Jump to content

Entry for March 2020's Guitar Of The Month is open - ENTER HERE!

Hank McSpank

Established Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Hank McSpank

  • Rank
    Established Member
  • Birthday 08/14/1962

Profile Information

  • Location
    London, UK

Recent Profile Visitors

1,071 profile views
  1. Mike, I'm sorted now, but that seems like an excellent deal for someone who wants to avoid the beginners pitfall of using basic threaded rod - if anyone is starting out Stateside, they should take your hands off! It is a massive learning curve...it took me about a month of nights trialing & erroring to get my simple CNC machine built, but then the real time sump arrives - how do I drive this darned thing!! (which means learning a CAD program & the CNC s/w itself...eg Mach3). IMHO, that needs about the same amount of time again to get to a level where things start falling into place. In the beginning, I too was somewhat intimidated by something as basic as positioning a simple shape & gettting it located in a place that my CNC would know where to go! (I was cacking that my spindle would try to go flying off past one of the Axis extremeties, lol)..you need to start thinking in coordinates & 'origins'. Additionally, I couldn't get away at all with some CAD programs at all (I tried the AutoCad demo - euuugh). Wrt CAD, once you've got past the basic s/w familiarity hurdle (eg "I just want to create a semi-circle damnit!"), you'll soon realise you've got to start thinking 2.5D & creatively pondering how to achieve the end result in the most efficient (or do-able) way. For example - eg to knock up a proper pickup bobbin on a 3 axis machine - not possible, but if you get creative & start thinking in 2.5D you can use your CNC machine two make two separate identical parts & join them together in the middle (where the copper winding hides the joint!) - I'm now using bits of my grey matter that have lain dormant for years! In general, I think it's just one of those things where you have to go through the pain of giving yourself a simple intial goal & plodding away & being a pain asking simple questions until you get there...then setting the hurdle a little bit higher - the penny eventually drops & it all becomes real fun after that. (BTW the CNC Zone is good because there are so many targetted/focused sub forums - so you're almost sure to get an answer to a basic question there). But it's worth the effort - CNC machines....every man should own one! (it's a birthright ) Re a tutorial ....it would need someone who has your chosen CAD s/w & Cut2D to do that (have you tried the obvious place - youtube ? - there's normally someone gracious enough to take the trouble & upload a video to help others on there). I know Vetric software is considered very good, but I'd think there's a possibility that you might outgrow Cut2D quite quickly - it looks to be ideal for 'easing you in' wrt toolpaths etc, but personally I'd rather go with a more 'integrated' package (by this I mean CAD->Toolpaths->Gcode all in the one application)
  2. Completely agree about the organization. I'd have thought a FAQ on page 1 might have evolved after 5 years?!! Seriously, I'm wading through treacle with those first 120 pages. i reckon if you took out the repetition (& also had a FAQ), then you could easily slim those first 120 pages down to about 25 pages....if I was cynical, I could have have almost thought the thread was being kept purposely long for the Kudos?! Col, about me wanting more technical info...I didn't mean in isolation (you are correct ....technical info on it's own isn't a whole lot better than just trial & error results!). But we've had the trial & error (lots of it) , we have the theories (some good...some waaay bad!)...surely after 5 years, it's time to give the project a little more disicplined scientific approach?
  3. Hi Fresh, Well, I hope to have meaningful power levels per string at my next run of tests (which hopefully will recommence soon, just after I bottom out these other sideline projectettes ...target date - about a fortnight) Re using the PIC for switching - I'd pondered that already...it makes sense as it'll save a lot of battery power (& I'll likely be using output ICs with 'standby' pins on them, therefore the PIC should dovetail well with such a method). Re the type of Hex input - I have both to hand (an old GK2 pickup & an old electronics debowelled Variax that still has a Hex piezo bridge) Re the technical data...I understand what you're saying about variants (which is why I propose trying to remove as many as possible!), but it might be suprising how aligned everyone's results turn out - we'll not know until people start taking such measurements & posting them up! Having some ballpark power levels per string (either with 'six string' drivers or 'single' string drivers) will be essential & if this project is to be nailed once & for all ....it's the only way to go (else we'll all just be trialling & erroring until the cows come home!). I suspect that there just aren't enough techy types with measurement tools tuned into this thread to get any meaningful 'depth of data'...which ultimately means most will come to this thread, build the driver that's been derived mainly from trial & error...connecting it up to a circuit whose only attribute being is that it's readily available, easy & cheap (the Fetzer Ruby!) & then getting very average results. There's only one way to tackle this project - technical data, else ....we're all just following the lead of those who have trialled/errored ...& how does that proverb go again? "The one eyed man is king in the valley of the blind....?" "MMF ...it's where the stimulation is!"
  4. Hi Fresh, I'm definitely having some finger trouble with those RMS conversions! (I keep tapping 400mV peak to peak into online calculators, whereas it should be 200mV peak!) Ok, first the bad news - that 400mV peak to peak signal I mentioned was just an example. That said, 400mV peak to peak figure I gave is probably from an actual reading I took (I seem to recall that's the type of signal level I was seeing across my driver ... during my first 'stint' of sustainer experimentation, I did a lot of initial experiments with my associated notes scribbled on the back of scrap paper ...I really must get more disciplined with my notation this time!) Alas, at the moment I can't double check - my sustainer 'REDS' facility (Research, Experimentation , Development Stop. ) is out of action at the minute ...due to a hulking hobby CNC machine I'm building taking over *all* my bench space. Now, to your specific questions... (bear in mind, I'm still on single string drivers until my CNC is complete, then I can start cutting some bobbin top/bottoms that'll hold six of my individual coils wired in series) "I. How fast does your sustain set in? I can imagine that when you use that little power it can take some time to achieve a sustaining tone. I hate to wait for sustain to happen." You may not recall, but I'm using a PIC to digitally sample a rectified incoming pickup signal. Once sampled, my little PIC program can determine how much gain is needed & how fast....therefore it's possible to have the sustainer kick in as fast as required , but as it goes I prefer to fade the sustain in, as the string's natural sustain ebbs (with the 'melding point' level set to my preference)...it's all pretty seamless. BTW, I have no fizz whatsoever in my sustained notes....clear as a bell. I've got to go back & revisit the supporting analogue circuit again once my CNC is ceremoniously launched (dumped!) from my bench...I have a whole heap of new analogue ICs to play with. There's still a lot of work to be done, but I'm striving towards the bare minimum of potentiometers or presets at all (hopefully none - aiming to be all done digitally with just a couple of small push buttons. I'm still someway off from that...my main focus is the 'patent applied for' McSpanKStainer complete in the shortest time! II. How focussed is the magnetic field? If you bend the string do you still have sustain? And I'm curious how you solve that issue with bending strings. Is that a matter of PIC, like when you play the high E-string your E and B driver work. (I don't know if that makes sense, I'm not familiar with PIC). Or do you build drivers with some sort of overlap (when a string is bent it is still above the driver). Or are you fully focussed on sustaining chords? Ok, this is an interesting one. You must bear in mind that I set out on this journey with a Hex driver in mind. My tests showed that with a single string driver scenario, the string can be bent a good way from the small driver & the sustain would still 'hold'. Too allow this, it needs a fast AGC circuit & a sufficiently powerful enough output stage (that said, when you're only dealing with one string...the driver's power needs drops significantly). So, as the string moves away from the area of driver flux 'focus', my circuit really is designed to crank up the gain fast & spam out a bit more flux & keep that string sustaining. III. There is a chance that when your sustainer is operational the drivers could have a negative effect on one another. You stated that you needed 400 mV pp for your E-string, but what if your B-string is sustaining at the same time? It could be that because of interference of the 2 signals it's a lot harder to get good sustain. There's every chance...but when you think about it...most of the time , guitarists have a 'mono' sustainer requirement (occasionally 2-3 strings for a fleeting moment)..ie this being when a guitar player is soloing. Therefore at any one time, there will normally be just one dominant note played by the guitarist...in a hex driver scenario, that'll map to one dominant driver 'ruling the roost' for that moment in time. For chords, I'm not so sure that driver interaction will be so benign. I'm hoping that string/driver resonance plays a large part. eg, the driver will only impact on the string it's getting a feed from (assuming a hex input) ...the other strings because they aren't resonant...will hopefully disregard. It may well be that there won't be as much focused MMF (not a porn term in this instance :-) ) presented at the string due to inter-driver flux fights...but at the end of the day it'll be very much a case of suck & see. I'm presently creating some simple CAD designs for holding multiple single coils to be held at exactly the string's mid point...I now only have the Dremel tool holder for my CNC machine to complete & I can then finally start cutting these driver holder CAD designs out of acrylic.... The screen shotABOVE just a simple CAD/CAM 2D representation of the top/bottom six coil holder design, (the dotted red box represents the acrylic it'll be cut from....BTW I'm being tongue-in-cheek with the wording!!!). It's full single coil in size...why? For no other reason than my benchtop guitar is a strat has a big hole where the neck pickup used to be...therefore I'll fill it with this shape! I'll be scaling the driver down to suit once I have definitive coil dimensions. I'm now up to page 110 of this (somewhat highly repetitive thread! Each page is like Groundhog Day), but as of yet, I haven't read of anyone back then using hex drivers with a hex pickup feeding six channels into the driver circuitry. The big stumbling block I have with the 'standard issue' driver that has been adopted by many on here, (ie a one coil driver breaching all strings), is that for most 'sustainer' situations (certainly when soloing) - at any one time, you really only need a dominant string to be sustained ...but the driver adpoted by many here, presents the required one note across all six strings - highly inefficient & which I reckon is wasting a lot of scarce battery power as the driver attempts to sustain strings which aren't meant to be sustained ....far better to find a way of 'routing' the dominant required note for sustaining to the correct string(s), therefore two options I can think of.... 1. Take a bog standard merged/mono guitar pickup signal & bandpass filter it to get the right frequencies 'routed' to the right strings (obviously there'll be some overlap, as for example a high 'B' could come from the B string itself or the two strings below fretted high up) & have six drivers (and preamps/power amps) or (far better)... 2. Take a hex input feed from the likes of a midi/hex pickup etc. I may pursue a non Hex input solution (too many 'decision point forks' with this project ....& I blow hot & cold as to which path to beat first!) ...but if I do go with a 'driver across all six strings' approach, one avenue I'll certainly explore is to customize the 'turns' needed per string across the strings by using six coils below in series ...less turns on the coils for the lower strings....more turns for the higher strings. This won't save power, but at least it'll help get the string balance right. Re the power need for your driver...I can't say what's best in your case - but that's the whole point of my 'call to arms' for those of us ith scopes. If you can scope the signal across your driver for each open string in turn, at a known distance (eg use a drill bit to slide between driver top & sting bottom to establish the distance) where you just get past the edge of sustain (a subjective term, but can be described where the sustain is just enough to keep the string sustaining)...with sufficient data we should be able to glean how much power is needed per string etc. This will at least allow us all to address the "My top two strings don't sustain at all" type posts we see. It's a little puzzling to me how a thread can be this old & yet still have no meaningful technical data! I'll not pretend to be a clued up electronics wizard with lots of Formulae waiting in the wings to solve all sustainer problems (& after all, I've calculated some RMS voltage levels erroneously twice!), but I'm sure that discussing/applying the basic stuff (power levels, impedance, inductance, 'ampere turns' etc) will go along way to finally solving this sustainer conundrum that (unless I've missed it), still hasn't been satisfactorily nailed in all that time?! Sure there are DIY sustainers a plenty out there, but everyone I've read of seems to have a problem-ette of some sort (distortion/fizz, weak/no sustain on some strings/fret positions, no harmonics, bad EMI, pop problems etc). There's only so many times I can read "0.2mm wire is the magic ingredient" without any explanation why, or "it's the thin efficient coil you see" - without anyone even trying to establish its efficiency. There must be about 20% of all posts in the first one hundred pages alone harping on about pva vs epoxy vs superglue vs wax during the winding process (sure you don't want the coil vibrating, but purlease!!)- but few are chiming in & questioning the technical aspect of the driver ...ie power levels, turns required per string (note: not the the driver turns in total across all strings), inductance blah blah...nope, everyone appears to follow the you need to wind the magical 0.2mm gauge wire thinly until you get 8 ohms! line! Yet everyone seems to have a hiccup of some sort with their sustainer?!!
  5. But if the that higher impedance is because of more coil turns, then ok, there'll be less 'drive' (i'm figuring you're meaning current), but all other things being equal the ampere turns will remain the same - therefore same amount of flux force at the strings? (the question mark is because I'm theorizing here!) There's some good stuff in there that'd be a good starting point for discussion! (eg more current through the coil might be 'the more the bbetter', but not if you're running off batteries, where you just want the bare minimum current possible to get a good 'grip' on the strings) Incidentally, I've been in relative radio silence...not because I've lost interest - far from it - but more, life is getting in the way! (also, I've spent an inordinate amount of time getting my PIC based coil winder running with 'bells & whistles' not to mention that darned CNC machine - TOP TIP....DON'T EVER BUILD ONE!). Anyway, I'm getting to the point where I can start getting back to sustainers tagain. I'd like to try & stimulate some discussion around ampere turns/ magnetomotive force (OR MMF which, which as it goes, I don't know a whole lot about). I'm slowly wading my way through this thread hoping that the odd pearl will surface (I jumped in at about page 30 & I'm up to about page 75 - woaah....what a lot of repetitive woolly 'noise' there is in there too ...in just about every other post!). I find it surprising - .bar one poster back then - that MMF hasn't been discussed much at all (certainly not up to page 75 anyway!). Ultimately it's the MMF that's going to produce magnetic force which will make our drivers physically move the guitar strings ....a common theme seems to be "My sustainer works on the lowest 4 strings fine, but not the top two" ....then surely we need to establish roughly how much MMF these strings need to get them sustaining well? (removing some of the 'variables' where possible - eg distance between driver & string etc). From my understanding, those drivers that span six strings generally have the following 'known' characteristics (I say 'known'...not 'best')... About 150-200 turns A DC resistance of 8Ω (this is the figure that everyone seems to focus on & I'm puzzled why - it's the least important!) An inductance of about 1mH (this one is certainly more significant) The variables we can't remove are ... type of magnet core material ..because a lot of folks will simply use what they can get or have to hand! Variables that could be removed are (for the purposes of collecting data)... Distance between sting & driver (ie if when taking measurements, we all ensure we use the same distance - eg 3mm) pickup feeding the circuit - use a Sig generator to feed into the circuit (as opposed to a pickup) There hasn't been a huge amount of technical data put forward wrt the measured signal levels across the driver which results in good sustain (I realise this term is subjective, so perhaps it's better to talk about the 'edge of sustain' ....this being where the driver has just got enough grip of the string to start sustaining it). In my opinion, unless we can start getting some of this data together, then we're all just shooting in the dark & making clones of a supposed 'efficient' driver (& that term actually gets my goat, as without some meaningful technical data to back it up, it's just people bigging their own driver up). So this is a call to all those of a more technical ilk, that have access to a scope, to start noting down & posting up some meaningful data!! Once we know the current running through the driver *and* the number of turns of the driver...then we can start talking 'ampere turns' & MMF. For example, let's take a single string 8 ohm driver, 1mH of about 200 turns as an example with 3mm distance between string & driver (you can slot a drill bit in between the gap to confirm the actual distance) let's say that to get the 'edge of sustain' for the top E string, that 400mV peak to peak sine wave is needed. Bear with me on this bit as I may have my figures wrong..... Firstly 'ampere turns' is meant to be DC current related (and measured in a vacuum!)...& what we're dealing with here is AC current (& no vacuum)...but let's park that pesky fact for now! If @200 coil turns it takes a 400mV peak to peak 'drive signal' to move a top E string at the 'edge of sustain', then assuming a coil of 8 ohms we can summise... Impedance is 8.264 Ω (top E = 330Hz, coil inductance = 1mH, DC resistance was 8Ω) RMS voltage is 282mV (ie our 400mV peak to peak) Therefore driver current is 34mA (282mV/8.264Ω) Therefore our 'rough & dirty' ampere turns figure for the 'E' string is 6.8aT (200 turns x 34mA) Once we have figures for two highest strings, then we can start honing drivers that will cater for these troublesome strings (one idea ...if you didn't all have solid cores running through the entire core length of your driver, is simply to wind a few more local turns at the higher string end of the driver - that'd put more ampere turns at the end causing the problem) Thoughts / Comments?
