• The swap meet forum is for private non-commercial transactions. Only unmoderated members can post here.

    diyAudio provides this forum 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 relay volume control kit.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#461
Hi Brian,

For contrast, I did use a 10K/100 position digital POT. That LCD really doesn't need the contrast control. Only 5 settings result in visible screen.

For brightness, I used the PWM output of the PIC driving a IRF510 mosfet. For that LCD, you do not need a limiting resistor since one is built in.


Dale

Hi Vinnie,

Thanks for the offer. Will Jen let me come over to build the volume control?
 
#463
Craig,

Thanks for the update, I got it now 🙂 I just have one small (?)comment now that I have analyzed the file.

When going down the list, I noticed that there was some serious switching of the pass elements such as here:

{3 , 10}, // Volume Setting 216 = -9.938068 dB
{0 , 0}, // Volume Setting 217 = -9.542425 dB
{2 , 6}, // Volume Setting 218 = -9.524475 dB
{3 , 9}, // Volume Setting 219 = -9.356446 dB

I know this is necessary in order to obtain the narrowest sequence you were after, but I fear that the first and second line will definitely sound different.

This is the moment of truth: Are we going all-out for performance, or are we optimizing the marketing numbers (such as a lot of small equi-spaced steps)?

I say that if we are going to switch back and forth, you may wish to revisit making going back more than one pass-setting ("only top two dogs can play")

I am after the ultimate in raw performance, however you might want to consider implementing both algorithms (switchable) if you prefer.

Thanks!

Petter
 
#464
Hi Vinnie,

With a little bit of luck, we should have all of the pieces by then.

If I do not receive the Encoders by then, I will remove them from my board. I just received the "remoting kit" for the encoders and LCD. It should lead to very neat wiring. I bought some nice flex 6 pin cables for the encoder and 16 pin header/ribbon cable for the display.

Our only challenge is how to mount the LCD?
Dale
 
#465
Doh!!!

harvardian said:
Hi Vinnie,


Our only challenge is how to mount the LCD?
Dale
Click to expand...

Dale,

This is true! Well, I think for starters that I can mount the LCD board (which is normally mounted on the IR board) onto the front panel, as long as it isn't > 1.75". Then drill small holes to send the wires through. I know this isn't ideal for looks, but as long as it's mounted solidly, it will be good for us to write the instructions and try out the Apox-2. Later I can get a new front panel and have it machined to the LCD rectangle size, and then it will be perfect. How does this sound?

Any other ideas for mounting in a 1U chassis?

Thanks,

Vinnie
 
#466
A NEW board APOX-4U schematic available

Hi guys,

Dale and I have gotten a couple of people who would like to build
their own hardware for the APOX kit.

I whipped up a new board called the APOX-4U.
This will allow a custom designer a jump start in prototyping their
own design.

The board basically consists of a 40 pin microcontroller with I2C, I2C address jumpers, RS232 with debugger jumper option, ICD2 interface, and has three 10 pin headers. (These are for the 24 spare microcontroller pins of I/O)
It also has a small prototyping area for your custom hardware.

There is a schematic available hereAPOX-4U schematic.

Please tell me if this is something people would want?

I know, I know, I'll finish the APOX-3. (Dale was already harrassing me )🙄



Thanks,
Craig Beiferman


Petter,
I will have too look at my program to come up with a way to minimize the series resistors. I was really trying to get the optimum step size, and not the optimum impedance.
 
#468
Hi Brian,

Yes, they have the similar pinouts. The 4220 is a nanoPower version that has an internal oscillator. Craig has left space for a resonator, so either one could be used.

Cost??? The raw board will be ~15.00. Parts would add another ~20. So about 35.00. Maybe less...

Dale
 
#469
NEW NEW NEW BOARD!

The <h2>APOX-DK1</h2> has arrived.

O.K. I finished the schematic about 5 minutes ago.
Thats two schematics in 1 day. Not too bad!:superman:

This is the NEW standalone remote controlled with optical encoder 4 balanced input selects, and APOX-1 style volume control. This board does not work with the APOX-IR1.
It is completely standalone. It is our cheapest alternative for a remote controlled volume and input selector.

It will replace a 4 stack poteniometer, and a 4 balanced input
selection switch. (I switch L+,L-,LGND,R+,R-,RGND for 4 seperate channels. I don't even know if they sell an input selection switch
like that?)

A microcontroller runs the show, accepting infrared commands.
A dipswitch controls options. 4 dip switches are used to decide if the inputs are single ended or differential.
3 other dip switches still need to find an application.

The input is via a single rotary encoder. A push button on the encoder cycles through the 4 inputs. 4 LEDS display which input is selected. Setting the volume all the way down will Mute the output. 255 volume settings are between 0 and -60dB

So you now only need to purchase 1 knob?

Is anyone interested in this board? 😀


Thanks for everyones ideas!
I think we are really starting to get some unique products that are cost competitive with some more standard solutions.

Thanks again,
Craig Beiferman
 
#470
A small prize for the first person to figure out what the name

APOX-DK1 stands for...

The remote will still have the following features:

1) Volume
2) Mute
3) Direct channel (if remote has keys 1-4)
4) Up/Down channel


A special thanks to James (Dane0198) for his suggestions.

We are really hoping to keep it below 200 with power supply and remote control. (including H8 resistors).


Dale

P.S. I have spent the day with input offsets, putting in control for bypass on the encoder, etc...

The input offsets work as follows:

1) You decide which input is nominal (none have to be. but thats just too wierd)
2) You would assign this input an offset of zero (default)
3) For the other inputs, you would determine the volume setting offset that makes this channel the same as the nominal. This would be in units of "volume increment". For the APOX-2, it would depend on your resistors, but may be 3dB. For the Apox-1 and Apox-3, each delta might represent .5dB.
Offsets can be from -60 to +60 (obviously, the APOX-2 is limited to -23 to +23 (but one or two make more sense)
4) As you change inputs, the volume would actually change by a value of (newchanneloffset-oldchanneloffset). In this way, you don't lose resolution

Seems to make sense to me (and Craig) for this application.

Now, channel offsets (balance or HT multichannel) are quite a bit different. These are offsets from the current nominal volume.
 
#473
Brian,

Not even close! :dodgy:

It is more of a marketing statement than a DipChip type acronym.


Think of the competition. That is a BIG HINT!!!


Peter,

Would that be a deal breaker for people?

The design is not set in stone yet, although we want to keep the price way down. I'll let Craig work out the additional parts required. It can certainly be done!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom