Pass DIY Addict
Joined 2000
Paid Member
Congratulazioni, Mauro! You convinced me that I could have been able to build this lovely device, so much that I did it twice! But your build really looks seriously great, way better than mine (even if I'm still working on it)!
Complimentoni, davvero un ottimo lavoro!
Gaetano.
P.S.: anche se non dovrei dirlo, forse un pochino devo ringraziare Conte e il suo lock down...
Complimentoni, davvero un ottimo lavoro!
Gaetano.
P.S.: anche se non dovrei dirlo, forse un pochino devo ringraziare Conte e il suo lock down...
B1 Korg final configuration
Many thanks guys,
I'm very excited for your comments, I've never received so many compliments in my whole life
... not even from my wife ... maybe it's normal, maybe there's a reason ?? Ok, ask to my wife ... or maybe it's better not ...
Have good music!!
Mauro
Many thanks guys,
I'm very excited for your comments, I've never received so many compliments in my whole life
... not even from my wife ... maybe it's normal, maybe there's a reason ?? Ok, ask to my wife ... or maybe it's better not ...Have good music!!
Mauro
Attachments
ClaudeG,
I respectfully request your advice what you consider the best remote control volume compatible with Papa's lovely tube preamp.
What is the general consensus Re. the use of linear stereo pots with a "logarithmic" inducing resistor from wiper to ground? The potential advantage is that linear pots have better/more linear channel tracking.
IIRC, the linear pot value = 10x that of the desired log/audio taper pot. The log taper pot value = that of the "log" inducing R.
Thank you kindly for your time.
I respectfully request your advice what you consider the best remote control volume compatible with Papa's lovely tube preamp.
What is the general consensus Re. the use of linear stereo pots with a "logarithmic" inducing resistor from wiper to ground? The potential advantage is that linear pots have better/more linear channel tracking.
IIRC, the linear pot value = 10x that of the desired log/audio taper pot. The log taper pot value = that of the "log" inducing R.
Thank you kindly for your time.
At first I wanted to use a series of gears, but the solution with the belt seemed more practical to me.
Cheers
Attachments
Hi James,
Thanks for your very kind words but, to be very honest, there are here a LOT of people that are far more knowledgeable than me, especialy since I have NO experience with remote controled volume pots.
I am playing since a couple fo decades with pots and stepped attenuators but never motorised solutions. Having said that, coincidence, I recently considered this topic... but please note I have yet no 1st hand experience on that.
After various researches I came to the conclusion that I shouldn't try to reinvent the wheel and that I should trust someone far more experienced and knowledgeable than me: Papa! On top, I like his philosophy as he listens to his designs: IMHO as designer he is rather on the musical and transparent side, than on the "dry, over-analytical computer figures side", and that suits me very well!
Nelson is using the Muse chip for remote controled volume adjustment in his Pass flagships. OK, there might be cost and industrial considerations, but if that's good for him, than it can only be a very suitable choice for me
I haven't tried all options, but with time I found that the very best pots are quite close to perfection and in most cases equivalent to expensive alternative stepped solutions. So my recommandation wouldn't be to try tuning a pot or attenuator with associate costs and question marks, but simply to go for the Muse solution (there is an affordable kit in the US) and to trust it as it is (without using the gain option). Yes, it is a chip (which has also some positive in that case in terms of resistor network consistency), but the world has moved on since a decade and even the latest op-amps are if righly implemented very performant solutions...
Another solution could have been LDR, but after reading rave reviews that also described... how much better it sounded than simple resistor networks, I digged further and came to the (very personal) conclusion these must add a lot of distorsions, among them perhaps the liked H2. Whereas it is for me OK for a B1K to add some controled flavour as I fancy it, it is not what I expect from a single volume (pot) function -not to mention unkown fail safe modi... so I now ruled these out.
Not sure it is what you wanted to read, but that's all my humble opinion. I would not go for an attenuator or pot if I would need a remote solution, but go Muse (and no other chip BTW).
Claude
Thanks for your very kind words but, to be very honest, there are here a LOT of people that are far more knowledgeable than me, especialy since I have NO experience with remote controled volume pots.
I am playing since a couple fo decades with pots and stepped attenuators but never motorised solutions. Having said that, coincidence, I recently considered this topic... but please note I have yet no 1st hand experience on that.
After various researches I came to the conclusion that I shouldn't try to reinvent the wheel and that I should trust someone far more experienced and knowledgeable than me: Papa! On top, I like his philosophy as he listens to his designs: IMHO as designer he is rather on the musical and transparent side, than on the "dry, over-analytical computer figures side", and that suits me very well!
Nelson is using the Muse chip for remote controled volume adjustment in his Pass flagships. OK, there might be cost and industrial considerations, but if that's good for him, than it can only be a very suitable choice for me
I haven't tried all options, but with time I found that the very best pots are quite close to perfection and in most cases equivalent to expensive alternative stepped solutions. So my recommandation wouldn't be to try tuning a pot or attenuator with associate costs and question marks, but simply to go for the Muse solution (there is an affordable kit in the US) and to trust it as it is (without using the gain option). Yes, it is a chip (which has also some positive in that case in terms of resistor network consistency), but the world has moved on since a decade and even the latest op-amps are if righly implemented very performant solutions...
Another solution could have been LDR, but after reading rave reviews that also described... how much better it sounded than simple resistor networks, I digged further and came to the (very personal) conclusion these must add a lot of distorsions, among them perhaps the liked H2. Whereas it is for me OK for a B1K to add some controled flavour as I fancy it, it is not what I expect from a single volume (pot) function -not to mention unkown fail safe modi... so I now ruled these out.
Not sure it is what you wanted to read, but that's all my humble opinion. I would not go for an attenuator or pot if I would need a remote solution, but go Muse (and no other chip BTW).
Claude