  6. Oops...my bad - you are of course completely right!
  7. As an aside, your scope trace shows the peak to peak voltage nearer 7.5V, (5.3V RMS)...which works out at 662mA into an 8 Ohm coil = 3.5W - positively nuclear!
  8. Well that scope trace signal is looking a lot cleaner than the crud I saw on my scope (unfortunately, I didn't take a screenshot of my LM386 results). I can see evidence of JFET induced distortion on that trace ...but what's with the vertical lines on the final two positive cycles (the falling slope)....is that some kind of oscillation? (or just a bad screen shot!) RE the heat...I'm not surprised you're getting a hot chip - it's nothing to do with that specific chip per se .... but more the fact that you're pumping 5Vpp across an 8 ohm coil (or is yours 4 ohms?). If my maths serves me right 5Vpp, is 3.536V RMS, therefore @8 ohms that means about 440mA = 1.56W!!! To put this into context, I'm getting good sustain on the lower 4 strings with an 8 Ohm driver @ about 0.7Vpp! (5V is insane!). I reckon you'll be able to move your driver a few metres away from the guitar & still see your strings sustain! (I hope none of your relatives visit with a pacemaker fitted when you're testing that circuit
  9. Well, there's your problem. Four hundred turns of wire is going to give you a fairly big inductance. I've just checked & established that 30AWG is about 0.25mm...so if you halved the wire diameter size (0.125mm), you'd need approximately 200 turns to get the same DC resistance - but that amount of turns is still perhaps a little too much. From recollection, with my sewing machine bobbin, I used about 140 turns of 0.15mm (approx 34AWG), which yielded a DC resistance of about 4.2 ohms (which is fine for my particular output chip) & an inductance of 1mH. You really only have two options... 1. Stick with your 30AWG but you must make big coils (eg rectangluar & with the longest bit at least 60mm), that way you get to nail your amp's required DC resistance fine yet witout too many turns. 2. Buy some thinner wire! [pedant alert] You keep speaking of impedance but it's actually DC resistance you appear to be referring to. Impedance does matter (a lot), but the impedance is not the DC resistance of your coil...I'll not bore you (there's plenty of info about) & there are some good calculators where you can extrapolate the interaction of each (but it won't tell you the wire length). For example http://pr.erau.edu/~newmana/imped.html [/pedant alert] No, don't go there...you've already got a volume pot in your guitar. If you start putting other pots in, you're going to get some interaction going on. The 5-10K pots I spoke of are for use within active circuits - you can't just drop one into a passive guitar wiring circuit with some *major* impact.
