ilovefuzz.com

Damn this looks like its gonna be awesome!

Wow, this thing looks NUTS!!! subscribed!

Pladask wrote:Some progress!

This. Is. Fantastic!

Where do I sign up?

My phone broke so I don't have photos to show for it, but the hardware prototype is assembled and the admin code is working. Satisfying to flip the lights with the CLOCK knob! Hope to test audio code later this week.

Hardware observation:
As with the previous version of the pedal the LOOP/REGEN pot gives the option for either buffer looping at MID <-> MAX (similar to the FABRIKAT LOOP parameter), and regeneration/feedback at MID <-> MIN. Now the additional (left) footswitch will only allow to MAX the LOOP/REGEN knob which yields maximum buffer looping. Ideally I'd like to be able to select if the knob should be set to either maximum feedback or looping when the footswitch is activated, but I don't believe there is a good way to implement the functionality and the necessary interface information without complicating the build. Unless some very very compelling arguments are presented I will keep the hardware as it is.

Pladask wrote:My phone broke so I don't have photos to show for it, but the hardware prototype is assembled and the admin code is working. Satisfying to flip the lights with the CLOCK knob! Hope to test audio code later this week.

Hardware observation:
As with the previous version of the pedal the LOOP/REGEN pot gives the option for either buffer looping at MID <-> MAX (similar to the FABRIKAT LOOP parameter), and regeneration/feedback at MID <-> MIN. Now the additional (left) footswitch will only allow to MAX the LOOP/REGEN knob which yields maximum buffer looping. Ideally I'd like to be able to select if the knob should be set to either maximum feedback or looping when the footswitch is activated, but I don't believe there is a good way to implement the functionality and the necessary interface information without complicating the build. Unless some very very compelling arguments are presented I will keep the hardware as it is.

Thinking about the way either side would be used - is there a way to have that switch work the way the bypass switch works with different results from press and hold than press and release? Press and release could max the knob for holding the loop. Press and hold could go to min to ramp up to max feedback. Surely thats a completely different set of functions than just changing bypass state but it would be cool.

Audio code tested and working. Will need some minor refinements. A happy mistake happened with the "both lower and upper octave" code. It's very glitchy, but kinda crazy and cool. Might keep it as is. Will have a lot of office work time the next 2 weeks so aiming to have the PCBA and pre-drill design files ready this month. I'll order parts this Autumn for 50 units. However unless we have a big break through with the FAB production these wont be available until early 2020.

"very glitchy, but kinda crazy and cool"

Pladask wrote:Had some leftover time on a trip recently and decided to revisit this thing. Haven't tested anything yet, but I think both the code and graphics look promising. Hopefully I'll be able to test it some time this Autumn. Below is the current graphic displayed with a gerber viewer (won't be so colorful). The red sections would be exposed FR4 backlit by LEDs.


The system clock parameter doubles as a program selector when in momentary bypass. Additional footswitch to maximize the looping. Ditching the grain direction switch and instead offering both forward and backward granular delay/stretching. Random vibrato (MOD) to make it more lively. The core schematic for this thing is laughably simple so it was fun to see how much functionality I could squeeze into it without adding too much extra circuitry.

Feedback is welcome

Minor critique: the symbols for octave selection should be -/+ rather than ÷/+ ? My brain is melting a bit at the idea of a division based octave.

Octave effects have been called Octave Dividers for decades. Divide a frequency by 2, get an octave down.

Fair point! But then shouldn’t we pick a system? Subtraction/addition or division/multiplication?

elefontpress wrote:Minor critique: the symbols for octave selection should be -/+ rather than ÷/+ ? My brain is melting a bit at the idea of a division based octave.

Good point. I think I intended for a minus sign, but have ended up with a division sign for some reason. How bout changing them to up and down arrows?

In elementary school I'm pretty sure we used ÷ for minus and / for division. I have no idea why. Maybe it was easier to read? Norway be crazy?

UglyCasanova wrote:In elementary school I'm pretty sure we used ÷ for minus and / for division. I have no idea why. Maybe it was easier to read? Norway be crazy?

UC and his false memories ..but I'll change it to something more internationally accepted