EHX - Octave Multiplexer  [schematic]

All about modern commercial stompbox circuits from Electro Harmonix over MXR, Boss and Ibanez into the nineties.
User avatar
JimSalabim
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 53
Joined: 02 Jun 2015, 23:00
Has thanked: 7 times

Post by JimSalabim »

Andy2No wrote:Could you post pictures? Also, if you want to show videos, it would be better if they were on Youtube or Vimeo. Personally, I'm not inclined to download a video. Youtube lets you have them unlisted, if that's an issue - you can still provide a link.
Here is a YouTube video:


And here are some pictures.
The etching didn’t work well here and took ages. It was either exposed or developed too short and then it was over-etched at some points again, because it took too long. I have corrected all suspicious lines and points with the soldering iron. The one longer trace that has gone off completely has been fixed by a cable (see picture). I have checked everything (or hopefully everything) for continuity and shorts with a multimeter and cannot find what could still be wrong.
1.jpg
1.jpg
3.jpg
4.jpg
Attachments
2.jpg

User avatar
Andy2No
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 82
Joined: 23 Sep 2015, 16:33
Has thanked: 154 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Post by Andy2No »

My one and only attempt at etching a circuit board looked similar.

Given the state of some of those traces, I'd suggest measuring the resistance between points, not just checking for continuity - some of them could have a significant amount, if there are thin spots.

Assuming the circuit is as it should be, and no components have been damaged by soldering, all I can think of is unintended capacitive or inductive coupling. One of the wire links looks quite close to a chip, for example - less distance between two conductors means greater capacitance.

Also, in a circuit with gain, any two capacitors which physically face each other could potentially cause feedback due to capacitive coupling. I've had that happen in a single transistor amp, with two ceramic disks maybe an inch apart - twisting one of them 90 degrees made a huge difference, which I wouldn't have expected.

User avatar
JimSalabim
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 53
Joined: 02 Jun 2015, 23:00
Has thanked: 7 times

Post by JimSalabim »

I have now also measured the resistance between the points where there should be continuity, but everything seems alright. I have also re-traced all traces with a little bit of solder to be absolutely sure and again checked visually and with the meter for possible shorts. Still no change. The main problem is also not only the feedback in the pot positions near maximum, the main problem is the bad tracking (often no tracking happening at all) and the strange behavior and crackling of the pots when reaching maximum positions – have you watched my YouTube video? You can hear all this clearly there.
Unfortunately I don’t really understand how the circuit works actually, I don’t have the necessary background, just some very very basic knowledge. Which part of the circuit or which IC is responsible for the tracking? Or which part is responsible for the way the signal arrives there? What could affect it in a way that the tracking doesn’t work as it should?
I have a frequency generator and I have an audio probe. And in a few days I also get a little digital oscilloscope. If you could lead me into the right direction where and how to check the circuit with some of these tools it would be really great!

User avatar
Andy2No
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 82
Joined: 23 Sep 2015, 16:33
Has thanked: 154 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Post by Andy2No »

I missed that. I saw the link, then started looking closely at the pictures, and forgot all about the video :)

I guess check orientation of components that can easily be reversed, like electrolytic caps, diodes and the JFET transistor. With some transistors there are variations on the order of the legs, for example.

Extra checking of all that off board wiring seems called for too. With all those wires, unintended feedback / coupling, wouldn't really surprise me. Maybe spread it all out on a bench and see if the behaviour changes when things are further apart. Hand effect is sometimes an indicator of that sort of problem - if the feedback or glitching changes when you put your hand near it, or a lump of metal, something may be coupling to something else, just by physical position.

An audio probe is a good start. If you get the datasheet for the 4013, it makes a lot more sense, but the idea is there's a circuit that turns your guitar signal into a square wave, involving two of the op amps used as comparators, then that signal clocks a divide by two circuit, made out of part of the 4013. I originally thought they made a sub octave and a sub-sub octave, like a Boss OC2, but they don't - there's just one octave down. The rest is a choice of filter settings.

