col Posted November 14, 2006 Report Share Posted November 14, 2006 Hi, few questions: how should I wire sustainer at all? I tried to make a sound clip of hand test but have a problem. When I wired it in parallel with guitar output on my last test signal didn't even come to sustainer circuit. Only when I unplug guitar cable I get signal coming to sustainer. Weird?! Second, I noticed that when I hit high E string (jn sustain mode) it doesn't sustain but instead G string vibrates in that pitch. I didn't notice that last night. It will maybe be different when I install driver but it's weird anyway. What about phantom powering sustainer circuit using stereo guitar cable. One "stompbox" would be connected to 9V power supply as all other pedals and send those 9V through second "channel" of stereo cord. That would eliminate battery nside guitar. Cheers What are you plugging it in to? The standard way to set it up is to split the signal from the pickup passively - take two wires from the pickup, one goes to the sustainer circuit, the other goes to the output jack and from there to your guitar amp. If you have it set up this way and its not working, then, assuming that your sustainer circuit is OK and battery is ok and connected, the first thing in the chain from the guitar to amp is probably a 'tone sucking' demon - if you have any stomp boxes or other FX between guitar and amp, try removing them and testing again. Col Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bancika Posted November 14, 2006 Report Share Posted November 14, 2006 I plugged it directly into mic in of my sound card. What I did is take output of guitar (after tone and volume controls, bridge pickup is selected), split it it two, take one to sustainer and other to PC. Nothing is connected between Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted November 14, 2006 Report Share Posted November 14, 2006 I plugged it directly into mic in of my sound card. What I did is take output of guitar (after tone and volume controls, bridge pickup is selected), split it it two, take one to sustainer and other to PC. Nothing is connected between What you really should do is take the line to the sustainer directly from the pickup lead before the volume and tone. I would also recommend some sort of pre amp between the guitar and soundcard. Not sure that this would cause the problems you described, but who knows for sure Col Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted November 14, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 14, 2006 I plugged it directly into mic in of my sound card. What I did is take output of guitar (after tone and volume controls, bridge pickup is selected), split it it two, take one to sustainer and other to PC. Nothing is connected between You are getting some power supply into the input...the G note is a give away...possibly to power the mic... Just split the signal out of the guitar to two jacks one in and the other to go out at the input of the sustainer circuit...so it goes to the sustainer and to the soundcard. That's how my "sustain box" was wired. Preferably go through a stompbox or mixer to the line in of the sound card...ther may be some power in the mic for condenser mics. You get a similar effect if using a power supply instead of a battery for the circuit if it isn't properly filtered and regulated. Have to run, but we discussed how to do remote power before but I seemed to be the only one that seemed really interested in it. pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curtisa Posted November 14, 2006 Report Share Posted November 14, 2006 I plugged it directly into mic in of my sound card. What I did is take output of guitar (after tone and volume controls, bridge pickup is selected), split it it two, take one to sustainer and other to PC. Nothing is connected between What you really should do is take the line to the sustainer directly from the pickup lead before the volume and tone. I would also recommend some sort of pre amp between the guitar and soundcard. Not sure that this would cause the problems you described, but who knows for sure Col A preamp of some sort is mandatory. Plugging the sustainer and guitar in parallel into your computer mike input is loading both down too much. Increased loading will reduce the amount of signal getting through to the sustainer and also affect the frequency response of your guitar pickups, changing the effectiveness of the sustainer to work on different strings and positions. Interested to see what circuit you've come up with, Col I'm a little bit concerned about the battery drain figures you've quoted, but it may be unfounded. Cheers, Curtis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bancika Posted November 14, 2006 Report Share Posted November 14, 2006 well, yes, I used wall wart power supply. It isn't regulated but has a 2200uF filter cap IIRC. I'll try to put it into preamp and then PC later, thanks! Just split the signal out of the guitar to two jacks one in and the other to go out at the input of the sustainer circuit...so it goes to the sustainer and to the soundcard. That's how my "sustain box" was wired. yeah, that's how I did it... Branislav Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted November 14, 2006 Report Share Posted November 14, 2006 Interested to see what circuit you've come up with, Col I'm a little bit concerned about the battery drain figures you've quoted, but it may be unfounded. Are they lower or higher than you would expect? They are lower than the figures I had from the simulation, but I didn't believe those anyway. Also with this circuit, there are a range of figures depending on how hard you want the sustainer to drive the strings - the figures I suggested are when the unit is producing a good sustain, but it can go louder or quieter. I obtained these figures by putting my meter between the +ve batter terminal and the +ve input to the circuit. The meter was switched to DC mA. I suppose I could get a more accurate valuse using a combination of DC and AC readings ? Disclaimer: as usual, this is in development, it is not finished, do not build it unless you are ready to tweak it to your requirements, and don't blame me if your guitar goes up in smoke or anything else bad happens Sorry its hard to read the values, can't get a better pic without using ExpressSCH and re-drawing the whole damn thing.. or a bunch of other fiddling that I don't have time for right now As I noted, I've still to work out the best way to do 'mixed mode' harmonics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted November 15, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 Branislav... I'd stick with a battery for a bit, all kinds of noise problems can come from power supplies... What about phantom powering sustainer circuit using stereo guitar cable. One "stompbox" would be connected to 9V power supply as all other pedals and send those 9V through second "channel" of stereo cord. That would eliminate battery nside guitar. This is possible and as the battery is hard to locate in and replace (as well as expensive) and causes angst over battery drain, it would seem to be an obvious area to explore. Strangely, there has been some resistance to the idea... More difficult, it would seem to achieve, is to have the whole circuit in a stomp box, many people have this kind of thing on a wish list and there was some excitement when I made the "sustain box" that this was moving in this direction... One of the major problems was running the high current driver leads all the way down and along side the guitar's signal leads without getting interferance...not possible I fear... However...what if there was a self powered driver on the guitar, and all we wanted to send was a preamped signal, whith harmonic functions and such controled on the preamp...possible, maybe... But, what of the guitar's bypass functions, you would still need to control the guitar's wiring so that everything else was disconnected... Much more difficult... Some solution could be in my mid driver idea where pickups don't need deselection...then you are looking at supplying power and a signal... You would still be looking at perhaps a USB 5 wire or more like connection, if it worked, would that be acceptable? Possibly not! Certainly, consistancy of power is a problem...the device will go through a few batterries, it is the largest component to find room for in the guitar and the response of the device will change as the ability to draw current from the battery is diminished...all of these things would be addressed by remote power, but you would need a pretty good power supply to avoid problems as you are having. Given that there has been some interest in onboard effects and such, remote power would have a wide interest outside the sustainer thread also, I suspect. ----- col... Nice work on the circuit, care to describe it in a flow or block of what it is basically doing? Obviously, it would be fairly large but if ultimately successful, could be condensed down with SMD's or refined further, perhaps with the help of others.... The clip sounds good too...very rawk'n'roll ... reminds me of the Heart songs, Magic Man and Barracuda, long sustained rock sound... The sustainer certainly does lend itself to the classic crunch, even if we do aspire to "clean" sustain ----- Off Topic... In other news, in time, after my move, I will be getting into recording and playing and composing music again. For years I used to bounce tracks between two cassette recorders, but as an early christmas present have just got an external sound card and will be looking into recording a lot more... I actually did my uni degree in music but by the time I had finished it, was past the point in which I joined bands and such, and so never took it further. Now, in the midst of a midlife crisis, I may as well keep myself amused and see where those ideas could have gone. If nothing else, the guitar has always been a relaxing companion. This thread is inspiring, not only has it attracted a lot of interest and contributions over the time that have stimulated discussion and practical work, but there is an ever increasing number of visits to the thread...on november 9 I posted...70 thousand visits! ...there have been over a thousand visits since then Now, we are talking a thread buried in a little forum on an obscure subject...imagine what something on the broader aspects of music making could be like. The world is full of talented people and as technology becomes easier and more available, and distribution via the net ever broader, there is some wonderful opportunities to share and share in eachother's talents. I guess there are various sites of this kind, but a lot of them are unfocused and are more of a "show and tell" kind of thing. A lot of guitar playing has fallen into this trap as well, the "look what I can do" approach has diminished expression for some (technique for techniques sake) and alienaited others (oh I can't play like steve vai so I can't play at all, I'm "no good")... What I'd like to see and to hear is something that focussed on a musical expression, the intent of composition. ----- Anyway...back to the sustainer...as more people make these things and get to use them, I am sure there will be much inspiration...it certainly is a fine rut buster to get one out of the standard blues licks syndrome (or is it some tapping extravaganza these days!!!)... pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bancika Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 I've been also thinking about offboard sustainer, but I doubt that one could make it with single cable. Sustainer level is much greater than guitar level, there will be nose, squeal and whatnot. One solution could be using two cables, but then it's ugly. It would be cool enough to have external power supply. I wish I didn't cut my stereo cable into smaller patch cables Even having batter outside is a success. Using short stereo jumper cable and small battery box attached to guitar strap (like wireless system). Jumper would go from guitar jack to strap box (it goes above strap anyway so it won't be visible). It's the same thing just you don't need long stereo cable. On the other hand you need lots of batteries, so in the long run it's better to go with floor based unit Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 (edited) This is possible and as the battery is hard to locate in and replace (as well as expensive) and causes angst over battery drain, it would seem to be an obvious area to explore. Strangely, there has been some resistance to the idea... Battery keeps things simple and safe, but I think that the main reason for resistance is that most guitartists like to keep things simple. Using non-standard leads would be a big issue for many to accept - not being able to just grab any old lead and plug your axe in... also, not being able to just go to the local shop and get a new lead when required, or borrow one from another guitarist.... If it was just the power that was offboard, then it a bit simpler, but still not "plug n play". There are already enough things stopping folks from considering a sustainer - installation, potential modifications to guitar, possible change in tone, issues with pickup selection etc. Adding non-standard connectors to off-board units, just adds ot that list. More difficult, it would seem to achieve, is to have the whole circuit in a stomp box, many people have this kind of thing on a wish list and there was some excitement when I made the "sustain box" that this was moving in this direction... yep, you're talking about a full-on umbilical cord for that Certainly, consistancy of power is a problem...the device will go through a few batterries, it is the largest component to find room for in the guitar and the response of the device will change as the ability to draw current from the battery is diminished... Yes, I've been thinking about this, its the only reason I've not already decided to have no knob on the front of my guitar - might need to adjust the output or threshold as the battery gets low. I'm sure that with small scale SMD and class-D amps, some sort of regulator could be included to keep the supply to the circuit stable until the battery dies, but I wouldn't want to try that using chunky old pin-through-hole components. col... Nice work on the circuit, care to describe it in a flow or block of what it is basically doing? Obviously, it would be fairly large but if ultimately successful, could be condensed down with SMD's or refined further, perhaps with the help of others.... I'll get an annotated breakdown of the circuit ready soon. As far as refinements, I don't think it will be possible to make any major simplifications without compromising the functionality, althout swapping two of the dual op-amps for a quad will help a little. The main thing about this design is that the parts are readily available - I used a J201 FET because they seem to be easy to get, and are used in most of the FET stomp boxes I've seen - hehe RunOffGroove should do a licencing deal with J201 manufacturers. The clip sounds good too...very rawk'n'roll ... reminds me of the Heart songs, Magic Man and Barracuda, long sustained rock sound... The sustainer certainly does lend itself to the classic crunch, even if we do aspire to "clean" sustain Thanks, although I don't know Heart, so not sure this is a compliment . The main thing I wanted to show is that this circuit gives a good sustain volume, and that my extra wide dual rail provides fine harmonic performance, in fact it may be better because it doesn't get so exruciatingly high pitched as with the single rail driver. This demo highlights another 'feature' that I'd not previously considered. The AGC circuit causes a longer hold before the harmoinic takes over, this is because the driver only fully kicks in when the guitar signal drops below the threshold level - so if you play soft, near instant harmonic, if you play hard - particularly with chords, you get some fundamental before the harmonic takes over. btw, I have a simple mod to my circuit to give a basic mixed harmonic mode - It's pretty subtle, but it does make a difference from fundamental mode - will do another demo with some clean sounds and 'mixed' mode Off Topic... In other news, in time, after my move, I will be getting into recording and playing and composing music again. For years I used to bounce tracks between two cassette recorders, but as an early christmas present have just got an external sound card and will be looking into recording a lot more... great news, looking ofrward to hearing the results. I've been also thinking about offboard sustainer, but I doubt that one could make it with single cable. Sustainer level is much greater than guitar level, there will be nose, squeal and whatnot. One solution could be using two cables, but then it's ugly. It would be cool enough to have external power supply. I wish I didn't cut my stereo cable into smaller patch cables Even having batter outside is a success. Using short stereo jumper cable and small battery box attached to guitar strap (like wireless system). Jumper would go from guitar jack to strap box (it goes above strap anyway so it won't be visible). It's the same thing just you don't need long stereo cable. On the other hand you need lots of batteries, so in the long run it's better to go with floor based unit Cheers Yeah, there are so many extra design variables and decisions with an off board unit that it kinda makes sense to wait until the on-board system is more mature, then work from that. As far as batteries are concerned, with a good AGC in the driver circuit, battery drain is reduced dramatically. If we can also ultimately swap the LM386 for a class-D amp chip, we should be able to further reduce power requirements - to the point where they're not much worse than some 'normal' stomp boxes. Personally, I would rather spend time on this avenue than developing an external solution - but then, my guitar has a big cavity (ooer missus... fnar fnar) cheers Col Edited November 15, 2006 by col Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bancika Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 It's easy when you have back access panel. On strat style guitars it's PITA to remove strings, pickguard etc. On floyd rose equiped guitars it's even bigger mess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted November 15, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 It's easy when you have back access panel. On strat style guitars it's PITA to remove strings, pickguard etc. On floyd rose equiped guitars it's even bigger mess Yes, installation is a problem...I wouldn't be encouraging people to rout out a mid driver cavity, unless it was replacing a pickup already there. I did make some very thin surface mount types, remember these drivers can be made very thin, and there may be some potential there, but there is a limit! At least with strat type guitars you do have a big scratchplate and you could use some of that area to install the circuit in a shallow route without too much trouble, or enlarge the control cavity...some even have "bath tub" pickup routes anyway...plus you have a mid pickup if that comes off. I love the tremolo for use with the sustainer so I wouldn't want to loose the springs for battery installation, but if you really wanted to, there is space in there (also if you only use two springs...I use three though!). Another option could be to enlarge the trem cavity out behind the bridge a little for the battery and make a new cover for it...you could make it deep and fit the battery, circuit and the switches through the top just behind the trem if you had the skills. In the end, each instrument has it's own needs and that is why the sustainer is a good DIY project if you have the nerve to do it. Even the commercial units really need someone who knows what they are doing and often extensive routing to get the job done. For years fernandes only offered the device on their purpose built guitars, possibly for this very reason. I still think some remote power or even a small box attached to the top of the guitar is something to explore and will be attractive to some. If battery drain can be kept low, perhaps a rechargable option is more appropriate if space can be found but only in a hard to get at location like on a strat... I still want to try to get the poweramp into or near the driver, so am still interested in seeing a circuit for the preamp that will allow for harmonic switching to enable this...spst is great because it would allow for a miniture momentary switch option too... wink.gif. The main thing I wanted to show is that this circuit gives a good sustain volume, and that my extra wide dual rail provides fine harmonic performance, in fact it may be better because it doesn't get so exruciatingly high pitched as with the single rail driver. This demo highlights another 'feature' that I'd not previously considered. The AGC circuit causes a longer hold before the harmoinic takes over, this is because the driver only fully kicks in when the guitar signal drops below the threshold level - so if you play soft, near instant harmonic, if you play hard - particularly with chords, you get some fundamental before the harmonic takes over. Yes I liked that the harmonic was a little slower and that it is responsive to playing touch. Clearly the rail works but I am not sure that it is necessarily "better" given the effort in constructing and installing such a device (especially in a single coil slot) and that it is a dedicated driver, not a pickup/driver...it has not achieved EMI advantages enough to run it in the mid position for instance, nor fixed the fizz or pop in it's design . Still, it does show that a dual coil design can be made and work well which encourages me to look into similar designs to try and get some of these further benefits... There is still the stacked and side and bi-lateral drivers to make and test...then other novel ideas like the horseshoe core...I wonder how that worked out?... With all these things, we do need to go back to what we were trying to achieve...the fact that it works is not necessarily an improvement, many things will work...more efficiency, flexability, reduced EMI, phase and speed concerns...all these things are improvements, but working "as well as" a simpler design is not enough unless it is heading towards a higher goal...IMHO Anyway...good stuff happening, keep it up and further explanation of how the six opamps are being utilised is required for people like me I am afraid... pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 (edited) I still want to try to get