  10. It's reasonable....but what's going to be key here is the coil characteristics & how you connect them all together. For example an inductance figure of 1mH (circa 150 windings) & a DC resistance of 8 ohms seems to be the ballpark for a general purpose driver ...the inductance figure is derived (in the main) from the number of windings your driver coil has. Therefore if you want to connect say 12 drivers in series, you'd want to shoot for 1/12th of those figures per coil (therefore each individual coil should be about 0.66 ohms & 83uH!). You'd need to experiment with differing coil gauge as you'd be beating a trailblazer's path there! My gut feeling is that a coil of 83uh, that the wire would need to be very thin to be able to get 150 turns - so thin, I reckon it'd not handle the current needed to get a higher frequency type string 'excited' sufficiently. I'd also have to assume that trying to span/excite so much string real estate with one 'virtual coil' (12 mini coils in series) would need a fairly chunky driving amplifier. if you don't need individual control per string (as per the EMPP), then I'd go with your 12 drivers connected in parallel or a combination of series/parallel (You'd still need to be careful with your coil characteristics, but they'd be more do-able vs pure 'series' connection) Well, I tried a couple more designs. One was a thin steel core, 4" long, wired with 30 AWG to 8 Ohms, solidified with PVA glue, with a ceramic block magnet attached to the blade. Another was like you suggested, wire wound around a plastic sewing bobbin, again potted with PVA glue, with a bolt in the middle of the bobbin and a neodymium magnet attached to the bolt. Both worked okay, not great, although using the glue eliminated the direct sound I had been getting with my earlier attempts. However, neither was nearly as good as the Radio Shack Miniature Audio Output Transformer, I cores removed and E cores aligned, with a neodymium magnet attached. This driver is by far the best of those that I've tried thus far. So...thinking aloud, would it at all be reasonable to wire up 12 of these transformers in a combination of series and parallel like: 7 in series 3 in series 2 in series and those three groups connected in parallel? With 8 ohms per transformer, that combination seems to yield a total impedance of 8.1951 ohms. Of course, this doesn't consider inductance. EDIT: I had incorrectly assumed that the transformers had an impedance of 8 ohms. In fact, after measuring, they have an impedance of 1.5 ohms each! So, how does that effect what I should do? IMHO, you're focusing on the least important aspect of making a driver (the DC resistance!). Re the sewing machine bobbin...what wire diameter are you using? The problem you're going to have is, unless you know the inductance & the total winding count of your own particular coils, then you really are going to be in the dark - & walking a (very) solitary & uncertain path. You can put the coils in any combination you wish, so long as the DC resistance matches whatever your final power amp wants to see *but* it may not sustain - what's absolutely key with sustainers, is not so much the DC resistance (that bit merely placates the needs of your power amp chip), but the delicate balance of number of driver windings (a bit like the three bears...this one has too many, this one not enough this one is just right!), strength of magnet (again three bears!), type of core etc. If you read through this thread you'll keep coming up with posts that wire gauge X is the most suitable - however such recommendations apply only to coils of a similar design. For example, many on here have established through trial & error, that circa 0.20mm diameter copper wire works best with a single driver breaching all six strings (I've seEn it said often on here that 0.2mm diameter wire is the only size that works ....this IMHO is quite incorrect *unless* we are all making drivers of exactly the same style/dimesions). theredfore 0.2mm wire gauge is the one to go for *if* (& only if) you are making a driver of similar proportions as the one most talked about on here. That said, what's been generally established on here, is that (for the main) a driver with about 150 windings & an inductance of about 1mH (maybe a little more) is about right. Therefore for my part, where I've been making single string drivers, to keep the winding count circa 150 turns & the inductance about 1mH, I have to use thinner wire than most (about 0.12mm-0.15mm)...your mileage will certainly vary. Therefore in summary...if you're making your own coils towards a different end goal, then you're going to need to find the wire gauge that suits your own situation (ie that satisfies the aforementioned characteristics). You'll be on forever & a day with the trial & error route...so I strongly I suggest you invest in a cheap inductance meter from China (mine cost a mere £14 delivered to my door from the far east! http://www.tinyurl.com/ompaon ) Mock duck - I can't comment about bass guitars (I don't use 'em) my gut feeling is that you won't need any extra oomph...because the strings that sustain best on a normal six string guitar are the lower frequency ones anyway! There's certainly a lot more ferrous material in the bass string for the sustainer coil to act upon Also the strings aren't as taught, so again I reckon this (in theory) ought to mean that no extra power will be required. re where to place the sustainer 'intensity' pot - that depends on the particular solution you decide to deploy, but it's probably fair to say that in the main, the intensity pot would best fit between the preamp output & the power amp input. Re its 'resistance' ...that depends on the optimum load that your preamp wants to 'see' but pots in the region of 5k-10k upwards are normally in the general ballpark
  11. Firstly, your wiring signal flow chain is fine. Re your bridge pickup query - a sustainer will work with a single coil in the bridge - after all, a guitar signal is a guitar signal (ie analogue...low level) - it's got to go into an active circuit anyway , where it can be 'treated/handled' according to the characteristics of the incoming signal ...ie single coil more gian, humbucker, less gain needed etc (my test/workshop guitar is a cheap strat copy...& its bridge single coil feeds my sustainer ciruit just fine) ...I can only imagine they recommend a humbucker, to help reduce some of the EMI spillage from their driver - can anyone else explain why they suggest a humbucker only in the bridge?
