MXR EVH 117 Flanger

All about modern commercial stompbox circuits from Electro Harmonix over MXR, Boss and Ibanez into the nineties.
Post Reply
User avatar
Coolcat0078
Information
Posts: 7
Joined: 15 Sep 2009, 00:21
Been thanked: 2 times
Contact:

Post by Coolcat0078 »

I have an EVH 117 flanger in for repair. I can take some pictures if someone is interested. It uses a (weird) v3204 dunlop branded BBD device..

User avatar
Govmnt_Lacky
Information

Post by Govmnt_Lacky »

Pictures are ALWAYS welcome!

Can NEVER have enough pics! Please do :thumbsup

User avatar
pedalgrinder
Cap Cooler
Information
Posts: 548
Joined: 29 Aug 2011, 06:05
my favorite amplifier: Ampeg SVT
Completed builds: pedals with pots switches and everything
Location: South Australia Adelaide
Has thanked: 198 times
Been thanked: 172 times

Post by pedalgrinder »

yes pictures please make sure you take both component and track side so if one of wants to have a go at tracing it we can get a schematic together cheers :applause: :thumbsup
What's the best thing about fat chicks and scooters? There both fun to ride around until your mates find out!

User avatar
Ice-9
Degoop Doctor
Information
Posts: 1094
Joined: 31 Mar 2009, 15:29
my favorite amplifier: Marshall
Completed builds: Far to many to afford the enclosures for them all. :)
Has thanked: 134 times
Been thanked: 359 times
Contact:

Post by Ice-9 »

I would imagine this pedal like a lot of the newer MXR stuff is pretty mutch all SMD, I would love to see a couple of pics of the pcb. :applause:
It's fairly straight forward, if you want to start it , press start. You can work out the rest of the controls for yourself !

No silicon heaven ? preposterous ! Where would all the calculators go ?

User avatar
Coolcat0078
Information
Posts: 7
Joined: 15 Sep 2009, 00:21
Been thanked: 2 times
Contact:

Post by Coolcat0078 »

2 Quick pictures so you can see the pcb. I will make larger/better ones for tracing purpose.

Does anyone have some info on the v3204 IC? Could it be a rebranded v3205?
This specific pedal sometimes starts to make a huge amount of random weird noise like self oscillation, so knowing what BBD is in there may be interesting to know.

Image
Image

User avatar
Scruffie
Opamp Operator
Information
Posts: 1739
Joined: 13 Mar 2009, 17:59
Location: UK
Has thanked: 28 times
Been thanked: 170 times

Post by Scruffie »

Rebranded v3205? No...

It's just a specially for MXR made MN3204, it's 512 stages.

User avatar
Coolcat0078
Information
Posts: 7
Joined: 15 Sep 2009, 00:21
Been thanked: 2 times
Contact:

Post by Coolcat0078 »

So I guess this hasn't got a direct replacement?

User avatar
Scruffie
Opamp Operator
Information
Posts: 1739
Joined: 13 Mar 2009, 17:59
Location: UK
Has thanked: 28 times
Been thanked: 170 times

Post by Scruffie »

Coolcat0078 wrote:So I guess this hasn't got a direct replacement?
Not unless you ask MXR for one.

The oscillation issues will be feedback or clock adjustments probably, you should probably ask MXR which trim controls which parameter and what the set up procedure is if you're going down that route.

User avatar
POTL
Resistor Ronker
Information
Posts: 335
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 03:11
Has thanked: 58 times
Been thanked: 67 times

Post by POTL »

there are ideas that makes sa572?
Attachments
EVH-M117b.jpg
EVH-M117a.jpg

User avatar
EddieTavares
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 126
Joined: 12 Jan 2010, 13:43
my favorite amplifier: marshall
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 26 times

Post by EddieTavares »

Sa572 is a compander, one half compress the signal befor the digital portion and the other half expand the signal after that.

User avatar
POTL
Resistor Ronker
Information
Posts: 335
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 03:11
Has thanked: 58 times
Been thanked: 67 times

Post by POTL »

Yes, but why is it needed in the flanger circuit?
It is used in analogue delays, in the original scheme with sad1024 it was not used.
http://rudn.nodevice.com/preview/big/373/373202-1.jpg

User avatar
Ice-9
Degoop Doctor
Information
Posts: 1094
Joined: 31 Mar 2009, 15:29
my favorite amplifier: Marshall
Completed builds: Far to many to afford the enclosures for them all. :)
Has thanked: 134 times
Been thanked: 359 times
Contact:

Post by Ice-9 »

POTL wrote:Yes, but why is it needed in the flanger circuit?
It is used in analogue delays, in the original scheme with sad1024 it was not used.
http://rudn.nodevice.com/preview/big/373/373202-1.jpg
My guess would be to simply lower noise in a BBD based circuit, same as it does in a delay.
It's fairly straight forward, if you want to start it , press start. You can work out the rest of the controls for yourself !

No silicon heaven ? preposterous ! Where would all the calculators go ?

User avatar
Scruffie
Opamp Operator
Information
Posts: 1739
Joined: 13 Mar 2009, 17:59
Location: UK
Has thanked: 28 times
Been thanked: 170 times

Post by Scruffie »

Ice-9 wrote:
POTL wrote:Yes, but why is it needed in the flanger circuit?
It is used in analogue delays, in the original scheme with sad1024 it was not used.
http://rudn.nodevice.com/preview/big/373/373202-1.jpg
My guess would be to simply lower noise in a BBD based circuit, same as it does in a delay.
I concur, the circuit is obviously quite different to the original, this uses a 512 stage BBD but the original used the SAD1024 in series mode so 1024 stage BBD... maybe rather than get two types of BBDs they just increased the delay length from half the stages and then needed to cut the noise down that introduced. Who knows without a schematic and/or clock readings though.

User avatar
POTL
Resistor Ronker
Information
Posts: 335
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 03:11
Has thanked: 58 times
Been thanked: 67 times

Post by POTL »

Scruffie wrote:
Ice-9 wrote:
POTL wrote:Yes, but why is it needed in the flanger circuit?
It is used in analogue delays, in the original scheme with sad1024 it was not used.
http://rudn.nodevice.com/preview/big/373/373202-1.jpg
My guess would be to simply lower noise in a BBD based circuit, same as it does in a delay.
I concur, the circuit is obviously quite different to the original, this uses a 512 stage BBD but the original used the SAD1024 in series mode so 1024 stage BBD... maybe rather than get two types of BBDs they just increased the delay length from half the stages and then needed to cut the noise down that introduced. Who knows without a schematic and/or clock readings though.
It seems even more strange why use the rare component mn3204 and expensive sa572 if you could just set nm3207 or nm3007 and get a 1024 stage BBD

User avatar
Scruffie
Opamp Operator
Information
Posts: 1739
Joined: 13 Mar 2009, 17:59
Location: UK
Has thanked: 28 times
Been thanked: 170 times

Post by Scruffie »

They use the 3204 in the micro flanger and I haven't checked but I think possibly the choruses too. It's not rare for them as it's made especially for them.

Probably use the 572 in their delays, cheaper to have a lot of one part produced than less of two separate parts.

Could be other design reasons though, as I said, can't say without a schematic and/or clock readings but I doubt they made an accounting mistake.

Post Reply