A BETTER FLANGER - Electronics Today January 1987  [schematic]

All about modern commercial stompbox circuits from Electro Harmonix over MXR, Boss and Ibanez into the nineties.

A BETTER FLANGER - Electronics Today January 1987  [schematic]

Postby Tham » 21 Jun 2017, 05:51

Well, I am being retrenched from my job after over twenty years.

So while packing up my considerable belongings (like moving house, really), I happened to find this 30-year old Electronics Today International magazine still at the bottom of my side chair.

Looks like a pretty good design. Based on the TDA1022.

It seems the TDA1022 has quite high distortion and a low noise replacement is the MN3004 or SAD512.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

For this message the author Tham has received thanks: 6
bossman (22 Jun 2017, 21:10), deltafred (21 Jun 2017, 08:54), Fender3D (29 Jun 2017, 15:04), Manfred (21 Jun 2017, 07:06), modman (21 Jun 2017, 09:03), teddeeh (06 Jul 2017, 10:49)
Tham
 
Posts: 21
Joined: 30 Sep 2016, 00:52
Has thanked: 2 times
Have thanks: 13 times

Re: A BETTER FLANGER - Electronics Today January 1987

Postby Tham » 13 Jul 2017, 05:01

Does anyone know if there are direct pin-for-pin substitutes
for the TDA 1022 ?

TDA 1022 is a 16-pin IC while MN 3004 is 14-pin, and
SAD 512 is an 8-pin chip, and their pin layouts are different.
Tham
 
Posts: 21
Joined: 30 Sep 2016, 00:52
Has thanked: 2 times
Have thanks: 13 times

Re: A BETTER FLANGER - Electronics Today January 1987

Postby uncleboko » 13 Jul 2017, 07:16

Tham wrote:Does anyone know if there are direct pin-for-pin substitutes
for the TDA 1022 ?

TDA 1022 is a 16-pin IC while MN 3004 is 14-pin, and
SAD 512 is an 8-pin chip, and their pin layouts are different.


No there are not, only TDA 1022 will do unless you have a............. (temp memory loss!) - you know what it's called - an adapter board I think!

I adapted this for SAD 1024 but never kept the details.
uncleboko
Resistor Ronker
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 25 Mar 2008, 21:19
Has thanked: 50 times
Have thanks: 18 times

Re: A BETTER FLANGER - Electronics Today January 1987

Postby uncleboko » 13 Jul 2017, 07:24

To run a TDA 1022 off 5 volts is disappointingly noisy and will have little headroom. I would have used 2 x 9v batteries to give it more beef!
uncleboko
Resistor Ronker
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 25 Mar 2008, 21:19
Has thanked: 50 times
Have thanks: 18 times

Re: A BETTER FLANGER - Electronics Today January 1987

Postby Dirk_Hendrik » 13 Jul 2017, 08:05

Why "adapt"? The TDA1022 is one of the few BBD's that is rather easy to source.
Sorry. Plain out of planes.

http://www.dirk-hendrik.com
User avatar
Dirk_Hendrik
Old Solderhand
 
Posts: 4123
Joined: 03 Jul 2007, 09:44
Location: Old Amsterdam
Has thanked: 246 times
Have thanks: 982 times

Re: A BETTER FLANGER - Electronics Today January 1987

Postby uncleboko » 13 Jul 2017, 16:40

Dirk_Hendrik wrote:Why "adapt"? The TDA1022 is one of the few BBD's that is rather easy to source.

And it's good for the brain to adapt. I much prefer shorter delay of SAD 1024. A Hoax Flanger would be interesting with SAD 1024s.
uncleboko
Resistor Ronker
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 25 Mar 2008, 21:19
Has thanked: 50 times
Have thanks: 18 times

Re: A BETTER FLANGER - Electronics Today January 1987

Postby Fender3D » 13 Jul 2017, 17:20

SAD1024 has not a shorter delay.
you may set it up to half chip or parallel-mux to have the same "buckets" as TDA1022. Otherwise it is a ...1024 stages BBD.
Parallel-mux will have a better resolution though....
User avatar
Fender3D
Cap Cooler
 
Posts: 473
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 03:40
Location: Helltaly
Has thanked: 94 times
Have thanks: 121 times

Re: A BETTER FLANGER - Electronics Today January 1987

Postby Fender3D » 13 Jul 2017, 17:24

SAD1024 has not a shorter delay.
you may set it up to half chip or parallel-mux to have the same "buckets" as TDA1022. Otherwise it is a ...1024 stages BBD.
Parallel-mux will have a better resolution though....

BTW
unless you have a reasonable cache of SAD chips (and you'd better keep very secret your address, in this case...)
I wouldn't waste a SAD1024 for a magazine project, I'd keep it for "vintage" repair or EBay
User avatar
Fender3D
Cap Cooler
 
Posts: 473
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 03:40
Location: Helltaly
Has thanked: 94 times
Have thanks: 121 times

Re: A BETTER FLANGER - Electronics Today January 1987

Postby uncleboko » 13 Jul 2017, 18:29

Fender3D wrote:SAD1024 has not a shorter delay.
you may set it up to half chip or parallel-mux to have the same "buckets" as TDA1022. Otherwise it is a ...1024 stages BBD.
Parallel-mux will have a better resolution though....

I thank innit!!!
uncleboko
Resistor Ronker
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 25 Mar 2008, 21:19
Has thanked: 50 times
Have thanks: 18 times

Re: A BETTER FLANGER - Electronics Today January 1987

Postby uncleboko » 13 Jul 2017, 18:46

Ah but you can clock SAD 1024 considerably higher than TDA 1022, especially if double buffered by a couple of 4049 inverter arrays. So minimum delay is in the microseconds range, so a converted Flanger Hoax may benefit!!
uncleboko
Resistor Ronker
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 25 Mar 2008, 21:19
Has thanked: 50 times
Have thanks: 18 times

Re: A BETTER FLANGER - Electronics Today January 1987

Postby uncleboko » 16 Jul 2017, 12:03

I found Philips' modifications for lower noise operation of the TDA 1022!
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
uncleboko
Resistor Ronker
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 25 Mar 2008, 21:19
Has thanked: 50 times
Have thanks: 18 times

Re: A BETTER FLANGER - Electronics Today January 1987

Postby uncleboko » 17 Jul 2017, 17:57

No luck with EH Flanger Hoax schematic, obviously kept very hidden!
uncleboko
Resistor Ronker
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 25 Mar 2008, 21:19
Has thanked: 50 times
Have thanks: 18 times


Return to Modern Stompbox Effects (1975 - ...)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: marcustorrada and 23 guests