• WARNING: Tube/Valve amplifiers use potentially LETHAL HIGH VOLTAGES.
    Building, troubleshooting and testing of these amplifiers should only be
    performed by someone who is thoroughly familiar with
    the safety precautions around high voltages.

Digitally controlled analog attenuator

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
My friend is working on development of remote controlled step attenuator. It is a thingy (either kit or complete box with input and output sockets) that has a ladder-type digitally controlled attenuator. Resistors in the ladder are switched by relays, in 2 dB steps.
Currently, he has prototypes with both rotary switch and pot controls. Pot control works as a A/D converted that senses input DC adjusting attenuation digitally.
One PCB may be used either for balanced IN controlling (4 balanced ins / 1 out), or for 2 stereo channels (4 stereo ins / 1 stereo out).


The question is, what interface is better for such a box to control remotely? I am thinking either of 9-wire control (5 for attenuator, and 4 for input selector relays)

Also, since any resistance is possible, which ones are better to choose?

Pics of what he currently has are attached.

Anatoliy
 

Attachments

  • 012.JPG
    012.JPG
    869.7 KB · Views: 567
  • MAT.jpg
    MAT.jpg
    548.9 KB · Views: 541
  • mat_assembly.jpg
    mat_assembly.jpg
    390.9 KB · Views: 523
Last edited:
To control the attenuator remotely? An IR receiver, of course. :cool:

Well, you probably mean on the amplifier panel. Why not use the rotary switches with two-bit encoding, you just sense direction and count pulses? Why add so many wires? My vote: two bits for attenuator, two bits for input selector. Or if you want to put input at absolute positions on the panel (otherwise you would need a display to tell which is selected) you could go three-bit grey code for up to 8 inputs.

Is he planning on doing a display to tell what is going on or using single-turn switches/pots?
 
Currently he supplies options with potentiometer control and 11 - position rotary switch for volume, and 4 position rotary switch for channel selection. A 25 - position rotary switch may be better, but rotary switches with encoding, of course, is the best choose!
Are 5 - bit encoders available? It would allow 2 dB control all over the range!

But the initial question was about remote control interface. For example, 8 - 16 - or 64 inputs on a stage digitally controlled from console... What do you think?

Edit: it is an early morning there in Israel, but here are files he sent me ye http://wavebourn.com/maat/MAT_Assembly.pdf sterday:

http://wavebourn.com/maat/Mattrix_Attenuator_Applications.pdf
 
Last edited:
If absolute position is not important, the two-bit quadrature output rotary encoders would be best in my opinion. You could get them without detents for very smooth operation. You could have as many positions as you want, it would just function as a multi-turn pot just like modern commercial receivers/amps. In fact, I'm sure that's what they use.

You would need a display to know what it is set at, though. Could be as simple as a strip of LEDs.
 
Wavebourn,

I don't know much about being a sound guy at a concert, but if I were doing this myself all of the information over long distances would be handled by a single TX and RX lines between two microprocessors. If you are going long distances this could easily be handled by a low-cost fiber line. That would be easy to set up and cheap to replace if broken.
 
Thank you!

There is already thingy on the market called Digital Snake, a local guy Barani from Networksound.com makes them. My idea was, to use his digital snake in my powered mixer, and add remote control to switch inputs (TRS/XLR, mic/instr, signal polarity, phantom power, HPF) and set gain remotely using the same digital snake that works over twisted pair.
Currently I have a box on stage with 8 XLR ins, 8 TRS ins, switches and pors, tube preamps with input and output transformers, and this thingy connects via 25 pin socket to the console.
 
This may not really be applicable to the task at hand, but he might consider using dual control pentodes to vary the volume of the audio signal. Changing the DC bias on the G3 will change the amount of signal the plate will get (G2 gets what the plate doesn't get). This DC bias could be a low impedance (to avoid noise pickup over a long control cable), or DC varied by a digital volume control chip (here the chip doesn't touch the audio signal)..
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.

More at 6BE6 volume control
 
Last edited:
It is totally different: either to use non-linear devices to control volume, or to use linear stepping attenuator. Stepping attenuator allows to get minimal possible distortions, and better possible tracking between channels. The lower is tempco of resistors, the more precise they are, the better is the result. However, complexity is the price we pay for it, but using modern technology it is possible to get it relatively cheap.
 
Hi Wavebourn,

Did you ever get anywhere with this?

I am currently working on a digitally controlled compressor using similar relay boards and a micro controller. The ARM mBed is a really useful tool if you not have come across it before.

Options for controlling the boards so far have been an encoder or potentiometer. But I have gone with motorised pots for full recallability. What did you end up with?

Think it is really interesting; So far I am in the early stages of an iPad app for bluetooth control, this way I can control relays for power, switching etc.

I guess it could also be used with the Raspberry Pi to some extent instead of the mBed. Might be an interesting DIY project.

Cheers

Charlie
 

Attachments

  • relay boards.JPG
    relay boards.JPG
    477.3 KB · Views: 173
If you're trying to control the attenuator from a far distance away, I'd throw a micro controller at it. For noise immunity, I'd use one of the industrial standard serial buses - RS232 or RS485 spring to mind. You could also use ethernet....

For the physical controls, I'd go with an encoder. I use some in my preamp that has detents so the feel is much like an attenuator, though, without the friction typically associated with a large rotary switch. The only snag there is that unless you're using an absolute encoder, you won't know the position of the encoder when the circuit starts up. That's usually not a big deal unless there's a pointer on the volume knob that needs to align with min/max marks on a dial. In my setup, I just store the previous volume setting in EEPROM and set the volume to that on start-up.

For the 25 control lines needed for the volume control, I suggest using a 5-to-32 decoder. I doubt such a decoder is available off the shelf, but it could be implemented in a GAL/PAL (remember those? :)) or made with some 3-to-8 decoders and some glue logic.

~Tom
 
For audio purposes, I always use the 40XX family, low cost, low noise, low complexity, well, until certain point. :)

A microcontroller (PicMicro or whatever) is far of the menu by now, remind you must control only two functions.
Addition that I have no idea about programing in Assembler. :D

BTW. Thanks for your advice ! :)
 
Last edited:
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.