borislavgajic wrote:I want to make new better layout for wiggler( or the original is best possible???)........
Wether the original is "the best" is one discussion. Therefore define "better" . There's certainly nothing incredibly "wrong" with the way EH layouted this thing.
Right now I think about the recent Maestro parametric filter thread where "impovements" were brought up before having even tried the original. The between-the-lines reading suggested more of a "I-think-this-is-difficult-let's-make-it-easier" attitude.
borislavgajic wrote:I want to make new better layout for wiggler( or the original is best possible???)........
Wether the original is "the best" is one discussion. Therefore define "better" . There's certainly nothing incredibly "wrong" with the way EH layouted this thing.
Right now I think about the recent Maestro parametric filter thread where "impovements" were brought up before having even tried the original. The between-the-lines reading suggested more of a "I-think-this-is-difficult-let's-make-it-easier" attitude.
That's a funny interpretation of my suggestions.
I just really don't like rotary switches. Since the original settings were meant to be changeable by foot I thought it a better Idea to replace the DP5T rotary with multiple CD4066, a CD4017 and a footswitch to make the settings foot scrollable. That's *hardly* a "I-think-this-is-difficult-lets-make-it-easier" attitude. It is a "how can I make this footswitchable and get rid of the rotary switch" attitude. The other mods were suggestions on changing the unit to make it more flexible. Again, hardly a simplification to make it easier. I think the original unit is a bit of a simplification of a standard parametric EQ. As it only allows Q presets.
better.......to reduce thumping noise(some owners of wiggler reported that as problem)
.....and I think input trace is too long,and it could pick up some interference from LED2(and lfo).....also secound(piggyback) PCB and mainPCB are connected with 10 wires (close to each other,and close to tube circuit)........
....also other (LFO) controls,and it is not shilded wire used for audio path.....
trace to pin 3 of IC is placed between pins 4 and 5......while it could easy be placed around resistors r39 and r40 ...............then it would not be so thin....
The schematic contained a small error: a missing resistor (R19). The schematic has been corrected. The link is the same; just refresh your browser to see the updated image.
"Analog electronics in music is dead. Analog effects pedal design is a dead art." - Fran
Yes, it just lights up the inside of the box and makes it look like the tubes are glowing very brightly (even though a 12AX7 doesn't glow brightly at all...).
I believe that Mr. Barmentloo actually holds a patent on the design of lighting tubes from underneath with colored LEDs to give them a more exciting appearance.
"Analog electronics in music is dead. Analog effects pedal design is a dead art." - Fran
soulsonic wrote:I believe that Mr. Barmentloo actually holds a patent on the design of lighting tubes from underneath with colored LEDs to give them a more exciting appearance.
Hey, this must be reported to Mr. Barmentlooo.... because Behringer is doing the "trick" with LED´s since more than one decade.
analogguru
There´s a sucker born every minute - and too many of them end up in the bootweak pedal biz.
I've got another question..
In the schematic Pin 6 of U2B is an non-inverting input en Pin 5 an inverting input. But in de Datasheet of an LM234 and at a gut shot at the pcb you can see that Pin 5 is an non-inverting input and Pin 6 is an inverting input. Is this an mistake in de schematic or make I an mistake?
my favorite amplifier: Homemade 18 Watt w/ 2xEL84 and tremolo.
Completed builds: Big Muff Pi (mostly violet Ram's head with my own bias and impedence mods) OCD, BYOC OD-2, GGG Tube Screamer, Red Llama, Dallas Rangemaster, Fuzz Face, SHO, Valvecaster, Bajaman's CX-3, ROG 22/7, ROG Professor Tweed, ROG Tri-Vibe, MXR Dynacomp, Mxr Phase 45, Proco Rat (with clippping mods), EA Tremolo, PT 80 Delay so many more...
Hi from a greenhorn! I love this place - very cool stuff you all are doing here.
I've been looking for a wiggler schematic for a while and I'm so glad you posted it! It's an awesome pedal, you can make some very cools sounds (and also some very bad ones). I play harp through it to try to get a leslie sound, but all the settings sound very bright and brittle even with a nice dark eq for my harp.
Where could I add a simple tone control circuit? I'd love to make one of the settings have the tone control, and leave the rest unaltered.
....it took some time for me to realize that Wiggler is nothing else but modified Wurlitzer 44 vibrato....slightly modified....one tube in LFO section is substitued with IC based LFO.....and some switching to make it more interesting.......
bajaman wrote:Hey - I looked, but it is missing from my archive too
Anyone besides that poor sad fool puretube who lurks here got it.
if so PM me too.
Cheers
bajaman
No offense, and pardon me if you were just being ironic (you know how hard it is to tell the tone in people's posts), but didn't that poor sad fool design the thing?
nelson wrote:The guy did design this effect and whatever you think about his attitude to intellectual property he has put *alot* of work into his effects. They are not just standard cookie cutter designs.
borislavgajic wrote:....it took some time for me to realize that Wiggler nothing else but modified Wurlitzer 44 vibrato.[/b]...slightly modified....one tube in LFO section is substitued with IC based LFO.....and some switching to make it more interesting.......
modman wrote: ↑Let's hope it's not a hit, because soldering up the same pedal everyday, is a sad life. It's that same ole devilish double bind again...