They are actually quite hard to get to track properly anyway. The official advice was to turn the tone control down on your guitar - for less harmonics, and play single notes, which ideally means muting any strings you're not playing, as bass players tend to. Rest your thumb on the low E string to mute that (you won't need it - you'll never get that to track properly) and pluck a string with a finger. If you're playing a note on, say, the G string, rest your fingers lightly across the higher strings to mute those. Try plucking further from the bridge, to get less harmonics, and turn the tone knob way down.

Some of what it was doing did sound about right. Making a square wave out of your guitar signal makes for a very synthy sound, which then has to be filtered down to sound less synthy - and I did hear synthy. The sort of sound you had going into it was probably not going to track easily either. You need the guitar to sound less bluesy... ideally, you'd want it to sound something like a flute.

So, with the audio probe, see if you're getting a square wave signal on one pin of the 4013, and then one an octave down from that. IIRC, one side of the 4013 is part of the square wave production - I seem to remember a set/reset latch, driven by the two op amps feeding that chip. The other half of the 4013 is the divide by two - it flips its output once per complete cycle of the square wave fed into it, making one an octave lower. The signal from there goes to the gate of the JFET transistor, which should produce a signal at the drain.

In particular, look for a square wave, very synthy signal, at the gate of the JFET.

I guess the schematic I'm looking at is already in this thread. I seem to remember giving my take on how to get a useful sound out of one - which is not immediately obvious, IMHO.

The weirdness at extremes of the pots is definitely not right though.

Even so, maybe play with your signal going in and see what happens, because they are quite awkward things to deal with - even the off the shelf ones, like mine (now with just an added op amp output buffer).

Do you have a looper? If not, maybe an MP3 player or a tablet... or a phone, playing a simple clear tune would do - or a recording of your guitar. You want to try it with clean, dull sounding notes, and try it at different amplitudes. If you have any sort of EQ pedal or filter, use it as a low pass filter to soften the tone.

The thing with turning a signal into a square wave is that any zero crossing is seen as the same thing - a tiny crackle gets turned into a full volume square wave, just like a clean note does... or at least, it has that potential.

User avatar
Andy2No
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 82
Joined: 23 Sep 2015, 16:33
Has thanked: 154 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Post by Andy2No »

The schematic I've been looking at is the cleanly drawn one posted by Bernardduur, near the bottom of the first page.

The only thing it lacks is labelling of the pins of the 4013. I'd suggest sketching that out from the datasheet, to help understand it a bit better, but mostly what you're looking for is a square wave at the original frequency, going from one pin of the chip to another, then the octave down square wave coming out.

That parts easy to spot - the octave down square wave is from pins 9 and 12, on his diagram, which are joined together, but it might not be those pins on yours. Also, on that diagram, it looks like the connection from pin 2 to pin 11 is carrying the original frequency square wave.

The problem is - the two halves of the chip are interchangeable. I seem to remember my XO one is the other way around. There may be other orders the pins could be in too. The clues are where the op amps connect, and where the octave down signal comes out, going to the JFET.

User avatar
JimSalabim
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 53
Joined: 02 Jun 2015, 23:00
Has thanked: 7 times

Post by JimSalabim »

Thanks very much for the explanation! That helps quite a bit for my understanding! Moving the PCB further away and increasing the distance between the cables all makes no difference. The polarized components are all in the correct orientation – given that the layout is correct. I took it from here: https://www.komitart.ru/716-sobiraem-ef ... monix.html. I don’t speak Russian, but the Google translation of the site made a reasonable impression ;) I think I have to compare it with Bernardduur’s schematic. I have also tried to move the wire bridges a bit further away. I cannot turn the capacitors 90 degrees, but turning some of them rather flat to the surface makes no difference at all neither. So no difference no matter how I turn or move cables and components.
I have checked the 4013 and the JFET with the audio probe. On the 4013 I do get the square wave sound – at some pins it seems like the normal square wave signal and at some like the octave down square wave, at some rather like a mix of both – BUT the signal isn’t really clean anywhere. The octave is jumping up and down and the signal gets interrupted and dirty and things like that. It doesn’t get better with the tone control further down or with the volume further down or higher up, no matter what I play. There’s hardly a chance to get a clean straight note at all. On the JFET gate there is also the square wave signal (but just as unusable). At the LM324 I get signal plus a fifth below (quite badly tracked and synth-like sounding) at pin 8 (output of IC1c in Bernardduur’s schematic) and loud hum as soon as I stop playing. Pin 14 (IC1d output) has the clean signal plus a (not too well tracked) octave below which is rather low and reminds of a dying and noisy signal. The left half of the LM324 (this would be IC1a an IC1b) sounds like signals from a ring modulator. Everywhere a bit different, at some points more synth-like and low, at some points higher, but everywhere similar to a ring modulated signal.
Is this how it’s supposed to be at the LM324?