the poweramp into or near the driver, so am still interested in seeing a circuit for the preamp that will allow for harmonic switching to enable this...spst is great because it would allow for a miniture momentary switch option too... Yeah, look at that circuit I posted. The op-amp nearest to the LM386 is the phase inverter. If you look closely, just to the left of it there is a SPST switch (closed) marked somthing like 'Key = SPACE' Yes I liked that the harmonic was a little slower and that it is responsive to playing touch. Clearly the rail works but I am not sure that it is necessarily "better" given the effort in constructing and installing such a device (especially in a single coil slot) and that it is a dedicated driver, not a pickup/driver...it has not achieved EMI advantages enough to run it in the mid position for instance, nor fixed the fizz or pop in it's design . That was my initial reaction, but I explained way back, that when I tried going back to the single core driver I discovered that the dual rail DOES make a big difference to the level of EMI feedback and fizz. Still, it does show that a dual coil design can be made and work well which encourages me to look into similar designs to try and get some of these further benefits... There is still the stacked and side and bi-lateral drivers to make and test...then other novel ideas like the horseshoe core...I wonder how that worked out?... I am interested in trying a bi-lateral driver at some point. I'm not so optimistic about a stack though - it is much less efficient, there is quite a lot of self cancellation inherent in the design of a stack - maybe if it was used with an off-board mains supply it would be a good option (it that what Brooks uses?). With all these things, we do need to go back to what we were trying to achieve...the fact that it works is not necessarily an improvement, many things will work...more efficiency, flexability, reduced EMI, phase and speed concerns...all these things are improvements, but working "as well as" a simpler design is not enough unless it is heading towards a higher goal...IMHO Well, I would say that it works a lot better than the simpler design. I am actually pretty much satisfied with the results I've had in the last couple of days, and if it works as well or better after installation, I may spend some time developing playing techniques for it rather than product research The only downside is that it isn't a universal solution yet because of the size of the circuit. There is plenty of room for it in my guitar, but many others will not have the space. As most of the circuit is using very standard parts it would be easy to minaturise it. The only thing that could be hassle is the FET, it depends how close the specs of any available SMD FETs are to a J201. If they're not close enough, then there would probably be a little tweaking required to the circuit. Edit: oof, of course J201 is available as SMD Basically, apart from pots trimmers, switches and a few caps, everything in the circuit could be miniaturised - small enough to sit alongside the driver if required. Probably talking about 1.5 square inches... have to find out how much a small batch of manufactured circuits can be had for. Anyway...good stuff happening, keep it up and further explanation of how the six opamps are being utilised is required for people like me I am afraid... pete Looking at the Schematic: The one at top left is to provide a stable voltage reference at half the supply voltage. The one just below that and slightly to the right is the input pre-amp this sets the threshold level. The pair at the bottom comprise the 'precision' rectifier - I tried a halfwave rectifier with just one amp, but it didn't provide nearly as even a frequency response particularly at the lower end. The op-amp just to the left of the LM386(rightmost IC) as explained above is the inverter. The last and possibly most important, right in the middle at the top is the AGC amp, its feedback loop has a tap off to the FET that changes the amps gain depending on the level of the signal produced by the rectifier.... so a loud input causes low gain while a soft input causes high gain... Thats what they do The only places where you could conceivably reduce the op-amp count are # The rectifier - although I think this will reduce performance noticably # The half supply reference - this could be done with a transistor, but it wouldn't work as well, and would require enough extra parts that it would probably not save board space. # The inverter, you could remove this if you don't like the extreme Harmonic mode. It may be possible to remove a few resistors here and there (e.g. the voltage divider that tweaks the dc offset of the rectifier), but without completely re-designing the circuit, all you would do is seriously reduce the effectiveness of it. I've already stripped as much as possible out of the 'Fast FET Limiter' circuit that I based the FET section on, and everything else is already pretty much bare bones. In the end, it should work out at about the same size physically as my old LM13700 circuit. cheers Col Edited November 15, 2006 by col Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted November 15, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 Just reposting this so it is near your description... Looking at the Schematic: The one at top left is to provide a stable voltage reference at half the supply voltage. The one just below that and slightly to the right is the input pre-amp this sets the threshold level. The pair at the bottom comprise the 'precision' rectifier - I tried a halfwave rectifier with just one amp, but it didn't provide nearly as even a frequency response particularly at the lower end. The op-amp just to the left of the LM386(rightmost IC) as explained above is the inverter. The last and possibly most important, right in the middle at the top is the AGC amp, its feedback loop has a tap off to the FET that changes the amps gain depending on the level of the signal produced by the rectifier.... so a loud input causes low gain while a soft input causes high gain... Thats what they do That helps a lot, thank you. It probably isn't that big...any photos of the circuit, or is it still on a breadboard? Ireally like the ideas and this could be a significant contribution. As for the driver design, it is only after making a few, and teaking those designs at that, that we can really assess them. A miniture bi-lateral idea really does appeal, not only are the coils close to the strings but the shorter coils would facililitate more overlapping windings and a narrower effective core. The side driver is interesting, but the coil is further away from the strings so perhaps not so good. Similarly, the stack has one coil further away, but I still haven't got my head around the actual effect of the two opposing coils will have on one another...is there a way in which the lower coil provides more push and pull to the upper coil, if so, it could be more efficient. There is even the possibility of a wound hex driver that could work ok pairs of opposing magnets and coils...certainly it would take the dual coil idea to another level as far as EMI cancelling... Then again, there is the possibility of 12, six pairs of my hex system drivers if the wave idea were to work...this is perhaps getting a little esoteric, but at least there wouldn't be any coil winding at all!!! One problem that my hex drivers tried to address was that conventional driver's kind of bounce the string up and down, whereas I was trying to move them more from side to side...in the end, a string will find it's own vibration pattern in 3d space, but a substantial up and down motion will necesitate a higher action and promote an unatural sustain... Still...simple is best. You certainly seem to get a good response from the device. How does it perform in a clean mode? Also, this is the first rail driver and improvements in construction and design tweaking may improve it further if you or someone else were to do it again. For instance...I might go for a slightly deeper coil and get the blades even closer together...I might also use stroonger neodyminium magnets that are much smaller and powerful...perhaps locating them deep below the driver on longer blades to draw stray magnetism, and perhaps EMI down into the guitar rather than along the string and into the pickups. Then again...I would like to retain the neck pickup, if only in sustainer off mode...If the mid-driver doesn't work out and the dual coil sustem is better...perhaps some of my bi-lateral ideas could work built on a rail, or even a conversion of a conventional HB pickup for a driver/pickup combo...we still haven't had anyone convert a HB and retain the pickup (primal had to strip the winding off one of his bobbins on his LP so it doesn't really count). I did get my LP to do it with the "sustain box" with a single coil on top of one coil (a duplicate of my strat's driver) and could propose extending some how the other coil it would be a little fiddly however. It would be something of interest as many two pickup guitars have dual HB's. Another installation idea for strat type guitars is that with most a battery would fit in the jack socket hole...conceivably one could make a box that fits over this to take the jack and switches to control it which was explored at one point...certainly there is scope for a surface mounting of the circuit, battery and controls (much like a roland synth pickup) but given the wiring that is required to and from this box and the driver installation, it could hardly be seen to be a temporary device, though it would mean low structural modifications and reversal of the procedure. Tim has shown that such a device would not necessarily be unsightly, but your arts and crafts in constructing something atractive would have to be pretty high Any thoughts on the "pop" issue? For many, the low fizz that I get even would be acceptable, but the "thwop" sound is a little off putting... pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spazzyone Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 (edited) I've been also thinking about offboard sustainer, but I doubt that one could make it with single cable. Sustainer level is much greater than guitar level, there will be nose, squeal and whatnot. One solution could be using two cables, but then it's ugly. It would be cool enough to have external power supply. I wish I didn't cut my stereo cable into smaller patch cables Even having batter outside is a success. Using short stereo jumper cable and small battery box attached to guitar strap (like wireless system). Jumper would go from guitar jack to strap box (it goes above strap anyway so it won't be visible). It's the same thing just you don't need long stereo cable. On the other hand you need lots of batteries, so in the long run it's better to go with floor based unit Cheers i do not have this problem and i'm using shitty speaker cable for my driver and outboard amplification here is a pic of the mess that is my signal path http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d38/femf.../Picture009.jpg and in my sound post the recording was done sitting in front of the computer moiter while it was turned on Pete knows my setup and is the only one who understands why i favor the outboard route but sadly i have no time to persue my deisign at the moment as im building guitars 10 hours a day so its safe to say when i come home the last thing i want to do is fiddle with more guitars Edited November 16, 2006 by spazzyone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 That helps a lot, thank you. It probably isn't that big...any photos of the circuit, or is it still on a breadboard? Yep, still on the breadboard, I'm still fiddling with component values and trying to come up with a better way to get 'mixed mode' to work as I want it to. ...Similarly, the stack has one coil further away, but I still haven't got my head around the actual effect of the two opposing coils will have on one another...is there a way in which the lower coil provides more push and pull to the upper coil, if so, it could be more efficient. My understanding of the stack as a pickup is that the two coils cancel each other - e.g. they fight rather than help ! This works reasonably as a pickup because the lower coil gets much less string signal than the upper one because it's further away, so it doesn't cancel too much of the sound. Seems Kinman and to some level Dimarzio have both had success developing a custom lower coil that is designed to pickup as little of the string as possible while still getting an equal dose of noise... It may be that we could do something similar with two very different coils in order to try and make the lower coil use as little power as possible while still pulling in stray magnetic flux to control EMI. Its always going to be less efficient than either dual rail or bi-lateral EMIbucker designs though. There is even the possibility of a wound hex driver that could work ok pairs of opposing magnets and coils...certainly it would take the dual coil idea to another level as far as EMI cancelling... Then again, there is the possibility of 12, six pairs of my hex system drivers if the wave idea were to work...this is perhaps getting a little esoteric, but at least there wouldn't be any coil winding at all!!! Can't really comment on that because I don't know how they work or how ther are constructed One problem that my hex drivers tried to address was that conventional driver's kind of bounce the string up and down, whereas I was trying to move them more from side to side...in the end, a string will find it's own vibration pattern in 3d space, but a substantial up and down motion will necesitate a higher action and promote an unatural sustain... side to side would be no more natural than up and down. Also, my experience is that you get a sustain tone that is plenty loud enough long before the string vibration has as much of an impact on action as other factors such as driver construction and mounting, magnetic pull etc... However, I would be interested in hearing if there was any tonal difference between up'n'down and side-to-side. Still...simple is best. You certainly seem to get a good response from the device. How does it perform in a clean mode? Seems good - my setup is not good for testing clean tones as I've already explained, and I'm hesitant to post examples because there is so much bad clipping from my cab sim that it would be difficult to tell where fuzz and distortion was coming from. I'm pretty sure by A/B ing clean tone with sustainer on and off that the fizz is much lower than it was with my other circuit if not completely gone. Its at the stage now when the most annoying thing is string to string balance - this time in chords ! the AGC evens up the balance well for single note stuff and rock chords, but when playing clean chord and letting them ring, the 'better' strings (G and D on my setup) tend to overpower the others - this is more or less noticable depending on chord voicing, but I know through messing around with sustaining chords that if we could make a driver that had better string balance, the thing would sustain clean chords a treat (I guess its a good sign that this is one of the big issues for me now) I suppose options for balancing would be pole pieces with adjustable height, or adjustable thickness - ideally these could be adjusted or replaced after manufacture... maybe using a couple of Tims groovy coreless coils. Also, this is the first rail driver and improvements in construction and design tweaking may improve it further if you or someone else were to do it again. For instance...I might go for a slightly deeper coil and get the blades even closer together...I might also use stroonger neodyminium magnets that are much smaller and powerful...perhaps locating them deep below the driver on longer blades to draw stray magnetism, and perhaps EMI down into the guitar rather than along the string and into the pickups. Yes, my coils came out well, but the magnet I'm using is from a standard sized humbucker, and that is the limiting factor as far as overall width is concerned - there is a gap between the coils. I suppose that also good really as many folks should be able to lay their hands on a magnet from a standard sized humbucker - it may not be ideal, but at least we know it works. Another installation idea for strat type guitars is that with most a battery would fit in the jack socket hole... Yes, with the socket turned 'inside-out' to give even more room. Any thoughts on the "pop" issue? For many, the low fizz that I get even would be acceptable, but the "thwop" sound is a little off putting... Ah, yes, I did some more pulling out and pushing back in of the power lead (both while sustaining and not) on my breadboard, and I can't get any pop or thwop or pdfffdpfffpfpfpfffff type of sounds all I get is a small faint 'tick' that is most likely caused by a tiny spark because I'm not using a switch for the test. I'll say again - NO POP (also, no neck pickup and no single coil pickups - but I don't think thats an issue) cheers Col Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spazzyone Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 (edited) side to side would be no more natural than up and down. Also, my experience is that you get a sustain tone that is plenty loud enough long before the string vibration has as much of an impact on action as other factors such as driver construction and mounting, magnetic pull etc... However, I would be interested in hearing if there was any tonal difference between up'n'down and side-to-side. i have run an obscene amount of power into my rail and had no fret buzz and its in an ibanez with very low action so i totaly agree that the right driver does not have this up/down affect with enough power to sustain the strings very well. ( remember i first tried 100 volts then 25 watts@ 8 ohm's fully cranked ) and not a buzz to be had. surely this has to be do to the fact its a humbucker driver and im also pretty sure its also the "rail" design as well Edited November 16, 2006 by spazzyone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted November 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 I'll say again - NO POP That's a real break through, at least for me, and you have the SPDT harmonic switch in there too You get the d and g strings over powering the other's on chords...invariably it has been the lower strings, so you may be onto something there...do you get multiple strings sustaining, or just one overpowering the rest in a chord? Spazzy...how is that job going...I hope that injury is healing, pretty nasty! You have taken a different path with the outpoard powered pickup idea but has shown that it works. In some way's it is similar to the Brook "infinite guitar", perhaps the first true sustainer. People have tried this kind of thing before (including me) and had no success at all, and clearly you have something magical going on there that get's results! Well, congratulations col...looks like your circuit ideas have paid off... I was wondering if there might be another way to create harmonics more consistantly...some kind of octave up effect, perhaps...rather than reversing the leads. The harmonic sound is great, but it does not produce a totally predictable note. Similarly, I notice now that, although quite a pleasing effect, my lower strings rise a fifth often (the e morphs to b, for instance)...a product of the smaller cap...and this is in the normal mode! It is amazing though what you can settle for once the thing is working. The "pop" iritates me, it is a flaw, while the fizz is not great, it is low enough to be usable for me. Similarly, the effect is usable without the compression and I haven't changed the battery in weeks...but I appreciate it could be better. Perhaps we are looking and working towards different levels of this device, in which case your version may be approaching the point that exceeds the commercial units potential. Clearly, those guys have done a lot of work on this, so that is quite an achievement. I am not sure of the application of this device. I don't see too many people wanting to fit this into a PRS or an LP...if people are prepared to work this into a squier however, what's a few holes or a little under the scratch plate routing? Since we are in a custom building and modification forum, we do have a receptive audience, I guess. The next stage is perhaps to see what kinds of musical applications this thing can be put to...proving it's worth as a fun and creative tool will be the test I guess. With this will come more of a demand for even better technology and we are well ahead of anyone out there in that department at this stage... pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 I'll say again - NO POP That's a real break through, at least for me, and you have the SPDT harmonic switch in there too Yeah, I would imagine the lack of a pop is due to the equally balanced dual coil driver. Oh, and its a SPST switch You get the d and g strings over powering the other's on chords...invariably it has been the lower strings, so you may be onto something there...do you get multiple strings sustaining, or just one overpowering the rest in a chord? Which strings it is depends on the guitar, hardware and sting guages used - the original (crappy) pickups that came with my guitar actually had a notch cut out of their rails under the G string, so I guess its a feature of this guitar. I get multiple strings sustaining, but whatever note is being played by the G string - or D if G is damped - becomes the dominiant tone. This is pretty much what happens on my guitar when playing loud with real feedback, its not unpleasant, so probably not too big a deal. It could be partially be balanced by adjusting the poles on my pickup, but I figure the only real solution would be to have some sort of biasing built into the driver core. Well, congratulations col...looks like your circuit ideas have paid off... I hope so, but as they (used to) say: The proof of the pudding is in the eating ! I was wondering if there might be another way to create harmonics more consistantly...some kind of octave up effect, perhaps...rather than reversing the leads. The harmonic sound is great, but it does not produce a totally predictable note. Similarly, I notice now that, although quite a pleasing effect, my lower strings rise a fifth often (the e morphs to b, for instance)...a product of the smaller cap...and this is in the normal mode! I'm not very happy with the full harmonic mode sound in general - it's too extreme for me, more of