the "U"?"
Our working title seems to have some staying power. Nothing else we've thought of communicates the intent and use of the unit quite as succinctly as "Colour." But I just can't get used to typing that extra vowel. And even Link, whose Canadian tendencies inspired my choice for the British spelling, prefers the "more efficient" American spelling. I'm currently leaning towards dropping the 'u', but let me know in the comments if you have a strong (or even mild) preference.
What's next?
The revisions we've looked at today all have to do with the motherboard. Next time we'll get into the actual "colors" with schematics and sound samples documenting our revision process for the modules. Thanks for following along while we slog through the gritty details!
Comments
Joel on November 12, 2014 18:04
Looks absolutely fantastic! My suggestion, as a Canadian, keep the “U” ;)
Kevin A. Cameron on November 12, 2014 18:04
Great update; a very exciting project!
I’d love to see the new modules/front panel layout.
And as a native Canadian, I also vote for the U (better SEO perhaps?).
M on November 12, 2014 18:04
As a Dutchman, I’d also keep the U. without it, the word looks a bit silly.
M on November 12, 2014 18:04
Forgot was I was about to say:
Totally excited about this project! :D
Link on November 12, 2014 18:04
Just for the record….While I do think “Color” is a more efficient spelling, do not want to drop the U. I am a proud Canadian eh!
Link on November 12, 2014 18:04
Oh and also not sold on the DIP8 rectifiers… I an still favouring discreet at this point.
It gives the end used more flexibility and easier trouble shoot in and repair in my eyes. I also do not think the space the discreet diodes take up is critical at this point.
Peterson Goodwyn on November 12, 2014 18:04
Thanks, Joel, next time I’m in Montreal we need to get together and nerd over some poutine.
Peterson Goodwyn on November 12, 2014 18:04
Interesting—the SEO angle. You think because it’s more likely to be unique?
A new front panel mockup will definitely be part of the next post, thanks for the reminder.
Erik B on November 12, 2014 18:04
Whatever the name (could not care less to be honest), this still looks like an awesome project!
Jason on November 12, 2014 18:04
Keep the U!
Erik B on November 12, 2014 18:04
and how difficult would it be to make a stereo version? Other than using two units of course :-)
Peterson Goodwyn on November 12, 2014 18:04
The stereo version will be very easy. You’ll simply run an IDC cable (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulation-displacement_connector) from one unit to another. The pots and switches on the first unit will then control both units.
Peter G. on November 12, 2014 18:04
Having a mixer that sums the 3 colour channels together with the dry seems far more intuitive to me than the wet/dry mix, and opens up some interesting possibilities with modules that subtract off the input signal from the distorted output so you only have distortion products mixing in. Let us know when you finalize the pinout and dimensions of the colour cards, we’ve got some ideas for channels it would be fun to get started prototyping.
Ben on November 12, 2014 18:04
KEEP THE U!!!
Peterson Goodwyn on November 12, 2014 18:04
Wow, the people have spoken!
Peterson Goodwyn on November 12, 2014 18:04
Glad to hear you like the new interface/summing concept and especially glad to hear that team Bearcat is interested in doing some modules. I’ll let you guys know as soon as we’ve got the dimensions/pinout finalized.
Eatpeople420 on November 12, 2014 18:04
How does it sound? Please post samples ASAP, drums, vox, 2bus, etc I’m jonesin’!
Jared Marsden on November 12, 2014 18:04
I just happened upon this site. Great Idea! I’m wondering if it would be advantageous to allow each of the “colour” modules to effect wide or narrow frequency bands. Sometimes I want to hear distortion in say the upper-mids, but not the rest of the frequency spectrum
Jason Hester on November 12, 2014 18:04
Idea for a name-
DiyRe Mak’er (diyre pronounced d’yer…) The name is a play on the Led Zeppelin song as well as a play on the DiyRe name AND references the open sourcing of the format to other “makers!” Too much?
Peterson Goodwyn on November 12, 2014 18:04
Absolutely too much. But I love it!
Comments are closed for this post.