• These commercial threads are for private transactions. diyAudio.com provides these forums for the convenience of our members, but makes no warranty nor assumes any responsibility. We do not vet any members, use of this facility is at your own risk. Customers can post any issues in those threads as long as it is done in a civil manner. All diyAudio rules about conduct apply and will be enforced.

Remote control kits

marziom said:
what about a 5.1 kit? i mean 6 channel volume control and some channel switch.

How many 5.1 inputs do you (and others) need? I have planned to make a 5.1 "add-on" input selector to be used with one of the 2-channel selectors. So the add-on board would control the remaining 4 channels. But how many inputs? Two or three?

I could make an input selector board with both 5.1 inputs and stereo inputs, but it would be very big, so I think two boards is a better idea.

For the 6-channel volume control you can just use 3 of the existing boards, or you can use the 6-channel pot.

Best regards,

Mikkel C. Simonsen
 
I think that almost three channel are required (DVD, SAT/TV, GAME/PC/CONSOLE?).
I also think that the kit should have separate pcb for 2ch selector (for audiophile lovers :) )and 5.1 selector, that could permit that who don't care about stero audio can use only the 5.1 part, reducing the space and the cost.

marzio
 
Passive Attentuator Project

Hi Mikkel:

I am planning to build a transformer-based passive line controller. I plan to use either the S&B TX-102 or the Audio Consulting units. I want the controller to have the following features:

1) Remote volume and mute (at a minimum). Phase reversal would be nice. Remote source selection and power are not required.

2) Source selection will be via a rotary switch on the base.

3) Volume control is required at the base, mute function is optional. Since source selection is via a rotary switch, a round knob is preferable for volume control at the base (cosmetics).

4) The design will be dual mono (ie. ground will be switched).

5) Fully balanced operation is nice, but not mandatory.

6) Digital volume display (2 digit) is also desirable, but not mandatory.

7) The cabinet will likely be hardwood or baltic birch ply. An aluminum faceplate may be used.

What parts can you supply to execute this design? Can you support a round volume control at the base? How would the two digit display be attached to the fron of the base?
 
Re: Passive Attentuator Project

mike_mcf said:
I am planning to build a transformer-based passive line controller. I plan to use either the S&B TX-102 or the Audio Consulting units. I want the controller to have the following features:

1) Remote volume and mute (at a minimum). Phase reversal would be nice. Remote source selection and power are not required.

The RelVol2 board could handle the volume switching. There are outputs for 4 extra relays, so you could use one of those for a phase relay.

5) Fully balanced operation is nice, but not mandatory.

That just depends on how you connect it, so that's no problem.

What parts can you supply to execute this design? Can you support a round volume control at the base? How would the two digit display be attached to the fron of the base?

You can use the VolControl2 board to get both the rotary volume control and a two-digit display. The rotary encoder, the displays and the IR detector are normally fitted on the PCB, but you could connect the encoder or IR detector with wires, if that suits you front panel layout better.

Best regards,

Mikkel C. Simonsen
 
Magsy said:
Is there a way to control power off/on relay and mute without one of your input boards Mikkel?

Yes, the power relay is very simple. The power signal is available on a separate pin on the Control2 board, so you only need a transistor (perhaps a 2N2222A) to switch the relay.

The mute relay is a bit more complicated. You would need a '595 to "decode" the mute signal, and then another transistor driver. But it would be no problem to build on a piece of Veroboard.

Best regards,

Mikkel C. Simonsen
 
mbcouple said:
I sent you an email the other day about possibly controlling the internal mux of a cs8416. Also, can your board control the wm8816 yet?

I have code for both chips. I don't remember if anybody has actually tested the WM8816 code yet... :cannotbe:


Is there a way to contact you more directly, possibly via an instant messenging service?

I have never used any of the instant messaging services (I don't know what's available for my ancient Warp4 anno 1996 OS/2 system). I also never know when I'm going to be in. I have no fixed working hours...

Best regards,

Mikkel C. Simonsen
 
Re: Re: Passive Attentuator Project

mcs said:


The RelVol2 board could handle the volume switching. There are outputs for 4 extra relays, so you could use one of those for a phase relay.



That just depends on how you connect it, so that's no problem.



You can use the VolControl2 board to get both the rotary volume control and a two-digit display. The rotary encoder, the displays and the IR detector are normally fitted on the PCB, but you could connect the encoder or IR detector with wires, if that suits you front panel layout better.

Best regards,

Mikkel C. Simonsen


Mikkel:

So if we understand each other correctly, I need to order the following:

Qty=1 RelVol2SB (for S&B TVAs)
Qty=1 VolControl2 (for 2 digit display)
Qty=1 7805PSU1
Qty=1 IRDet2 (for remote IR capability)
Qty=1 RU151 (to control volume, mute, phase, and tape loop)

I need to source the TX-102s, a source switch, knobs, faceplate, cabinet, and connectors. If that is correct, I will place an order ASAP.

Michael
 
Re: Re: Re: Passive Attentuator Project

mike_mcf said:
Mikkel:

So if we understand each other correctly, I need to order the following:

Qty=1 RelVol2SB (for S&B TVAs)
Qty=1 VolControl2 (for 2 digit display)
Qty=1 7805PSU1
Qty=1 IRDet2 (for remote IR capability)
Qty=1 RU151 (to control volume, mute, phase, and tape loop)

I need to source the TX-102s, a source switch, knobs, faceplate, cabinet, and connectors. If that is correct, I will place an order ASAP.

Yes, correct.

Best regards,

Mikkel C. Simonsen