Zvex - Box of Rock  [traced]

General documentation, gut shot, schematic links, ongoing circuit tracing, deep thoughts ... all about boutique stompboxes.

Postby Ed G. » 01 Jan 2008, 01:15

The BMP tone stack was definitely the starting point for the BSIAB2 tone stack. I added a couple of filters at the end as I thought it was still a bit too edgy, some people prefer to clip the caps, it depends on what kind of amp you'd have.

MOSFETs are usually darker than JFETs, so I'm somewhat surprised that the BSIAB tone stack would work with the BOR.
Ed G.
Breadboard Brother
 
Posts: 88
Joined: 12 Jul 2007, 16:01
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 0 time

Postby benadrian » 01 Jan 2008, 11:32

Ed G. wrote:The BMP tone stack was definitely the starting point for the BSIAB2 tone stack. I added a couple of filters at the end as I thought it was still a bit too edgy, some people prefer to clip the caps, it depends on what kind of amp you'd have.

MOSFETs are usually darker than JFETs, so I'm somewhat surprised that the BSIAB tone stack would work with the BOR.


Ed,

I've had a BSIAB in the works for a while, but I modded the tonestack to be similar to the Fat Boostered circuit on GGG.

I can't post the link, because I'm too new and don't have enough posts.

Have you tried anything like this?

Ben
benadrian
 
Posts: 4
Joined: 14 Nov 2007, 00:06
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 0 time

Postby MoreCowbell » 01 Jan 2008, 12:29

benadrian wrote:
Ed G. wrote:The BMP tone stack was definitely the starting point for the BSIAB2 tone stack. I added a couple of filters at the end as I thought it was still a bit too edgy, some people prefer to clip the caps, it depends on what kind of amp you'd have.

MOSFETs are usually darker than JFETs, so I'm somewhat surprised that the BSIAB tone stack would work with the BOR.


Ed,

I've had a BSIAB in the works for a while, but I modded the tonestack to be similar to the Fat Boostered circuit on GGG.

I can't post the link, because I'm too new and don't have enough posts.

Have you tried anything like this?

Ben


Hi Ben...I hope you had a great New Year !

For those who don't know, Ben is a hell of a musician, recording / mastering engineer, and amp builder. I've known Ben for MANY years, and he's a great guy. I imagine you might see him wandering the "Tube Amp" forum here a bit....


And Ben...I hope the Ric is still treating you well ! ;)

AC
MoreCowbell
Transistor Tuner
 
Posts: 1106
Joined: 06 Aug 2007, 15:39
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 11 times

Postby Igloo » 02 Jan 2008, 09:49

Ok, many thanks to the very experienced member who confirmed my updated Vero from page one of the thread. I hope this clears up any confusion and please make sure you have the updated draw if you download it earlier.

Happy 2008 to all. I hope the forum grows stronger and happier as the year unfolds.

Cheers everyone


:D :D :D :D :D :D
Igloo
Solder Soldier
 
Posts: 171
Joined: 08 Jul 2007, 10:33
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 2 times

Postby nokaster » 05 Jan 2008, 13:01

OK. i have the circuit built.
like my sho i used BS250's instead of BS170, turned around the diodes and the elco's. it'll be positive ground.

but i'm waiting on some 100kB pots, so i can't finish it...

what would you guys recommend instead of 100kB?
i have 100kA's, 50kB's, one 250kB, 500kB's, 500kA's

what will get me close to the real deal?
or should i just wait for the 100kB's?


thx!
nokaster
Solder Soldier
 
Posts: 153
Joined: 07 Oct 2007, 17:46
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 0 time

Postby s.r.v. » 13 Jan 2008, 00:18

so the vero layout on the first page is updated and verified? thanks
User avatar
s.r.v.
 
Posts: 34
Joined: 12 Jan 2008, 19:17
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 0 time

Postby chris_d » 22 Jan 2008, 00:21

I just built this one. Good sound, crap tone control. Basically, stock this thing is suuuper bass-heavy to the point, IMO, of silliness.

I messed a bit with swapping caps, and got it to sound much more nicer to my ears, a more usable tone control range. I am a hack about this stuff but the sound and the way it changes across the tone pot travel is much nicer now, IMO.

I did a bit of swapping between the input and tone caps, and various changes and combinations obviously yielded varied results. Some things made it sound like a bassy JTM sort of growl, some things made it sound more like a big muff set up for lower gain. In the end i wound up sticking with the odd combination that sounded most "marshall amplike" to me, more bass than i need at the one end, a nice mid sweep through the middle, and just a little more presence than it needs at the top end of the control.

Anyhow, referencing the schematic, i wound up swapping that first 0.1uf at the input for a .022uf. Then i swapped that second .01uf(or 0.1uf) for a .033uf. Then i reversed the wiring to the tone pot(i.e. swapped lugs 1 and 3) because it was backwards when i was done! :)

Anyhow, that is what worked for me. I am pretty happy with it right now.

-chris
chris_d
Solder Soldier
 
Posts: 184
Joined: 16 Aug 2007, 21:03
Has thanked: 4 times
Have thanks: 3 times

Postby madbean » 22 Jan 2008, 02:23

Cool. Glad to hear it is working for you. I have to admit, I rather like mine stock, but I guess that's just my ears...

One thing on this circuit is that the drive pot really isn't all that versatile. I've found a couple of really nice sweet spots on it, and tend to leave it there.
madbean
 

Postby chris_d » 22 Jan 2008, 03:15

madbean wrote:Cool. Glad to hear it is working for you. I have to admit, I rather like mine stock, but I guess that's just my ears...

One thing on this circuit is that the drive pot really isn't all that versatile. I've found a couple of really nice sweet spots on it, and tend to leave it there.


Yeah, so far i mostly leave the drive cranked up near-full, and then i use the guitar volume to cut it back, kind of like a cranked amp. One of the things i like about this circuit is that it cleans up well enough with the guitar volume to allow that. Though, one of the things that got me cap-swapping was that it was cleaning up to too dark a tone, too bass-heavy, before. But with the cap changes, it cleans up to a nice sparkle.

Are you using a proper 5k reverse log for the control?

-chris
chris_d
Solder Soldier
 
Posts: 184
Joined: 16 Aug 2007, 21:03
Has thanked: 4 times
Have thanks: 3 times

Postby madbean » 22 Jan 2008, 04:01

No, I used what I had on hand which was linear. Basically, there little effect up to about 1 o'clock. But right around 2 o'clock it starts to sweeten up. So, somewhere between 65-80% seems to be what works for me. Full up is good too for rolling back on the guitar, like you mentioned.
madbean
 

Postby John Lyons » 22 Jan 2008, 04:18

Chris
Which version/layout did you use?
As stock should have nice punchy full bodied sound, but not bass heavy.

Is it possible that you had .02 caps to ground instead of the .002?

John
User avatar
John Lyons
Solder Soldier
 
Posts: 188
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 04:09
Location: West Virginia
Has thanked: 5 times
Have thanks: 26 times

Postby chris_d » 22 Jan 2008, 04:26

John Lyons wrote:Chris
Which version/layout did you use?
As stock should have nice punchy full bodied sound, but not bass heavy.

Is it possible that you had .02 caps to ground instead of the .002?

John


Hmm. That makes two of you then! I'll have to take another look!

I did my own vero layout. I did have to use an odd mishmash of components from what i had around. I will double check and see if a .02 made its way in place of a .0022. If so, then i will reverse all of the things i have done and see where it stands!

Hmm. :D

-chris
chris_d
Solder Soldier
 
Posts: 184
Joined: 16 Aug 2007, 21:03
Has thanked: 4 times
Have thanks: 3 times

Postby John Lyons » 22 Jan 2008, 04:45

I know that there was at least one layout that had .02 in place of .022 which was later changed.

With the .02 instead of .002 you will have a very dull sound with greatly reduced high end.
It sounds like this may be the case.

John
User avatar
John Lyons
Solder Soldier
 
Posts: 188
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 04:09
Location: West Virginia
Has thanked: 5 times
Have thanks: 26 times

Postby chris_d » 22 Jan 2008, 04:54

John Lyons wrote:Chris
Which version/layout did you use?
As stock should have nice punchy full bodied sound, but not bass heavy.

Is it possible that you had .02 caps to ground instead of the .002?

John


haHA! Good call. One of those .0022s... was a .02. I put all of the caps back to stock, and there is nothing wrong with it at all in the stock setting.

DOH! Ah well, at least it is sorted now! It is much better the stock way than the way i had it, for sure! Also i may be hearing things but it sounds like the available distortion increased as well, with the, ahem, correct values in place.

:D

-chris
chris_d
Solder Soldier
 
Posts: 184
Joined: 16 Aug 2007, 21:03
Has thanked: 4 times
Have thanks: 3 times

Postby chris_d » 22 Jan 2008, 04:57

John Lyons wrote:I know that there was at least one layout that had .02 in place of .022 which was later changed.


Oh no, the mistake was purely my own in not looking closely enough at two caps that appeared the same, but that certainly were not!

-chris
chris_d
Solder Soldier
 
Posts: 184
Joined: 16 Aug 2007, 21:03
Has thanked: 4 times
Have thanks: 3 times

Postby John Lyons » 22 Jan 2008, 05:15

Cool, glad that you found the problem.
I had put a .001 cap in the tone stack by mistake and although it did sound good it was not correct and sounded very different.

John
User avatar
John Lyons
Solder Soldier
 
Posts: 188
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 04:09
Location: West Virginia
Has thanked: 5 times
Have thanks: 26 times

Postby seniorLoco » 22 Jan 2008, 05:24

John Lyons wrote:Cool, glad that you found the problem.
I had put a .001 cap in the tone stack by mistake and although it did sound good it was not correct and sounded very different.

John


Johnzy ...so it's good or bad ?? :lol:
"Curiosity may have killed the cat, but it saved the mice, who ate the cheese."
User avatar
seniorLoco
Resistor Ronker
 
Posts: 343
Joined: 05 Nov 2007, 10:43
Location: ASIA
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 10 times

Postby madbean » 22 Jan 2008, 06:15

Yeah I did the same thing on mislabeling those 2n2's as 22n's on my original PCB layout. It's easy to mix those up!
madbean
 

Postby patafix » 22 Jan 2008, 16:41

Wow !!!

The frequency of the low-pass in such a pedal is lowered 10 times !!! 3 octaves lower than stock !!!

No harsh treble anymore !!!

chris_d wrote:
John Lyons wrote:Chris
Which version/layout did you use?
As stock should have nice punchy full bodied sound, but not bass heavy.

Is it possible that you had .02 caps to ground instead of the .002?

John


haHA! Good call. One of those .0022s... was a .02. I put all of the caps back to stock, and there is nothing wrong with it at all in the stock setting.

DOH! Ah well, at least it is sorted now! It is much better the stock way than the way i had it, for sure! Also i may be hearing things but it sounds like the available distortion increased as well, with the, ahem, correct values in place.

:D

-chris
Patafix... so sticky
patafix
Breadboard Brother
 
Posts: 85
Joined: 16 Jan 2008, 12:21
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 3 times

Postby s.r.v. » 22 Jan 2008, 23:51

hey thanks for the layouts guys! My parts should be arriving this week, and then when my new drill press gets here I can go fullsteam ahead with this project [smilie=rlp_smilie_242.gif]
User avatar
s.r.v.
 
Posts: 34
Joined: 12 Jan 2008, 19:17
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 0 time

PreviousNext

Return to Boutique Stompboxes dissected...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: harunobu0801, pedalpartsuk, roberttomasz and 17 guests