a special FX type thing. As far as Mixed mode, the trick is to use filtering to boost the frequncies where the harmonics you want are located... I tried doing that by switching a cap in the AGC part of my circuit, but thats not a good option because the respone of the low strings drops right off. What I need to do is put a bandpass or highpass filter immediately before or after the initial pre-amp stage. This would mean that there would be more high frequency content in the tone, but the AGC would bring any low level signal up to a usable level solving the dead 5th and 6th string issue. Problem is that that adding a seperate filter stage would mean at least one more op-amp... So what I really want to do is incorporate some sort of switchable filter into the pre-amp stage - just havn't done it yet. I am not sure of the application of this device. I don't see too many people wanting to fit this into a PRS or an LP...if people are prepared to work this into a squier however, what's a few holes or a little under the scratch plate routing? Personally I believe that its not being marketed correctly - they should be aiming it at the home recording crowd and selling it as a way to achieve a cranked amp tone without annoying the neighbours... Theres one thing a pod can't do - bring the strings alive - this system fills the gap. most DI units and digital fx boxes take the alive raw unpredictable quality out of a cranked guitar tone - which is crazy because it is the most important thing about that kind of tone... Another thing, in rehearsal studios I've played in, the guitar often gets swamped by drums and bass, getting a nice feedback in those situations is not easy... enter the sustainer... One potential reason for lack of enthusiasm might be that shredding is coming back again. Shredders never let a note ring long enough to hear the guitars natural tone let alone long enough to hear a sustainer at work Col Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 OK, I got a better 'mixed' mode harmonic up and running - just switching the input cap gives a pretty good result - will try a few values to see which are best, and if it's worth having more then 1 'mixed' setting. I put in a proper on/off switch, and the little click I described is still there - will do some fiddling to try and remove it. Col Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted November 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Personally I believe that its not being marketed correctly - they should be aiming it at the home recording crowd and selling it as a way to achieve a cranked amp tone without annoying the neighbours... Another thing, in rehearsal studios I've played in, the guitar often gets swamped by drums and bass, getting a nice feedback in those situations is not easy... enter the sustainer... Yes...this is very much what the thing does, it creates real feedback. It is not just an effect, but makes the guitar come alive, it is why people played loud in the first place! It is very much what is lacking in all the emulations that you hear (such as on the pod) which are very good, but sound a little sterile. Similarly, it provides control of the effect so that you get that same response as playing loud through headphones or with a band...you don't have to find that special spot on the floor in that particular hall, with this guitar...(I remember an interview with gary more about his live version of "parisenne walkways" where he holds an impossibly long note...to do it he had to find the magic spot and mark it on the stage, but when it came to the performance with a hall full of people, he had to try it over and over to get it on tape and edit it back later) This responsiveness is important for a lot of styles. EVH is someone who exploits a loud sound, when you hear people play his stuff in a music shop (eruption for instance) it never sounds right even with great sound and technique. One of the important things is that this responsiveness actually inspires a certain kind of thing musically and technically...the "loud" sound gave birth to those licks and tricks (tapping is so much easier loud!). Yeah, I would imagine the lack of a pop is due to the equally balanced dual coil driver. Oh, and its a SPST switch Yes...well I thought that the dual coil might address the problem, but now you have reminded me that you don't have the bypass functions that I have that might be an influence. I'm not very happy with the full harmonic mode sound in general - it's too extreme for me, more of a special FX type thing. Well, I kind of like it, but it could be the novelty factor a little. I thought the clip beckistan made quite good musical use of it...I like the way the harmonics organically evolve on these lower frets. The slower speed of this evolution into harmonics is prefered and you seem to have been able to get a more consistant response which is good. My highest frets the harmonic is instant which is cool, but is more of a special effect kind of thing in a way. The most cliched thing is to do the harmonic dive bomb thing, it's hard to resist if you have a tremolo. Problem is that that adding a seperate filter stage would mean at least one more op-amp... So what I really want to do is incorporate some sort of switchable filter into the pre-amp stage - just havn't done it yet. Since you have already six op amps, another two would mean you could use two quads for the same price...just a thought. I am really starting to like the idea of active circuitry and there is something appealing about the EMG Hi-Fi approach, especially with modelling and computers being so much a part of what people do with their guitars these days. A good clean noiseless signal that contains all the harmonic signals allows more fro these devices and recorders, effects and such to work with. Similarly, I think there is some potential in the USB guitar. This type of thing is already emerging, but a guitar run from a USB insted of a standard cable would allow for power and signal and perhaps other functions in a studio type of situation. I could imagine a USB to an effects box with a single pickup guitar that the selector switch was used to switch between different modeled sounds and pickup types and positions without getting into the full digital line6 or roland synth kind of thing. Definitely the kind of thing PIC and DSP type devices that were mentioned earlier could have an application for. most DI units and digital fx boxes take the alive raw unpredictable quality out of a cranked guitar tone - which is crazy because it is the most important thing about that kind of tone... And...as you say, that is where the sustainer comes in...it brings back the real responsiveness of the "electric" guitar...it is not simply and amplified guitar but an instrument and sound in it's own right! One potential reason for lack of enthusiasm might be that shredding is coming back again. Shredders never let a note ring long enough to hear the guitars natural tone let alone long enough to hear a sustainer at work I think a lot of people, have a love/hate thing going with the shredders! The problem is that all the technique in the world won't make you musical...there are few who have really been able to rise musically above their abilities. Vai and Satch come to mind perhaps. Of course Hendrix, Beck, Clapton and Page were I guess shredders in their/my time. Part of the problem is that so many people with the shred ethic are playing follow the leader...years of practice can allow people to play like Vai or play Vai songs but can they create