freestompboxes.org

Hi, everybody.

For me was kind of shock, since this is my main distortion unit since 1984, despite all bad talkings about this pedal.
I know the circuit has changed over the years, differents IC's, etc. But in a way or another, the DS-1 remained essentially the same, IMO. A little more harsh, that's true, or even a little worse than the MIJ versions, but, for me, this is the thing that starts all.

My main concern after taking a look to the circuit, along with the unfamiliar disposition of the components (hey, I'm a DS-1 modder for the trhru hole, big PC board) was the IC chip. Looking at that almost made me fell apart. A JRC 4580 !!! What in the hell people at Roland decided to use that? An attempt to an ultimate"mod", in order to make it sound similar to anything else? Like a Riot Suhr, or an Analog Man King of Tone?, or a Wampler?

See guys, I've searching for this subject on the net for a couple of days, the main Boss channels like Boss Area, etc. Nothing...
I think this subject deserves some more attention, so please, let's talk about it!

I'm on the way to show here a lot of gutshots of the pedal, soon. I'm just too busy with year-end preparations.

Comments please!!!

Cheers,

Gustavo

Stone_66 wrote: A JRC 4580 !!! What in the hell people at Roland decided to use that?

it's an op-amp, dude. a simple opamp. circuits generate tones, not components.

plush wrote:

Stone_66 wrote: A JRC 4580 !!! What in the hell people at Roland decided to use that?

it's an op-amp, dude. a simple opamp. circuits generate tones, not components.

Yep, but that's not the point. I expected at least a miniaturization of the current circuit, as in the Tube Screamer Mini.
NJM3404 IC's are available in SSOP8 package.

Stone_66 wrote: A JRC 4580 !!! What in the hell people at Roland decided to use that?

Most likely because people at Boss are serious designers that do not sniff cork and do not proclaim a component all kinds of mythical mojo characteristics because thats the only way they know to boost sales.

Dirk_Hendrik wrote:

Stone_66 wrote: A JRC 4580 !!! What in the hell people at Roland decided to use that?

Most likely because people at Boss are serious designers that do not sniff cork and do not proclaim a component all kinds of mythical mojo characteristics because thats the only way they know to boost sales.

Makes sense. Time will tell if they got it right.
Due to the lack of opinions I have seen on the net about this change, Roland may have been right, just as he did the first time he changed the DS-1 circuit.
To be honest, my curiosity about the fact, is if there was a drastic change in the circuit, due to the exchange of the chip.

The opamp functions as an amplifier that boosts the signal. After that there's a clipping stage and a tone control. The last 2 have way more influence in the tonal character. This means that, imho, the difference in opamps is just as drastic as the difference between a Taiwan and a Japan model: marginal and gone as soon as your drummer hits a snare or a hihat or your tech misplaces your mic a litle from "optimal".

Dirk_Hendrik wrote:The opamp functions as an amplifier that boosts the signal. After that there's a clipping stage and a tone control. The last 2 have way more influence in the tonal character. This means that, imho, the difference in opamps is just as drastic as the difference between a Taiwan and a Japan model: marginal and gone as soon as your drummer hits a snare or a hihat or your tech misplaces your mic a litle from "optimal".

I see. In fact I could not hear a significative difference between the big board and the small one. Maybe a little more definition and a less fuzziness than others DS-1 I have. Anyway, I think Roland made a good job, although, as I said before, I guess they had simply miniaturized the previous circuit with the same NJM3404 IC, just like Ibanez did with the TS Mini. Maybe I'm a bit purist, LOL.

Forgot to ask, for those who have an universe beyond me in building projects, is there any limitation, circuit-wise, due to the need of miniaturization, that made Roland adopt another design (components, IC, etc. ) in order to make DS-1 sound similar to the previous circuit?

Cheers,

Stone

Stone_66 wrote:Forgot to ask, for those who have an universe beyond me in building projects, is there any limitation, circuit-wise, due to the need of miniaturization, that made Roland adopt another design (components, IC, etc. ) in order to make DS-1 sound similar to the previous circuit?
Cheers,
Stone

SMT is usually cheaper to manufacture than thru-hold due to robot assembly.
Redesigned connectors for minimal human workforce.
Same case for over 30yrs!!!!?!

The amount of automated quality control one can do on an SMT board is way higher than with through hole assembly. This means you buy a far more reliable device. This is also the same argument why "hand built" is no argument for quality. Humans make errors. Computers don't. And the one who will state the attention taken when hand-assembling a pedal is audible....

Aside from the financial aspects indeed.

Happy New year everyone!
As I promised before, here goes some gut shots I took from the Boss DS-1 (B) version. I couldn't find pics from this version over the internet, maybe two or three, so I think this is something new for the majority of us...
Hope you enjoy

Under the hood






General overview of the small main board


After TA7136AP, BA728N, M5223AL, NJM2904...


Comments will be welcome

Cheers

Stone

Well, you can always start a business modding these to the other chip.

While bored at work one day I built a Fuzz Face with all SMD to see how small I could make it.


It's like the size of a postage stamp.

drewl wrote:Well, you can always start a business modding these to the other chip.

Me? SMD? No way, friend...

Cheers

Stone

It will stiil sound corksnifingly good to the listeners.
Happy new year