User avatar
Andy2No
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 82
Joined: 23 Sep 2015, 16:33
Has thanked: 154 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Post by Andy2No »

The idea of the LM324 is that it behaves a bit like a bridge rectifier - the positive half of the signal goes one way, and the negative half goes the other, but one half is then inverted. The two separate pieces flip the Set/Reset latch side of the 4013, to produce the same frequency square wave signal.

So, if you pick up just one of those two pieces, it can sound like a dirty octave up - half rectified, then smoothed a bit, is similar to doubling the frequency, but with distortion added. I guess that could sound like a ring modulator too, depending on what's going into the ring modulator.

Possibly it's just picking up a lot of noise? A circuit like that makes no real distinction between a tiny signal and a large one - they both produce a full strength square wave. With a tiny signal it would be more likely to be swamped by noise though.

Maybe try it with some clean test tones, like recordings of sine or triangle waves, or try it with a synth, if you have one that can sound nice and clean - just turn the output volume really low, to start with. Synths have more output than guitars, but not much more than a pedal, so you're not likely to damage anything.

One thing I've done to get octave pedals to behave is use a graphic EQ pedal to take off most of the low end - like below 200Hz, and as much of the high end as I can get away with. Anything over a couple of kHz is harmonics.

That also reduces mains hum - 60Hz in the US, or 50Hz where I live. 60Hz sounds nicer to me, but it's closer to your low E, which makes it harder to get rid of, I guess. In this case, forget the entire E string anyway. If you can get the A string to track properly, you'll be doing well.

User avatar
Andy2No
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 82
Joined: 23 Sep 2015, 16:33
Has thanked: 154 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Post by Andy2No »

... by which I meant IC2, in the schematic from Bernardduur. IC1 is most of the filter.

User avatar
JimSalabim
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 53
Joined: 02 Jun 2015, 23:00
Has thanked: 7 times

Post by JimSalabim »

OK, thanks. I’ll see how it sounds with a clean synth signal from my computer through my reamping box. I can also adjust the level there.

I have now compared the PCB layout to Bernardduur’s schematic. I have noted all differences in red.
Octave%20Multiplexer%20vintage Kopie.jpg

User avatar
Andy2No
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 82
Joined: 23 Sep 2015, 16:33
Has thanked: 154 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Post by Andy2No »

Okay. Top left is fine - that's just more stabilisation of Vref and power smoothing.

R7 being reduced from 18K to 15K, I would guess is just someone's preference - or someone didn't have an 18k resistor, and tried that instead. Probably not much difference, but maybe worth experimenting with if nothing else seems to help.

A 22nF cap instead of R16 is a significant change. A resistor from an op amp input to Vref is using it as a signal ground. A capacitor is doing something quite different, and I'm not entirely clear what the plan was, there. I guess there have been different revisions, but I'd try swapping that, or putting the resistor in parallel, at least.

Bottom left - reducing that C11 cap from 100n to 22n is a big change. I'd try soldering on a socket so I could try different caps - e.g. a short piece of DuPont cable with female ends, or a short servo lead, or tack on a SIL socket with poster putty, or similar, and run short wires.

I'd be tempted to clip the resistor between S and D, and do the same - or temporarily wire a large value pot there, as a variable resistor.

If you clip one leg neatly, you may be able to solder it back together if you want to, or run two wires to the two pieces - or just remove it, and run wires to the socket if you want to try adding one back.