and initiate this stuff. The real secret, and the one that even these guys admit to, is to find a voice and material to apply their technique too...they frequently cite people who may technically be inferior as inspiration. I was most impressed with Vai describing the influence of Roy Buchanan on one of his tracks (I think "tender Surrender"). As I recall, he had not previously understood the apparent loose and sloppy timing that Roy would sometimes evoke, till he tried to get that effect. It is incredibly powerful, yet his attempts while good, were not a patch on the real thing. Similarly, EVH had an expression for some of his stuff "falling down stairs and landing on your feet"...a lot of his licks are symetrical patterns and so move outside the key and move in odd groups across the beat...it really is so effective, but more of a feel than something you can precisely practice...it's a part of the artist's voice! Anyway...got to love the shreaders but there is a lot more to music than technique or even songs...a unique voice is certainly something I like to hear on the guitar...perhaps the sustainer will help keep the "life" back in the guitar as it moves into the digital age... pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Problem is that that adding a seperate filter stage would mean at least one more op-amp... So what I really want to do is incorporate some sort of switchable filter into the pre-amp stage - just havn't done it yet. Since you have already six op amps, another two would mean you could use two quads for the same price...just a thought. maybe the monetary price is the same, but in terms of board real estate its not. I think a switchable input cap will be adequate. The mixed mode does highlight a limitation in this new circuit that would not exist if I could do what I defined as my ideal circuit and have seperate independant low and high thresholds. In mixed mode, the low E and A strings have very poor response - I understand the cause and without a re-design, there's not much that can be done about it. I don't think it will be a problem when playing though. I am really starting to like the idea of active circuitry and there is something appealing about the EMG Hi-Fi approach, especially with modelling and computers being so much a part of what people do with their guitars these days. A good clean noiseless signal that contains all the harmonic signals allows more fro these devices and recorders, effects and such to work with. Yes, and one of the best things about my original circuit was that the straight through sound is so clean and strong. I decided to go the other route this time partly to save an op-amp, but also so that if the battery runs out, you can still play. In a phantom/remote powered version I would definately go for a buffered through sound. Similarly, I think there is some potential in the USB guitar. This type of thing is already emerging, but a guitar run from a USB insted of a standard cable would allow for power and signal and perhaps other functions in a studio type of situation. I could imagine a USB to an effects box with a single pickup guitar that the selector switch was used to switch between different modeled sounds and pickup types and positions without getting into the full digital line6 or roland synth kind of thing. Definitely the kind of thing PIC and DSP type devices that were mentioned earlier could have an application for. One downside here for me is that I don't see any standard USB cable coping with the punishment I deal out to my guitar cables - I like to jump around while playing Rock'n'Roll Thats an issue for any system that uses non-standard connectors and/or cables - can it survive a Rock'n'Roll lifestyle ? Anyway...got to love the shreaders but there is a lot more to music than technique or even songs... I think what many many players don't understand is that there's a lot more to technique than speed. Good tone comes from your fingers - its that side of technique that is most difficult to master, and it's there that you find your own voice - playing fast can disguise deficiency in this area up to a point, and thats what a lot of players do.... guys like EVH, Hendrix, Page, Angus young, SRV, Brian May, Malmsteen have/had great technique, their tone was expressive and unique, how fast they could or couldn't play is always going to be secondary.... The problem for many young players is they only realise this when they get to the point where they can play as fast as their Hero after many years of speed drills, only to discover that they still don't sound any good... Unfortunately lots of them think they do sound good cheers Col Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted November 17, 2006 Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 As requested by fookgub, here is a schematic of my latest circuit with readable component values. Col Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fookgub Posted November 17, 2006 Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 Yay! PS: I'm back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted November 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 (edited) Welcome back fookgub...and thanks col...that is much clearer... Had to go to the city for some legal appointment and saw a lovely guitar....ohhhh, honey Of course, you see these things and then immediately think...how am I going to get a sustainer in there It would be one thing to be able to shrink this circuit down enough to fit into a guitar and then find room for a battery...tricky... One idea I alway seem to come back to is those battery boxes that install in the back and flip open...perhaps you could route it a little deeper and put the circuit behind it, or perhaps the switches... On multi pickup guitars you do have the bypasing issues too...that means a pretty big switch body in the control cavity or wherever at the very least... I did discover some interesting switches at one point that were probably made for computers. These are latching 4pdt pushbutton switches with a clear top that illuminate as well...pretty small and mont vertically (deep) which are interesting...Altronics switch...I actually bought a few in different colours and they seem sturdy enough...at $2.95 they are certainly cheaper than a toggle, but whether they would be more convieniant, I'm really not sure...and then you'd have to mount them in some way....hmmmm Even a 4PDT switch on a strat is probably not enough to preserve the original wiring. On my strat the middle pickup is always on but controled by it's own volume control...the bypass switches both the middle and neck pickups on.... Looking again, maybe it would be ok... It is amazing the quality of some cheap guitars these days...the guitar I saw was a new squier strat with 2 post trem and duncan "designed" HB pickup, 22 frets and top loaded pickups (no scratch plate) for a little over A$300, out of indonesia... A little bit of attention to the set up, it would play really well and age nicely with it's natural finish. If people are considering this project, it may well be worth considering such a guitar...given the cost of commercial sustainers and the installation hassles you need to go through anyway, working towards a cheap guitar dedicated to the sustainer may well be cost competitive for the entire project compared to the cost of the sustainer unit itself... pete Christmas is coming....hmmm...washing machine or guitar, washing machine or guitar....hmmmm Edited November 17, 2006 by psw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts