freestompboxes.org

The sounds of surf rock
Like Dick Dale would always play
Cowabunga, dude

Very nice work.

You are on fire dude
Really good work I must say
Hope there's more coming

You jerk! Now Wampler's going to have to spend more money on lawyers.

Why are there two identical split-supplies?
Why is a direct-coupled opamp input tied to a second half-supply?
Why is such a high value resistor used?
Why is the unused opamp input tied to ground?
Why not use this unused opamp to stabilize the lossy tone control of the circuit and eliminate the circuit's variable output impedance?
Why are there redundant decoupling capacitors?

WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY?

Is the trace good? I'm not doubting whoever traced it, I'm just confused by these "design decisions."

Thanks for that trace, but there has to be some mistakes: The depth pot won't act as supposed, and the tone pot won't work much either.

I am pretty sure IC2B is a summator too. It would make more sense (it would be R9 goes to 6, R19 goes to 6, R15 is in the feedback loop, R10 still goes to 5 and now makes sense at this place).

For the tone I think C10 goes to ground, after the tone pot.

The depth pot somehow should loop around the Belton brick.

I may try to retrace from the pictures. If you have more of them,can you please post? In particular under the pots of course...

Jack Deville wrote:Why are there two identical split-supplies?
Why is a direct-coupled opamp input tied to a second half-supply?
Why is such a high value resistor used?
Why is the unused opamp input tied to ground?
Why not use this unused opamp to stabilize the lossy tone control of the circuit and eliminate the circuit's variable output impedance?
Why are there redundant decoupling capacitors?

WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY?

Is the trace good? I'm not doubting whoever traced it, I'm just confused by these "design decisions."

I guess the identical split-supplies are used to limit interferences between different sections of the circuit, but apart from this i think there are some errors in the trace.

I will revisit
Sorry for any errors
Thanks for your patience.

Thanks for opening and tracing at first! Some errors are expected in the process, but you will get it right I bet.

any corrections on the schematic/verification?

So I bought a Faux Reverb and I took it apart and as far as I can tell, this schematic is correct.

One thing; the label in the brick has been removed. Any guesses on what is used for this circuit?

I'm going to order the parts soon and breadboard it to confirm.

Thanks.

Don't know about original brick...
but
I built it with BTDR2 (long tail) and it works great.
It has almost same pinout too

You mean you built the Faux according to this schem? Did you happen to make a layout for it?; vero, perf, PCB?

will-scarlet wrote:The sounds of surf rock
Like Dick Dale would always play
Cowabunga, dude

Please don't build them that way. That output is wack.

edit: a closer look... from the depth pot forward is messed. It's not too far off from the mixing section of the datasheet. Building the circuit as shown here won't sound anything like the FSR.

I built my reverb using all the goods I found on web.
Looking around all BTDR built are close but not equlals.

80% is Faux design and the rest is from other (like feedback from GGG).

Brian, you're right the schematic on beginning of topics is NOT the Faux. In your design why do not use half TL for feedback ( it makes the reverbs like shimmering ) ?

Anyhow, I called it the "CRASTER REVERB", feel free to built it, and mod it as per your personal taste. ( This is NOT the Wampler clone !! )
Ciao !!

indyguitarist wrote:

will-scarlet wrote:The sounds of surf rock
Like Dick Dale would always play
Cowabunga, dude

Please don't build them that way. That output is wack.

edit: a closer look... from the depth pot forward is messed. It's not too far off from the mixing section of the datasheet. Building the circuit as shown here won't sound anything like the FSR.

i don't get why people pretend to be smarter than they really are,publishing schematics obviously wrong from a technical point of view,its happened many times here and in the end the original builder gets it in the a$$ because hundreds of people build the pedal the wrong way and come out on boards saying that sucks big time.

alexradium wrote:

indyguitarist wrote:

will-scarlet wrote:The sounds of surf rock
Like Dick Dale would always play
Cowabunga, dude

Please don't build them that way. That output is wack.

edit: a closer look... from the depth pot forward is messed. It's not too far off from the mixing section of the datasheet. Building the circuit as shown here won't sound anything like the FSR.

i don't get why people pretend to be smarter than they really are,publishing schematics obviously wrong from a technical point of view,its happened many times here and in the end the original builder gets it in the a$$ because hundreds of people build the pedal the wrong way and come out on boards saying that sucks big time.

Maybe I misunderstand, but I'm not trying pretend to be smarter or anything, I just don't want people to say the pedal sucks after trying a DIY version. I also know that half of the fun is putting the puzzle pieces together of a design, so I offered some insight into what was wrong.

I wasn't referring to you,Brian,you are SMART enough to make your businesses in a good way,for sure.

I think I fixed the output...

Beedoola wrote:I think I fixed the output...

Look at the application circuit on page 3 of this pdf:
https://www.smallbearelec.com/Projects/BTDR-1H.pdf

hint: Notice the last opamp stage. That can be turned into a low pass filter very easily.

You are close, but still not there.