  12. That's now how it works here - you have to read the whole thread! I'm not sure I've ever seen a bill of materials for the Fetzer/Ruby, here's a site that comes close (I gather has simply 'pulled stuf from this thread as it credits Pete & Col )... http://diy-fever.com/index.php?project=sustainer re your wiring diagram...someone may have something diagrmatically to hand (I don't), but it's as simple as can be - you simply tap off your bass pickup signal either at your guitar's 1/4" jack output socket (which is simple - but not ideal as the sustainer will then be fed a 'manipulated/filtered' signal) or more preferably tap off the full unadulterated pickup signal as it appears at the input lug on your guitar's Volume pot.
  13. It's reasonable....but what's going to be key here is the coil characteristics & how you connect them all together. For example an inductance figure of 1mH (circa 150 windings) & a DC resistance of 8 ohms seems to be the ballpark for a general purpose driver ...the inductance figure is derived (in the main) from the number of windings your driver coil has. Therefore if you want to connect say 12 drivers in series, you'd want to shoot for 1/12th of those figures per coil (therefore each individual coil should be about 0.66 ohms & 83uH!). You'd need to experiment with differing coil gauge as you'd be beating a trailblazer's path there! My gut feeling is that a coil of 83uh, that the wire would need to be very thin to be able to get 150 turns - so thin, I reckon it'd not handle the current needed to get a higher frequency type string 'excited' sufficiently. I'd also have to assume that trying to span/excite so much string real estate with one 'virtual coil' (12 mini coils in series) would need a fairly chunky driving amplifier. if you don't need individual control per string (as per the EMPP), then I'd go with your 12 drivers connected in parallel or a combination of series/parallel (You'd still need to be careful with your coil characteristics, but they'd be more do-able vs pure 'series' connection)
  14. Hmm...I had high hopes in 'porting' the principles used in the Electro Magnetically Prepared piano over to a guitar sustainer - but in my (albeit brief) experimentations...it wasn't very successful. I reckon they're successfully doing this by chucking a fair old chunk of 'power' at each string...because they don't have to worry about EMI (on account the piano sound is 'acoustic' & not needing to use electric pickups like an electric guitar). IMHO, you'd be better off making a single driver more akin to the many variants on here but in a scaled down version for one string. (I suggest a sewing machine plastic thread bobbin, like these http://www.brother-usa.com/usaimages/Acces...Large/sa155.jpg, winding your copper around...about 150 turns of 0.15mm wire, dip it all in molten wax then let cool to solidify the windings , find an old drill bit that fits into the hole snug, cut the drill bit to length & pop it in the hole - now place a 3mm-5mm diameter rare earth magnet on the end of the cut drill bit - voila a single string driver!) One thing though....you shouldn't hear any sound from your driver at all - if you can, it suggest the wire windings are moving &/or the magnets....everything needs to be totally solid/rigid.
  15. Sorry I can't help you there... at this stage, I'm only winding smaller one string drivers...at the risk of appearing a little blunt....it's not that tough a task to wind a coil...why not have another go? Next time, I'd say don't bother with the glue ...at least this way, you can always unwind the coil again if it hasn't turned out as you'd imagined (once you're happy - simply pot it with wax afterwards)
  • Create New...