|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
| Analog Line Level Preamplifiers , Passive Pre-amps, Crossovers, etc. |
|
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.
Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving |
|
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
|
Hello DIYaudio community!
I'm currently designing a 3 band parametric equalizer based on the 2nd order state variable filter as proposed by W. Kerman, L. Huelsman and R. Newcomb (State-Variable Synthesis for Insensitive Integrated Circuit Transfer Functions). I like its bandpass response because it is really easy to tune. I've read articles about the use of this filter topology as a parametric equalizer (to adjust Q, center frequency and boost/cut). I think the most inspiring I read is the one by Ethan Winer (Spectrum Analyzer and Equalizer Designs) and I used his circuit as a basis. Since I didn't want to copy his circuit I studied to see how I could improve it. One day I read Rane's Constant Q Graphic Equalizers article (http://www.rane.com/pdf/constanq.pdf) and now I'm obsessed with that idea, since I haven't been able to accomplish it. According to the author "The amplitude function must be entirely separate from the bandpass filter function" so I'm using a modified non-inverting SVF and bandpass gain is totally independent from Q. Take a look at the graphs I obtained with LTSpice at various levels of boost/cut, you can see that Q is not constant at all levels. I would like to hear if someone has worked or is working on a similar project to share experiences. M. Fricke (Sorry about my bad english) |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Midwest U.S.A.
|
If I can find it and digitize will post it here. If I do not remind me via private message. Good luck -Sum
__________________
What the other guy said----Standing on the shoulders of giants. New avatar- no more little array
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
|
Thanks Sum, it would be nice to see what real constant q curves look like...
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Midwest U.S.A.
|
Wish I could claim this one but I cannot. Please thank Mr. Ike Wakibiashi for this one. He put a lot of work into it. Using half way decent parts I have gotten Q=2000 with this set up, WOW!
He gave this to everyone who ask so I pass it freely to this forums users. Standing on the shoulders of giants, makes me a little taller. Ike was one of those giants.
__________________
What the other guy said----Standing on the shoulders of giants. New avatar- no more little array
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Midwest U.S.A.
|
Was curious- did you get this to work and did it do what you wanted?
-Sum
__________________
What the other guy said----Standing on the shoulders of giants. New avatar- no more little array
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
|
Hi Sum:
Thanks for the circuit, I will start "spiceboarding" the circuit, in previous days I was immersed in the non-inverting SVF equations, I studied a Rane schematic (http://www.rane.com/pdf/old/pe17sch1.pdf) of an equalizer that used this topology. With the common N-I implementation one is unable to achieve Q values lower than 1 (you can using the inverting SVF but then Q is dependant of gain and viceversa). Q can be less than 1 (using the N-I SVF only if): a) R107 and R108 resistors are not equal but that will modify gain. b) RC values are not equal (Rane's trick) however I haven't figured out what effect will this imbalance have on frequency and how to tune for the values needed so I will further study it. |
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
|
Are there any simpler ones than Winer's circuit that allow boosting/cutting, with the frequency and Q all independent(the response frickecello posted is exactly what I need)? I'd like to build 3 single band parametric EQs and cascade them for conceptual simplicity. The amount of opamps used won't be a problem, but I need a design that doesn't use any dual gang pots.
Last edited by dewasiuk; 24th September 2011 at 08:32 PM. |
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
|
Sorry I forgot to mention that I actually need constant Q as well. I gave the response a better look lol.
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Midwest U.S.A.
|
The trouble is this is a second order function which means two integrators which leads to a dual pot. Do not use audio taper for frequency. Use a quality linear taper instead and my posted circuit will work fine. You could use a digital resistor ladder with some encoder and control circuit or possibly some device set up as a variable resistor. Linear taper dual gang are not so bad as audio taper pots for tracking and matching the linear ideal values.
Good luck and post if you find a suitable circuit.
__________________
What the other guy said----Standing on the shoulders of giants. New avatar- no more little array
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| FS: Behringer CX2310 active crossover plus 2x PEQ2200 parametric equalizers | nl | Swap Meet | 6 | 21st May 2009 03:58 PM |
| parametric equalizers | stupid m0nkey | Everything Else | 7 | 16th February 2005 04:49 AM |
| Rane 4th order SVF | nuppe | Solid State | 4 | 12th June 2004 08:54 PM |
| Recomended Stereo Equalizers? | Audio Addict | Analogue Source | 2 | 6th June 2003 12:13 PM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |