WOLF COMPUTER DIY DID YOU BUILD IT?

[Faldoe]

I have a clone I built years ago that I traced from a real WC I had in my possession at the time. I'll take a look at mine and see if it matches the layout here.

I remember other people had mentioned prior vero layouts not being accurate.

[purpleshoes]

I'm the dude who emailed you a month or two ago asking if there were any pcbs left but they were already sold out - been planning a build on perfboard for ages but finally have the parts/time to get round to it this week. are you looking to find out if the PCB itself is ok or just the circuit?

[eatyourguitar]

I'm the dude who emailed you a month or two ago asking if there were any pcbs left but they were already sold out - been planning a build on perfboard for ages but finally have the parts/time to get round to it this week. are you looking to find out if the PCB itself is ok or just the circuit?

I am in need of information about the circuit and also the PCB. if the PCB is confirmed working then it would prove the circuit I drew is also working. my circuit has a few mods but you don't need to wire them up if you want something closer to the original. there is no downside to putting the bass control in there. you can twist the 100K up effectively taking the 3.3uF cap and 100K pot out of the circuit. the tone control on the output was done quickly without testing so I would like to print information in the build doc telling people to leave it out or telling them what value pot if we leave it in.

if anyone has a working clone on perf, please tell me if you used my schematic or something else.

[eatyourguitar]

electrolytic capacitors are polarized so that would be my primary concern. my second concern would be consistency from one pedal to the next in a production environment. this goes hand and hand with the tolerances %5 poly vs %20 on the electrolytic usually. there is also longevity of the cap. a poly box cap is good for 100 years while an electrolytic cap might not be so lucky. you could buy a "non-polar" also known as a "bi-polar" electrolytic capacitor but if you would go out of your way to find it and pay for it then maybe just keep going and get the high end cap. then after all these considerations there is the issue of temperature stability and moisture resistance. I want my equipment to sound the same in any environment. new designs should not have the problems that old germanium fuzz pedals had.

So it can be used, but you just prefer not to.

Thanks.

you can not substitute polarized caps where there should be a non-polarized cap unless you understand the circuit to the point where you know the DC bias on each side of the cap. this can lead to blown and sometimes even exploding electrolytic caps when installed backwards. you can hack two polarized caps together to make one non-polar electrolytic. it will not sound the same as the poly cap, mostly because of the filter frequency being changed but a little bit because of the different substrate. after a lot of listening tests and laboratory measurements over seven years, I concluded that the frequency response curves have different logarithmic shapes that are fundamentally different. it is not as simple as the value being %20 away from the 3.3uf target. I tested samples with a capacitance meter. the ESR of modern or high quality electrolytic capacitors is much lower than the cheap electrolytic capacitors. my design is spec for a poly box cap from Kemet or wima that has an ESR consistent with poly @ 3.3uF. after people change things, I can't be held responsible for the change in sound. that is not my design.

[eatyourguitar]

I have a clone I built years ago that I traced from a real WC I had in my possession at the time. I'll take a look at mine and see if it matches the layout here.

I remember other people had mentioned prior vero layouts not being accurate.

yes I took this into consideration so I tried not to use the old schematic as much as I relied on the newest boot leg schematics and discussion from FSB



my version 7. I believe this to be incorrect.


my version 8 PCB. tone, fine, bass, punch controls optional.

[BetterOffShred]

I want it

[Fuzzy Lumpkins]

I can't be held responsible for the change in sound.

To be clear to you and anyone reading this, I'm not suggesting holding you responsible for anything.

And to clarify what, judging by your verbose response, you seem to be misunderstanding, I was just curious about your cap specification and whether or not an electrolytic could—not should—be used.

Thanks.

[eatyourguitar]

you can not use an electrolytic cap

[multi_s]

electrolytic caps, a polarizing topic.

XD

[BetterOffShred]

Sometimes I use them for input and output caps..

But generally I also do not prefer them unless dire need and maximum Jonesing for use of the effect outweigh my better senses.

What tapers are those pots? I'll make sure I have them

[eatyourguitar]

everything linear but the volume is audio taper.

you can use electrolytic caps anywhere you have a DC bias and you know where the + side is. the sag control and bias control make it impossible to predict. those things will be moving all over the place when you use the pedal.

[multi_s]

i think in this case though you can pretty safely assume putting the anode on the side where the "c3" text is in the above schematic will be ok though no?

just eyeballing it but say the net that has the base of Q2 and pin 1 of bass pot cannot be higher than ~ .7 VDC right?

and how low can the collector of Q1 really go? 0V? so worst case across C3 and BASS pot in series you have .7 volts of reverse bias?

you could also just put two 6.8uf in series as eyg showed in his picture to get 3.4 uf, close to 3.3.

i am not responsible for how that sounds though.

[eatyourguitar]

i think in this case though you can pretty safely assume putting the anode on the side where the "c3" text is in the above schematic will be ok though no?

just eyeballing it but say the net that has the base of Q2 and pin 1 of bass pot cannot be higher than ~ .7 VDC right?

and how low can the collector of Q1 really go? 0V? so worst case across C3 and BASS pot in series you have .7 volts of reverse bias?

you could also just put two 6.8uf in series as eyg showed in his picture to get 3.4 uf, close to 3.3.

i am not responsible for how that sounds though.

[Fuzzy Lumpkins]

i think in this case though you can pretty safely assume putting the anode on the side where the "c3" text is in the above schematic will be ok though no?

Yep.

It's not just a "safe" assumption, but an obvious one, hence my initial curiosity.

[purpleshoes]

I'm the dude who emailed you a month or two ago asking if there were any pcbs left but they were already sold out - been planning a build on perfboard for ages but finally have the parts/time to get round to it this week. are you looking to find out if the PCB itself is ok or just the circuit?

I am in need of information about the circuit and also the PCB. if the PCB is confirmed working then it would prove the circuit I drew is also working. my circuit has a few mods but you don't need to wire them up if you want something closer to the original. there is no downside to putting the bass control in there. you can twist the 100K up effectively taking the 3.3uF cap and 100K pot out of the circuit. the tone control on the output was done quickly without testing so I would like to print information in the build doc telling people to leave it out or telling them what value pot if we leave it in.

if anyone has a working clone on perf, please tell me if you used my schematic or something else.

Ok no problem, I didn't realise earlier that the circuit might not be correct so I'm gonna try breadboarding it first and see what happens. need to order a breadboard now hehe
(why didn't I already have one? damn )

I drilled out the enclosure already for a version without the fine sag pot, fingers crossed it all works! will keep you posted