My main suspects would be that resistor across the JFET, and the 22nF cap that's been used instead of R16.

Incidentally, if you're re-doing your wire links, I'd make them insulated - use some single core insulated wire, or narrow heat shrink. Not essential, maybe, but the longer ones could get moved by accident and touch the wrong thing.

User avatar
Andy2No
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 82
Joined: 23 Sep 2015, 16:33
Has thanked: 154 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Post by Andy2No »

Correction to what I said earlier - a bridge rectified signal would sound a bit like a distorted octave up, not a half wave rectified one.

User avatar
JimSalabim
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 53
Joined: 02 Jun 2015, 23:00
Has thanked: 7 times

Post by JimSalabim »

OK. First of all, again, thanks so much! I got it working now, see video:
https://youtu.be/h1mkTx1r_N4

The guitar tone control is really your friend here. As you said, with lower notes it works much better when you roll it down. With higher notes (see differences in the video) it works better with the tone control up high. So for overall good tracking it really seems reasonable to use an EQ pedal here, just as you suggested.

BUT one strange problem remains: When I power on the unit (in this case via plugging in the guitar cable – I have a 9V battery inside) while the Bass filter pot is set to max it will power on with weird noise and not function correctly. Whenever the Bass filter pot is below max while powering on it will work fine. Then the Bass filter pot works fine, too – also when set to max position while in use.

Here are the changes that I did to the PCB layout, all according to Bernardduur’s schematic:
octave_multiplexer_v3_lay changes.png

User avatar
Andy2No
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 82
Joined: 23 Sep 2015, 16:33
Has thanked: 154 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Post by Andy2No »

Excellent. I'm glad you've got it working.

Yes, ideally, you'd strip all the harmonics / overtones off the note, but a guitars tone control doesn't track with the note, so if you set it right for the low notes, it will mute the higher ones. Restricting the range with an EQ pedal does tend to help, though riding the tone control could help more, I guess.

Is that power on problem just happening when the Bass switch is on? I hadn't noticed before, but the fact that R9 connects to ground (0V) on the schematic, seems odd - since that's not signal ground, which would be Vref. That seems like it ought to cause a glitch, when the capacitors start off discharged. Is that really how it's connected?

User avatar
JimSalabim
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 53
Joined: 02 Jun 2015, 23:00
Has thanked: 7 times

Post by JimSalabim »

Andy2No wrote:Is that power on problem just happening when the Bass switch is on? I hadn't noticed before, but the fact that R9 connects to ground (0V) on the schematic, seems odd - since that's not signal ground, which would be Vref. That seems like it ought to cause a glitch, when the capacitors start off discharged. Is that really how it's connected?
The power on problem is happening in both Bass switch positions. And now I have played for a few minutes and suddenly the problem also appeared without changing anything, just while playing. Only weird subnotes on lower tones, no subnotes on higher tones and crackling pots.
R9 connects to ground, too, in the layout that I used and also in the Tagboardeffects vero layouts for example. This seems to be intended.

User avatar
Andy2No
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 82
Joined: 23 Sep 2015, 16:33
Has thanked: 154 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Post by Andy2No »

Fair enough. I can't claim to completely understand the circuit, but it seems like an odd choice, to me. Even so, the sound of those caps charging up from a standstill would probably be more like a click, or a pop, I expect.

I recently bought a Mosky SHO Booster clone, which is MOSFET based, as I understand it. That design is notorious for a crackly pot, and mine does that perfectly. In this case, are you sure you don't just have actual crackly pots? Carbon track ones can be pretty poor. I've had one wear spots in its track after just a few hours use.

Dry joints can misbehave too, of course.

I assume all your capacitors have a high enough voltage rating? Ideally, at least rated for 16V, in a 9V circuit.

I haven't played with my EHX one, for a while, and I don't have much energy left tonight, but I'll get it out soon and re-familiarize myself with it. They are quite frustrating things, in my experience. Probably the least badly behaved octaver I've tried is Behringer's OC2 clone, called UO100. That just needed the EQ pedal first, to get it to be less temperamental. They always seem to promise more than they can deliver though. I got their OC3 clone too (SO400), which I found deeply annoying. That one sounds like a depressed robot, singing to itself in a cupboard.

The best way I found for using the EHX one was to just use a fairly subtle amount of the octave down signal... maybe so it doesn't sound as bad when it skips tracking a note. All of the analog ones are mega fussy about other strings ringing, of course - chords are definitely out, but even just playing a note on one string, then on another without muting the first, is generally enough to upset them.

If you're interested in octavers and pitch shifters in general, the Behringer US600 is actually pretty good - it's not analog, but it can handle chords, and ringing strings. I hear what sounds like loop points, sometimes, as though it's made a short recording then played it back at a different speed, in a loop... maybe that's how they work; I don't know. They are a lot less troublesome though.

User avatar
JimSalabim
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 53
Joined: 02 Jun 2015, 23:00
Has thanked: 7 times

Post by JimSalabim »

Andy2No wrote:In this case, are you sure you don't just have actual crackly pots? Carbon track ones can be pretty poor.
I just used the regular 16mm Alpha pots that I always use for pedals. I must have built over 20 pedals now and never had any problem with these pots.
Dry joints can misbehave too, of course.
The only joints that I haven’t re-soldered in the meantime are the lugs at the pots. They look fine, but I will re-solder them as well.
I assume all your capacitors have a high enough voltage rating? Ideally, at least rated for 16V, in a 9V circuit.
Yes, all between 16V and 50V.
That one sounds like a depressed robot, singing to itself in a cupboard.
:lol: Awesome, I’d love to hear that :)
If you're interested in octavers and pitch shifters in general, the Behringer US600 is actually pretty good - it's not analog, but it can handle chords, and ringing strings.
Actually I just wanted to build some kind of pedal that I haven’t build before and I wanted to try out etching, so I ended up with this octaver. It’s not something that I need desperately, but it’s driving me mad that it isn’t working as it should. This would be the first pedal that I really have to give up.

I could live with it if I knew, OK, just don’t turn it on with the Bass filter knob at max. But the fact that the crazy behavior sometimes also starts suddenly while playing and even though all was working before, is something that I just can’t bear :)

User avatar
JimSalabim
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 53
Joined: 02 Jun 2015, 23:00
Has thanked: 7 times

Post by JimSalabim »

About the pots: They are not crackly at all while the pedal is actually working. They’re only crackly when the strange behavior and the weird (or non existent) tracking is there.

User avatar
Andy2No
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 82
Joined: 23 Sep 2015, 16:33
Has thanked: 154 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Post by Andy2No »

Maybe you could narrow it down to a general section of the circuit.

For example, with Blend all the way to the "clean" setting, does it ever happen, or maybe just very faintly? Because of the way the Blend knob works, there's always a chance of some small leakage from the effect, but if the strangeness is basically eliminated, that confirms it's in the squarer or filter sections.

Next, does it do anything like that if you take the JFET out of the socket? That ought to largely knobble the effect, but there would still be some response from the filter.

I've read JFETs shouldn't really be in a socket, but I'm not sure if that's fact or prejudice. I'm guessing it's the latter, but I'm not sure. They are quite easy to damage by soldering, allegedly, but I'm really bad at soldering and still managed not to damage one in a JFET buffer I made.

Since it is in a socket, you could try a different one, of course. They vary a lot. This one seems to be being used as a switch, so maybe it doesn't matter too much, but I guess you could still have a faulty one.

Something I've been getting, lately, is unwanted AM radio pick up. Which seems odd, because it's not easy to get a decent AM radio signal on an actual radio, any more. Maybe I'm getting pirate stations, that transmit from a short distance. I'm not talking about the Octave Multiplexer, but I've had it on an LM386 headphones amp, and a ribbon controller (linear touch pot) that I've been trying to use with a Korg Monotron.

If you have someone using a radio transmitter nearby, you could be picking that up, I guess - though I can normally almost make out the words. For FM, I guess I wouldn't.

User avatar
JimSalabim
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 53
Joined: 02 Jun 2015, 23:00
Has thanked: 7 times

Post by JimSalabim »

Andy2No wrote:For example, with Blend all the way to the "clean" setting, does it ever happen, or maybe just very faintly? Because of the way the Blend knob works, there's always a chance of some small leakage from the effect, but if the strangeness is basically eliminated, that confirms it's in the squarer or filter sections.
I have made a short video with the Blend on 0. Octaved square wave sounding effect when the low E is picked, no effect on other notes/strings. Clean sounding signal when the Blend is a bit higher than 0.
https://youtu.be/sFl9yzbMfIc
Next, does it do anything like that if you take the JFET out of the socket? That ought to largely knobble the effect, but there would still be some response from the filter.
Without the JFET the problem stays the same, the strange "effected" signal is just not as loud as with the JFET.
Since it is in a socket, you could try a different one, of course. They vary a lot. This one seems to be being used as a switch, so maybe it doesn't matter too much, but I guess you could still have a faulty one.
I have already tried with another JFET, makes no difference. I have also checked them with a measuring device and they both seem fine.
If you have someone using a radio transmitter nearby, you could be picking that up, I guess - though I can normally almost make out the words. For FM, I guess I wouldn't.
No radio transmitters nearby as far as I know. I never had any problems with radio interference here.

User avatar
Andy2No
Breadboard Brother
Information
Posts: 82
Joined: 23 Sep 2015, 16:33
Has thanked: 154 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Post by Andy2No »

Yep, that's pretty weird. I would guess that the circuit, as drawn, can't do that, so something is different.

By turning the Blend knob a little, I think the main thing you're doing is putting some resistance between the output of the first op amp in the chain (IC1d, in Bernardduur’s schematic) and the output socket of the pedal.

As a workaround, I suppose you could just add a resistor to do that, in the wire running to that side of the pot - e.g. measure across the pot in the position where it improves, from the centre lug to either side, and take the smaller value. It's not really a proper solution though.

Something that strikes me is that all the schematics I've found so far have a resistor from the output of that op amp to ground - R3, on that schematic, which is 10k. That makes no sense to me at all. That op amp is wired as an input follower, by connecting the output to the inverting input (which is how I made my output buffer). That should mean the output is at almost exactly the same voltage as the positive / non-inverting input - unless it was loaded really heavily, or the input went out of range. So, all R3 would be doing would be getting warm. Why would they do that? It just seems like a waste of power.

Since the input goes to the non inverting (+) input of IC1d, I guess you could get interference if R2(100k) is missing, or has a dry joint, because + inputs have a high input impedance, which makes them prone to picking up EM noise (or radio stations, in my case).

It seems you never can get a properly clean signal out of them. That's something I don't like about mine - bypass sounds better than it being turned on, with the Blend all the way to clean.

Mostly, it sounds like distortion, to me, in that video. Maybe see what happens at lower volume levels, from your guitar?

Incidentally, I've tried mine with my active bass ukulele, which has silicone rubber strings. Those actually work better with the Octave Multiplexer, because they sound dull as ^%&% - with very low levels of the harmonics that make a steel string bass sound good. I can get it to track down to nearly the bottom of the A string - about what I got on a guitar, except in this case, the A is an octave lower, and it still works about as well. The active preamp could be making a difference too, of course - the output impedance is much lower, compared to a guitar, and loading it doesn't have the same sort of effect.

So, another experiment - what have you got that you can put between the guitar and the pedal, to change the output impedance? Something that can give a clean signal, and ideally be used as extra tone controls. Even just a pedal with a buffer (not true bypass) could help - just try one with the effect off, so you're just getting a buffered signal, and control the tone and volume from the guitar.

On trying to narrow it down more, I think I'd try taking some chips out of their sockets. The only one you should need to get a clean blend signal is IC1, for that one op amp. There would still be filtering going on from some of the passive components, but it seems worth a try...

I see you have two 4558s, soldered to the board, a 4013 in a socket and a 14 pin chip in a socket, presumably a quad op amp? Which parts of the circuit are the 4558s providing? On Bernardduur’s schematic, they're all LM324, but they're largely interchangeable... The input and output impedances are probably different, but I don't know how much that matters, off hand - maybe not at all.

Post Reply