Pearl - PH-03 Phaser issue
Information
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 14 Feb 2013, 17:17
- my favorite amplifier: marshall bluesbreaker
- Completed builds: univibe, tri-fuzz, ts 808, fuzz face, zvex fuzzfactory, cornish buffer
mod: crybaby, ds-2, lin6 dl4
I everybody, I'm new here, I've bought an old Phaser made by Pear in the '80s, sold as "not working", I have changed all the opas,chacked all the voltage, and also the MC14069, the LFO section seems work well but with the pedal engaged I can only heard the clean sound without the effected sound of the pedal.
I also removed the buffer with a 3dpdt for true bypass, so the MC14007 and all the other components from the buffer section are missing.
I took from "8" the out for true bypass.
Down here the schematic
I also removed the buffer with a 3dpdt for true bypass, so the MC14007 and all the other components from the buffer section are missing.
I took from "8" the out for true bypass.
Down here the schematic
- Blitz Krieg
- Breadboard Brother
blown diodes in the power section?
- Fender3D
- Cap Cooler
Hi and welcome to the forum,
you should definitely hear a "phased" sound, cause the 4 stages will affect your signal when mixed with "dry" even when LFO or IC4 don't work...
so, check you're actually getting your output at C10. It might be a schematic error...
Otherwise check IC2 and/or IC3
you should definitely hear a "phased" sound, cause the 4 stages will affect your signal when mixed with "dry" even when LFO or IC4 don't work...
so, check you're actually getting your output at C10. It might be a schematic error...
Otherwise check IC2 and/or IC3
Why????Blitz Krieg wrote:blown diodes in the power section?
- tube-exorcist
- Resistor Ronker
Unfortunately IC4 is NOT a MC4069.....andre23 wrote: ..... I have changed all the opas,......, and also the MC14069, ......
"I've noticed there's an inverse relationship between cost of gear and talent. If you need the most expensive gear to get decent tones, then you suck as a player."
Information
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 14 Feb 2013, 17:17
- my favorite amplifier: marshall bluesbreaker
- Completed builds: univibe, tri-fuzz, ts 808, fuzz face, zvex fuzzfactory, cornish buffer
mod: crybaby, ds-2, lin6 dl4
@tube-exorcist
I'm pretty sure about IC4 because I removed the old one, it was a MC14069 by Motorola.
Before installing a new MC14069 I've tried other hex-inverter with no good result.
@Blizt Krieg
I will check the diodes but I think they work well 'cause all the pedal has a correct power supply.
@Fender3D
I can't heard any phased sound come out from the pedal, the IC2 and 3 work and I've taken the out from the C10
I'm pretty sure about IC4 because I removed the old one, it was a MC14069 by Motorola.
Before installing a new MC14069 I've tried other hex-inverter with no good result.
@Blizt Krieg
I will check the diodes but I think they work well 'cause all the pedal has a correct power supply.
@Fender3D
I can't heard any phased sound come out from the pedal, the IC2 and 3 work and I've taken the out from the C10
- tube-exorcist
- Resistor Ronker
Yes, that MC14069 maybe could have been inside because......:andre23 wrote:@tube-exorcist
I'm pretty sure about IC4 because I removed the old one, it was a MC14069 by Motorola.
...... another "brilliant" solder jockey - maybe the seller - will have put it there.andre23 wrote: ....I've bought an old Phaser made by Pearl in the '80s, sold as "not working",.....
This doesnt change anything on the fact, that IC4 is NOT (has NOT been) a MC14069 originally.
Have a look at the datasheet of the MC14069 and you will see that pin 7 of that chip goes to gnd and pin 14 to Vdd.
When you have a look at the schematic you will see that Pin 7 of IC4 does NOT go to ground and PIN 14 does NOT go to Vdd. So it can´t be a MC14069.....
.... or another hex-inverter. It will be SOMETHING LIKE the (obsolete) AM79C11 or similar - a quad FET.andre23 wrote: Before installing a new MC14069 I've tried other hex-inverter with no good result.
"I've noticed there's an inverse relationship between cost of gear and talent. If you need the most expensive gear to get decent tones, then you suck as a player."
- Fender3D
- Cap Cooler
Lift C9:
does sound change?
If not, you have no signal into IC2 and/or IC3, because since you have 4 phase stages mixed at IC1a, you MUST hear some difference, modulated if LFO and IC4 work, static (phased) if they don't...
@tube
4069 is not used as inverter here.
If you don't connect power supply, you have access to mosfet and may use them as variable resistors...
does sound change?
If not, you have no signal into IC2 and/or IC3, because since you have 4 phase stages mixed at IC1a, you MUST hear some difference, modulated if LFO and IC4 work, static (phased) if they don't...
@tube
4069 is not used as inverter here.
If you don't connect power supply, you have access to mosfet and may use them as variable resistors...
- tube-exorcist
- Resistor Ronker
Feel free to dream on about that there is a 4069 used here.Fender3D wrote: 4069 is not used as inverter here.
If you don't connect power supply, you have access to mosfet and may use them as variable resistors...
"I've noticed there's an inverse relationship between cost of gear and talent. If you need the most expensive gear to get decent tones, then you suck as a player."
It's a 4069 in mine! Like pretty much every pedal I have bought off ebay, mine wasn't working properly. When I looked at IC4 at an angle to the light, you could see that they had just gone over the top of the IC with a black permanent marker, but the writing was still legible. I swapped it for a new one and it worked fine.
- Dirk_Hendrik
- Old Solderhand
Information
I do have some trouble contardicting Tube Excorcist on the device in question not being a 4069 since TE usuelly does not say something unless it's backed up with proper argumentation.
At the other hand I see a lot of suggestions the device is a 4069...
At the other hand I see a lot of suggestions the device is a 4069...
I can only imagine that there are two versions. Maybe the 4069 was revision 2, because the original IC became obsolete?
Just a thought.....
Just a thought.....
- Blitz Krieg
- Breadboard Brother
otherwise what kind of phaser topology is it? It's not OTA based or LDR based.tube-exorcist wrote:andre23 wrote:@tube-exorcist
It will be SOMETHING LIKE the (obsolete) AM79C11 or similar - a quad FET.
- aion
- Solder Soldier
Information
Maybe photo evidence can help clear things up... mine is a Motorola MC14069UB for IC4. The pads on the trace side are fully lacquered with the rest of the PCB, indicating it's never been replaced or repaired.
Start here:
https://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/ ... ic=40414.0
From that thread (fifteen years old), Mark links to this Japanese site with an in-depth technical analysis of the PH-03, which is fortunately still online:
https://houshu.at.webry.info/200511/article_1.html
https://houshu.at.webry.info/200511/article_2.html
https://houshu.at.webry.info/200511/article_3.html
https://houshu.at.webry.info/200511/article_5.html
Google Translate via Chrome renders it fully readable, and all the diagrams are in English as well. Not only is it confirmation of the 4069 being used, but also an explanation of how it's implemented (the fourth article in particular). I won't try to summarize it since, again, it's way above my experience level, but I'd suggest checking it out if there are any lingering questions about the 4069.
I do plan on fully tracing my unit in the next few months just to verify all the values against the schematic, since I have seen other minor errors in Pearl factory schematics (notably the OD-05, which is the only other one I've studied). But the explanation on the Japanese site shows it working exactly as shown in the schematic, so I think it's safe to say the factory schematic gives an accurate view of the overall architecture of the effect.
It's still kind of silly that they said "exclusive use" instead of just naming the IC, especially when you can just open one up and see for yourself. Maybe they thought they could hide it at first (as lasermonkey mentioned his was blacked out) but then eventually gave up on it (as all the others I've seen are not blacked out). Who knows.
Like Dirk, I'm hesitant to contradict Tube Exorcist since he knows more than I probably ever will. But the IC shown in the schematic is a 4069, and I can offer an explanation of how it works.lasermonkey wrote:I can only imagine that there are two versions. Maybe the 4069 was revision 2, because the original IC became obsolete?
Start here:
https://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/ ... ic=40414.0
From that thread (fifteen years old), Mark links to this Japanese site with an in-depth technical analysis of the PH-03, which is fortunately still online:
https://houshu.at.webry.info/200511/article_1.html
https://houshu.at.webry.info/200511/article_2.html
https://houshu.at.webry.info/200511/article_3.html
https://houshu.at.webry.info/200511/article_5.html
Google Translate via Chrome renders it fully readable, and all the diagrams are in English as well. Not only is it confirmation of the 4069 being used, but also an explanation of how it's implemented (the fourth article in particular). I won't try to summarize it since, again, it's way above my experience level, but I'd suggest checking it out if there are any lingering questions about the 4069.
I do plan on fully tracing my unit in the next few months just to verify all the values against the schematic, since I have seen other minor errors in Pearl factory schematics (notably the OD-05, which is the only other one I've studied). But the explanation on the Japanese site shows it working exactly as shown in the schematic, so I think it's safe to say the factory schematic gives an accurate view of the overall architecture of the effect.
It's still kind of silly that they said "exclusive use" instead of just naming the IC, especially when you can just open one up and see for yourself. Maybe they thought they could hide it at first (as lasermonkey mentioned his was blacked out) but then eventually gave up on it (as all the others I've seen are not blacked out). Who knows.
Information
hello!
what about the phaser Multibox SE-1?
C4 is a mistery!
the schematic es wrong!
what about the phaser Multibox SE-1?
C4 is a mistery!
the schematic es wrong!