MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index
 FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 
WIGGLING 'LITE' IN GUEST MODE

Juno 106 Chorus Module for Eurorack
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Music Tech DIY  
Author Juno 106 Chorus Module for Eurorack
logicgate
This is another project that was in my backburner, I'm loosing hair already trying to make the best routing and make it fit nicely in a 10cmx10cm PCB:




In my latest attempt I was able to squeeze it in a 9.7cm x 11cm PCB, almost there!






I was thinking about using an attenuverter to control the output:

at noon it would be chorus I + II

FCCW chorus I

FCW chorus II


Gonna take a little while, though. I'm still waiting for parts, around here it takes fucking long to get stuff, and I'm gonna use almost all original components.
logicgate
The forum is very laggy today, I can't edit my post and the images are not showing....
horstronic
Very nice! Do you plan to do boards for this?
logicgate
horstronic wrote:
Very nice! Do you plan to do boards for this?



Yes definetely.

Once it's done, and if there's enough interest, I'll offer a PCB run.


Cheers!
medbot
Wow, that's a busy looking board woah looking forward to seeing how this one turns out for sure.
lintfresh
Cool! applause
clusterchord
interested in this module...

if you can, add wet/dry control. many times, we just need a touch of chorus whilst retaining the full bandwidth of the source signal. its much more usable setup than just on or off.


also a 2-pos fixed HPF affecting whats fed to the chorus circuit, would be fantastic. for example 0/80/160Hz etc. it would make it much more versatile being usable for bass/low mid sounds, male vocals, things like that.. de facto a "bass chorus" setting of sorts.

just a thought. ..
Luka
i tried to find decent price mn3009 when fixing my juno and struggled finding real ones. all the ebay ones were duds.

if you are designing this maybe redesign for a in-production bbd like cool audio clones
logicgate
@Luka

This guy sold 139 MN3009 already, has 0 negative feedback. If you check the positive feedback, all MN3009 buyers confirm it's the real deal

http://www.ebay.com/itm/150955355461


@clusterchord

The idea is nice, but there's no way I can fit ANYTHING else in the PCB lol


I believe it's easier to achieve what you want by feeding an already HPassed signal into it? For dry/wet, you can use a stackable to feed the original signal into a mixer and the copy to the chorus module and from chorus to mixer, and adjust to taste?
Jdavidk
Any updates on the boards? Am very interested in this.
logicgate
Jdavidk wrote:
Any updates on the boards? Am very interested in this.



still cooking slowly.

I noticed that I can omit more parts from the original circuit that won't make any difference so, i think that the board will be a bit smaller.
Check Mate
This is just what I've been hoping and waiting for. I'm definately interested and you can count me in.
Keep it up! nanners
abelovesfun
Me too. Does it add noise like the juno chorus?
LektroiD
I'd be in for one of these with a panel...

The dry/wet option would be a welcome addition too, if possible...
malnatim
yes please!
livefreela
i'd for sure be in for a pcb / panel set - i'd been giving some thought to trying to render out the gligli juno chorus circuit for some time, but my skills are dodgy at best, so this looks rad!
logicgate
@abelovesfun

"Me too. Does it add noise like the juno chorus?"

It's quiet I think, didn't notice any noise that would impair the sound when I had it on breadboard, and I'm one of those guys that get very annoyed with hums, etc..
Isn't this "noise issue" something that is very random? Not all 106 are noisy, I believe there's something to do with the build or parts.


@LeKtroiD

Yes the wet/dry will def be there, there will be two outputs (chorus I and II), each with it's own wet/dry control.
Leonard de Leonard
"Yes the wet/dry will def be there, there will be two outputs (chorus I and II), each with it's own wet/dry control."
Sweet! w00t
memorygardens
any way this would work for motm? i love my juno chorus
Isaiah
I'm interested in a PCB, please.
Any idea of the board dimensions yet?
abelovesfun
Ok cool. Maybe it's bad luck, but every juno I've touched (5 between 6s, 60s, 106's, alphas, and my current hs) gets noisy with the chorus. Maybe they just needed new caps. I'd love to buy a pcb! I'm motm so I'll have to figure out my own panel.
Suf-fuD
I'm also very interested in this....smile
technotron


Sign me up for one! smile Do you plan on making front panels as well?
minisystem
Here's another Juno chorus clone:
http://gliglisynth.blogspot.fr/2014/05/new-diy-project-standalone-juno -60.html

I was wondering what, if anything, needs to be done to make it work with 12V?
logicgate
@technotron

no, I suck at panels! lol


@minisystem

Not much, really. All the ICs works with 12v, the only thing that needs to be done is to bring the signal level down before going into the circuit and then up again when exiting. Given that the MNs are somewhat sensitive I wouldn't feed them with a signal too hot.
ablearcher
Once I used my Juno 6 in a band, leaving the chorus on all the time. It was so noisy that it sounded like the ocean. We listened to it so long that we named ourselves JUNOCEAN. Very soothing.

I would go for a euro version.
esbjerg
Very interested too!
oootini
interested for sure!
Jdavidk
logicgate wrote:
Jdavidk wrote:
Any updates on the boards? Am very interested in this.



still cooking slowly.

I noticed that I can omit more parts from the original circuit that won't make any difference so, i think that the board will be a bit smaller.


Fantastic. The chorus on my 106 has no noise at all for the first 15 minutes or so of use, but slowly the noise level ramps up. I suspect it's due to heat building up in the case. But then again i should probably recap it at some point....
puzo
all loks good, i'm in for a pcb and panel, cheers
ben_hex
I'm very interested. Full set up for euro would do it for me if at all possible (PCB/panel and kit or at least the essential parts).

Although at the size it might not fit in most euro cases? seriously, i just don't get it
logicgate
@benhex

Hi mate. It will definetely fit in a euro case, but not skiff.

I'm only making a PCB, no panels or kits...
Randy
Euro version would be cool but I'm thinking I might be more interested in a standalone version for my Rhodes.

Randy
aladan
I'd love two PCBs too, please. I have some MN3009s hidden away, just have to chase up some MN3101s to go with.
ben_hex
I saw you said no panels logicgate wondering if anyone else is up for some. Or if we drum up enough interest for grayscale. I can try and design a panel if that's any good. It would just be photoshop though, so someone who can make sure measurements are all correct etc. but then who's gonna get a run of panels? Just thinking out loud here.

Any chance of stereo outs?
the bad producer
I think Grayscale would need 100 orders? Maybe Wes can chime in? I use Re:Synthesis for smaller runs, very good quality and anything from 1 to 100 panels can be done, here is an example:

ben_hex
the bad producer that looks great. So if we drum up enough interest and settle on a design then we can for a run.

If I can get final specs for inputs / outputs knobs etc I'll knock something up. Be a rough mock up to start with but worth a shot. Just need to know what's going on it. I'll need help from someone else (the bad producer could that be you?) to finish it off and make sure spacings and all dimensions are correct. But I'm happy to knock up a few designs and see what people think.
the bad producer
Yeah, I'm up for that!
horstronic
I'd be in for a panel too!
logicgate
ben_hex wrote:
the bad producer that looks great. So if we drum up enough interest and settle on a design then we can for a run.

If I can get final specs for inputs / outputs knobs etc I'll knock something up. Be a rough mock up to start with but worth a shot. Just need to know what's going on it. I'll need help from someone else (the bad producer could that be you?) to finish it off and make sure spacings and all dimensions are correct. But I'm happy to knock up a few designs and see what people think.



Cool.

You don't need to worry about the spacing and dimensions because you can put the jacks and knobs wherever you want, given that you will need to wire the pots and jacks.

What I have in mind is only two dry/wet pots (chorus I and II), two jacks for the inputs, two jacks for the individual outs (and perhaps one more jack for a summed out I+II), and then, again, this can be done in the panel If desired.
logicgate
Something like this:

ben_hex
cheers logicgate so are the ins an input for each chorus? So effectively we can have 2 separate chorus FX?

Adding a fade to the mixed output would be cool. That doable?
sempervirent
the bad producer wrote:
I think Grayscale would need 100 orders?

More like 15-20. Only a few panels have hit the 100 mark!

Looks like others are open to taking this on, but I'd be glad to do a panel.

Love the old Rolands, the Juno-60 was my first analog synth.

Is the circuit in the 106 the same as the 60?
logicgate
sempervirent wrote:
the bad producer wrote:
I think Grayscale would need 100 orders?

More like 15-20. Only a few panels have hit the 100 mark!

Looks like others are open to taking this on, but I'd be glad to do a panel.

Love the old Rolands, the Juno-60 was my first analog synth.

Is the circuit in the 106 the same as the 60?



I checked both service manuals and they seem to be exactly the same.

Your panels are great! When I finish the layout I give you a shout.
ben_hex
Be great for you to take it on sempervirent.
acidbob
Need to keep my eyes on this thread ! hihi

Please put me down for 3x PCB's and 2x faceplates.
LektroiD
If this goes ahead, put me down for one PCB and a panel... Many thanks smile
ben_hex
logicgate So is that definite? 1 input for each chorus (so 2 ins) and inidividual outs plus a mixed out? And dry wet for each in/chorus type/out?

What size are people thinking for this? 4HP? All in a line vertical or wider with knobs and jacks next to each other?

What text do people want on there? Other than labels for jacks and knobs?

Anything you want on there logicgate?
logicgate
ben_hex wrote:
logicgate So is that definite? 1 input for each chorus (so 2 ins) and inidividual outs plus a mixed out? And dry wet for each in/chorus type/out?

What size are people thinking for this? 4HP? All in a line vertical or wider with knobs and jacks next to each other?

What text do people want on there? Other than labels for jacks and knobs?

Anything you want on there logicgate?


Yep that's it. No more, no less.


As for the width, the smaller possible.


I was picturing "Juno Chorus" using the same font as the one in the synth.
ftr
Quote:
If this goes ahead, put me down for one PCB and a panel...


Same for me, absolutely love the Juno chorus.

Cheers.
Isaiah
Four MN3009s arrived in the post today.
Their destiny awaits...
LektroiD
How many MN3009's are required per board?
logicgate
LektroiD wrote:
How many MN3009's are required per board?


You will need:

2 x MN3009
2 x MN3101


All NPN Transistors are 2SC1815 or 2SC2603

All PNP Transistors are 2SA 1015 or 2SA 1115


If you wanna count how many are needed just check the service manual. I got a bag of 50 for each, just to be on the safe side (It's on page 15 I think, look for the "chorus board" page)

http://kiwitechnics.com/index_htm_files/Roland%20Juno-106%20Service%20 Manual.pdf

Of course you can use 2N**** but I'm keeping faithful to the original components (so if you use 2Ns you gonna have to bend legs)
logicgate
The only thing that needs to be tested before commiting to the final PCB layout is whether this part of the circuit is needed or not, I'm gonna breadboard it this weekend to find out, I have no clue of the purpose of this (marked in RED):




I already identified the MUTE circuit (chorus ON/OFF) which is not needed for this module, nor the "bypass" signal path. If I can cut out this other part too, I can make the PCB way smaller.
horstronic
logicgate wrote:
The only thing that needs to be tested before commiting to the final PCB layout is whether this part of the circuit is needed or not, I'm gonna breadboard it this weekend to find out, I have no clue of the purpose of this (marked in RED):




I already identified the MUTE circuit (chorus ON/OFF) which is not needed for this module, nor the "bypass" signal path. If I can cut out this other part too, I can make the PCB way smaller.


thumbs up

Btw, does anybody know a good source for MN3009, preferably in europe?
I can only find them on ebay and I'm not quite shure if I want to risk that...
Or is there a good replacement that is easier to get? Couldn't find any.

Edit: Nevermind, I just found your comment about that ebay guy.
the bad producer
Smallbear have the MN3101
Nordcore
logicgate wrote:
purpose of this (marked in RED):


Looks like it is a power on/off mute, so the output keeps quit (no *THUMP*) when you switch on/off the synth.

Tr10 powers up the supply of IC6 delayed by C24/R76.
TR9 and TR7 shorten the output during power up/down, so the output stays quit.
The part behind D7 drives the mute-transistors during power up, TR9 (and its surrounding parts ) during power down. TR9 starts to conduct when the positive supply ramps downwards, C18 delivers base current for TR7/9 then.
acidbob
Maybe a group buy on the IC's could save some money and hassle?

If you look at this pedal you might get some inspiration for the faceplate graphics?

http://effectivywonder.com/?product=juno-chorus

By the way, this pedal doesn't use original components, and does not use 256 stage
logicgate
Taking a look at the pedal you posted I remembered a mod that can be done using a switch.

We can have a switch on the panel for "factory" setting and "hack" setting. In the "hack" position you can control the rate of the LFOs with a potentiometer.

@nordcore

Thanx for the description, mate! So it seems we can cut this part too, not needed. Cool!
jumunius
I just noticed this thread. A couple years ago I modded my Juno 106 chorus to add a "Chorus III/IV" pot, which boosted the modulation level to the extreme -- resulting in a very syrupy chorus. (I then badly mangled my voice board and it's been dead ever since so I can't post examples. Voice board has no relation to the chorus -- this was completely unrelated foolishness on my part.)

I haven't looked at your schematic but my mod would replace the original 106's R8 (2.2M) with a 2M pot in series with a 100k resistor. When at max resistance, the performance would be the same as the original Juno, but as you turn the knob the modulation gets extreme.

I don't know the theory behind this and can't remember how I figured it out (dumb luck?) but I'd recommend it to the adventurous. So long as nobody concludes that it will cause your machine to smoke after 30 minutes.
jumunius
abelovesfun wrote:
Ok cool. Maybe it's bad luck, but every juno I've touched (5 between 6s, 60s, 106's, alphas, and my current hs) gets noisy with the chorus. Maybe they just needed new caps. I'd love to buy a pcb! I'm motm so I'll have to figure out my own panel.


Recapping didn't help mine. (Had the same issue but was unable to resolve it.) Some people blame this on old MN3009s but I don't know if that's reliable.
logicgate
jumunius wrote:
I just noticed this thread. A couple years ago I modded my Juno 106 chorus to add a "Chorus III/IV" pot, which boosted the modulation level to the extreme -- resulting in a very syrupy chorus. (I then badly mangled my voice board and it's been dead ever since so I can't post examples.)

I haven't looked at your schematic but my mod would replace the original 106's R8 (2.2M) with a 2M pot in series with a 100k resistor. When at max resistance, the performance would be the same as the original Juno, but as you turn the knob the modulation gets extreme.

I don't know the theory behind this and can't remember how I figured it out (dumb luck?) but I'd recommend it to the adventurous. So long as nobody concludes that it will cause your machine to smoke after 30 minutes.



You have to replace R3 with a 1M pot, and R8 with 1M. So, the best is to keep the original values on the PCB, and using a switch we can swap between "factory" and "hack".
jumunius
logicgate wrote:
You have to replace R3 with a 1M pot, and R8 with 1M. So, the best is to keep the original values on the PCB, and using a switch we can swap between "factory" and "hack".


Another option is a switchable pot in parallel with the resistor, rather than using a separate switch. I also found interesting results using a momentary switch to trigger the extreme setting -- more of a niche use but it you could play little rhythms that affected the modulation depth.

At any rate I was kind of sad to have lost this as soon as I made it, and maybe someday can build this board to try to get it back. (Not building much at the moment however.)

But I'd love it if someone tried it out and found a good use for it.
acidbob
Cv input for the LFO rate could be useful for some sounds.
Sounds with long release and an envelope to the LFO rate,

Anyway, just an idea. Don't know how useful it would be in the long run?

I also like the idea of just have the two settings, and wet/dry
acidbob
Dont know if you have seen this project.

Sounds great

http://gliglisynth.blogspot.com.es/2014/05/new-diy-project-standalone- juno-60.html
logicgate
@acidbob

Yep, I checked when you first posted. It's basically what I'm doing, but definetely gonna make the PCB at least half of that size, we don't need the mute circuit.

CV input for the LFO would require a lot more modding, and definetely would make the PCB bigger. Wanna keep this on the simple side thumbs up
acidbob
Yes definetely a good idea, no reason to make things too complicated and expensive
ben_hex
So this is rough looking but dimensions are to scale. Here's my first panel mock up ... thoughts? hmmm.....

sammy123
I like it.
logicgate
Very cool, Ben!!

I think that If you use roman numerals it would look even better! But it's just my personal preference.
acidbob
It looks great applause
medbot
Have you tried one with the inputs at the bottom too? Less spaghetti to deal with then.
ben_hex
Thought I'd responded and posted these.

Here's a I and II design and also jacks moved.

Thoughts?


sammy123
Knobs on top for sure.
Check Mate
I like the second one better, too!
ben_hex
Check Mate wrote:
I like the second one better, too!


Yeah me too. Any adjustments anyone? Knobs a bit higher, jacks spread out more? It's only rough but hopefully something we can work worth and get some panels done.
Jdavidk
Looks fantastic. How about a blue/red stripe across the top?
ben_hex
Well if people are happy with the design I'm happy to go with it.

Colour I think will add a lot of cost to the panels ... but I don't really know. I can add a band of colour if people want and it's doable.

the bad producer would you be cool to check measurements and things and just firm things up with me? Then we can go with your suggestion for a small run?
acidbob
Looks super fly, I am down with the second one smile
Great job

Stripes is not a must for me
jorsteinwiener
Just wanna say that I'm interested in this too! I'm game for one or maybe two PCB + panel sets.
LektroiD
Loving the 2nd panel.

I always thought the Juno chorus was mono in, stereo out, or is there two of these circuits inside the Juno?
ben_hex
There's certainly room for stereo outs on the panel. If its in the circuit I'll change the panel design for it.
LektroiD
ben_hex wrote:
There's certainly room for stereo outs on the panel. If its in the circuit I'll change the panel design for it.


Then you would need to have 3 stereo pairs for each of the chorus variations, unless you use a 3-way switch, with left & right positions for I & II, and the centre position for both...
logicgate
panels look awesome, but the one with all the jacks at bottom looks better.


It is mono in and stereo out.


The two inputs are just a passive mixer so you can plug in two sound sources and both will be present at chorus I and II outs.

The only difference between the two choruses is the LFO speed.
ben_hex
LektroiD huh? It would be Chorus 1 in, Chorus 2 in, Chorus 1 stereo out, Chorus 2 stereo out, Mixed out stereo. So 8 jacks on the bottom. Is that what you meant?

logicgate So where are the stereo outs then? The original image you shared was just mono outs. 1 in, dry/wet level 1 out. Then same again for chorus 2 and then a mixed output with both inputs and both chorus outputs present?

... Let's firm up what's actually happen with ins and outs and then I'll adjust the panel.
logicgate
ben_hex wrote:
LektroiD huh? It would be Chorus 1 in, Chorus 2 in, Chorus 1 stereo out, Chorus 2 stereo out, Mixed out stereo. So 8 jacks on the bottom. Is that what you meant?

logicgate So where are the stereo outs then? The original image you shared was just mono outs. 1 in, dry/wet level 1 out. Then same again for chorus 2 and then a mixed output with both inputs and both chorus outputs present?

... Let's firm up what's actually happen with ins and outs and then I'll adjust the panel.



I was checking back the pages and I can't believe why I posted the panel like that lol lol ! I must have been drunk...

Well, it is mono in and stereo out. I'm sorry if I made some confusion...

The wet/dry control for each chorus is definetely possible, though.

Also, it is possible to divide the chorus in two separate units (chorus I and II)


So, what can be done is:

Keep the panel as you designed and send a copy of IN 1 to switching lug of IN 2, so when nothing is connected you have signal on both outputs.

EDIT:

Well, I think it's not wrong to call it stereo right? I mean, you have two outputs (chorus I + II), if you connect one to LEFT and other to RIGHT you have stereo.
ben_hex
Ah so it's not stereo from the chorus circuit. Just a case of two outputs you could pan left and right.

So this is right ...

Input 1 to chorus 1 and chorus 1 just has one output.
Input 2 to chorus 2 and chorus 2 just has one output.

What are the knobs originally then? I thought they were dry wet knobs? But as you said above just input 1 level and input 2 level and both go to both chorus 1 and 2. So we could just have one input?

Where does the stereo on a Juno come from then if not the chorus?
logicgate
The wet/dry pots are extra, they are not in the original circuit and it's easy to to. There are no level pots.

From what I gather, the Juno is mono and it's only stereo if you use the chorus.


So, for instance, if you use a module like pittsburgh outs and connect chorus I to left and II to right, you gonna get a wide stereo signal, with different LFO sweeps on each one.
ben_hex
logicgate wrote:

The two inputs are just a passive mixer so you can plug in two sound sources and both will be present at chorus I and II outs.


No level pots? What are these quote above then? Mixer/level pots?
logicgate
ben_hex wrote:
logicgate wrote:

The two inputs are just a passive mixer so you can plug in two sound sources and both will be present at chorus I and II outs.


No level pots? What are these quote above then? Mixer/level pots?



The passive mixer is just the sum of the two signals.




This is one option. The other option would be sending input 1 to chorus I and in 2 to chorus 2, the module would behave as two separate chorus. But you can send a copy of in 1 to the switching lug of of in 2 then you can have the signal being fed into both chorus, the same as in the Juno.
logicgate
Or, to keep it even more simple we can ditch the wet/dry part and leave it 100% wet, and then using a mixer and stackables you can "dose" the effect...

I was gonna use this circuit for the dry/wet feature, looks very simple:

logicgate
There's also this one:

logicgate
And the most simple solution would be using a dual gang pot, wiring the dry or wet signal in reverse.

But all needs to be tested first, nothing is final. Wait til I get a final prototype.
Isaiah
Personally, I would prefer the Dry/Wet Mix to be included.
Isaiah
Couldn't you use a single pot arrangement like this?:
http://www.cgs.synth.net/modules/cgs81_mixer.html

The only difference is that the link above is for panning.
It would need to be adapted slightly for crossfading.

Just to clarify:
In I
In II (the builder might decide to normalise the In I signal to appear when no cable is insterted at In II)
Out I
Out II
Out I & II
Mix I
Mix II
Correct?
logicgate
@Isaiah

Yep that's exactly it, but there's no need for active mixer or crossfader. Unless, of course, you want to mod it and add pan.




In this pic are the two "dry/wet" solutions I will test.
LektroiD
ben_hex wrote:
LektroiD huh? It would be Chorus 1 in, Chorus 2 in, Chorus 1 stereo out, Chorus 2 stereo out, Mixed out stereo. So 8 jacks on the bottom. Is that what you meant?

... Let's firm up what's actually happen with ins and outs and then I'll adjust the panel.


I was thinking of the original 106 arrangement, where there is a switch for chorus 1 & chorus 2 (and chorus 1+2 when both switches are enabled), but using a 3-position toggle switch instead for the panel. Also on the original Juno, it doesn't matter which chorus is enabled, they all go to the same stereo output pair. To have many separate jacks would surely make it convoluted and unnecessary.

However, if what I read is right, and that the only difference between each chorus type is the LFO speed, then why not just make that variable, like on the Juno 1/2, or even better add an external modulation input for some really interesting variations.
logicgate
LektroiD wrote:
ben_hex wrote:
LektroiD huh? It would be Chorus 1 in, Chorus 2 in, Chorus 1 stereo out, Chorus 2 stereo out, Mixed out stereo. So 8 jacks on the bottom. Is that what you meant?

... Let's firm up what's actually happen with ins and outs and then I'll adjust the panel.


I was thinking of the original 106 arrangement, where there is a switch for chorus 1 & chorus 2 (and chorus 1+2 when both switches are enabled), but using a 3-position toggle switch instead for the panel. Also on the original Juno, it doesn't matter which chorus is enabled, they all go to the same stereo output pair. To have many separate jacks would surely make it convoluted and unnecessary.

However, if what I read is right, and that the only difference between each chorus type is the LFO speed, then why not just make that variable, like on the Juno 1/2, or even better add an external modulation input for some really interesting variations.


There is no need for buttons/switches because we don't need to turn the chorus on, it's always on, you just need to insert the signal.

Adding external CV control would require a lot of modding, not suitable for this project.
LektroiD
logicgate wrote:
LektroiD wrote:
ben_hex wrote:
LektroiD huh? It would be Chorus 1 in, Chorus 2 in, Chorus 1 stereo out, Chorus 2 stereo out, Mixed out stereo. So 8 jacks on the bottom. Is that what you meant?

... Let's firm up what's actually happen with ins and outs and then I'll adjust the panel.


I was thinking of the original 106 arrangement, where there is a switch for chorus 1 & chorus 2 (and chorus 1+2 when both switches are enabled), but using a 3-position toggle switch instead for the panel. Also on the original Juno, it doesn't matter which chorus is enabled, they all go to the same stereo output pair. To have many separate jacks would surely make it convoluted and unnecessary.

However, if what I read is right, and that the only difference between each chorus type is the LFO speed, then why not just make that variable, like on the Juno 1/2, or even better add an external modulation input for some really interesting variations.


There is no need for buttons/switches because we don't need to turn the chorus on, it's always on, you just need to insert the signal.

Adding external CV control would require a lot of modding, not suitable for this project.


Of course you'd want it permanently on, that's why I suggested a 3 way toggle switch.
Position 1 = chorus I
Position 2 = both I + II
Position 3 = chorus II
logicgate
LektroiD wrote:
logicgate wrote:
LektroiD wrote:
ben_hex wrote:
LektroiD huh? It would be Chorus 1 in, Chorus 2 in, Chorus 1 stereo out, Chorus 2 stereo out, Mixed out stereo. So 8 jacks on the bottom. Is that what you meant?

... Let's firm up what's actually happen with ins and outs and then I'll adjust the panel.


I was thinking of the original 106 arrangement, where there is a switch for chorus 1 & chorus 2 (and chorus 1+2 when both switches are enabled), but using a 3-position toggle switch instead for the panel. Also on the original Juno, it doesn't matter which chorus is enabled, they all go to the same stereo output pair. To have many separate jacks would surely make it convoluted and unnecessary.

However, if what I read is right, and that the only difference between each chorus type is the LFO speed, then why not just make that variable, like on the Juno 1/2, or even better add an external modulation input for some really interesting variations.


There is no need for buttons/switches because we don't need to turn the chorus on, it's always on, you just need to insert the signal.

Adding external CV control would require a lot of modding, not suitable for this project.


Of course you'd want it permanently on, that's why I suggested a 3 way toggle switch.
Position 1 = chorus I
Position 2 = both I + II
Position 3 = chorus II


Oh I see, sorry!

So you want only one switchable output? dunno...
LektroiD
logicgate wrote:
LektroiD wrote:
logicgate wrote:
LektroiD wrote:
ben_hex wrote:
LektroiD huh? It would be Chorus 1 in, Chorus 2 in, Chorus 1 stereo out, Chorus 2 stereo out, Mixed out stereo. So 8 jacks on the bottom. Is that what you meant?

... Let's firm up what's actually happen with ins and outs and then I'll adjust the panel.


I was thinking of the original 106 arrangement, where there is a switch for chorus 1 & chorus 2 (and chorus 1+2 when both switches are enabled), but using a 3-position toggle switch instead for the panel. Also on the original Juno, it doesn't matter which chorus is enabled, they all go to the same stereo output pair. To have many separate jacks would surely make it convoluted and unnecessary.

However, if what I read is right, and that the only difference between each chorus type is the LFO speed, then why not just make that variable, like on the Juno 1/2, or even better add an external modulation input for some really interesting variations.


There is no need for buttons/switches because we don't need to turn the chorus on, it's always on, you just need to insert the signal.

Adding external CV control would require a lot of modding, not suitable for this project.


Of course you'd want it permanently on, that's why I suggested a 3 way toggle switch.
Position 1 = chorus I
Position 2 = both I + II
Position 3 = chorus II


Oh I see, sorry!

So you want only one switchable output? dunno...


Would it be possible to use a double pole switch to have a stereo pair for each type? Assuming there will be stereo outs on this module. I was just thinking of doing away with so many jacks, and at the same time, retaining the feel of the original Juno chorus (sort of)...
ben_hex
Unless the circuit is mono in stereo out, or whatever but actual stero. Not just two of the same out or one chorus left and one right there's no point tagging stereo on.

I would be happy with one stereo out and a switch. Or one stereo out and passive level pots for both chorus 1 and 2 going to the final output.

I've always been happy with the chorus sound on the 60 and 106 with no control over chorus rate. However it's modular and would be welcome.
Isaiah
The original idea proposed was:

In I
In II
Out I
Out II
Out I + II

I believe that's two independent BBD lines that share an LFO (one BBD line is modulated by the inverted LFO), correct?
If so, that means the above input/output spec would allow:
Stereo in, stereo out (one BBD line per side).
Mono in, stereo out (one BBD line per output).
Mono in, mono out (both BBD lines in parallel).

If those I/O connections are on the PCB, you could wire them to a switch to accommodate most any I/O spec you like.
ben_hex
Looking forward to this getting firmed up and final.
acidbob
Me too smile Would also like to thank you guys for doing all the hard work, it's a dream come true for me
IAMPelican
Im definetely in
nickster
This will be killer when it is ready. Thanks as ever to all involved. nanners
ben_hex
So do we have a final feature set for inputs, outputs and the knobs?

Keen to get the image edited to something nearing a final state.

Also will it fit comfortably behind a 4hp Panel? Will it need holes to mount a bracket?
Royalston
definitely in for this. my Juno's chorus is the best thing about it.
logicgate
ben_hex wrote:
So do we have a final feature set for inputs, outputs and the knobs?

Keen to get the image edited to something nearing a final state.

Also will it fit comfortably behind a 4hp Panel? Will it need holes to mount a bracket?



Isaiah nailed the features a couple of posts back.

Your panel design doesn't need to be changed at all, it will fit perfectly. I have my doubts about being 4HP, though.

I haven't had the time to breadboard it again, still have other stuff I haven't finished and on top of that, normal life problems and stuff. This DIY stuff is a hobby so, it's not on the top of my priority list guys! But hang in there that soon I'll have the final PCB layout, perhaps in a month or two, tops.
ben_hex
logicgate ok great. Soon as you have a final design I'll edit the panel to adjust. 6hp seeming more realistic than 4?
oootini
4hp sure would be nice...

regardless. can't wait for this.
HIMA
please please somebody make one of these for me! we're not worthy
zvonx
Very excited for this. I did a chorus in mod on my 106 but having one for euro would be excellent!
logicgate
Hey guys! Good news. Circuit is confirmed to be working in 12V nicely, however, what I removed was less than I was expecting, there is one part I thought wasn't necessary, but actually was... lol


Anyways, now I can start the final PCB. I recorded some audio just now, but unfortunately I don't have a original Juno to compare...

[soundcloud url="https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/168030283" params="auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_use r=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true" width="100%" height="450" iframe="true" /]



I will record some more stuff later, I'm just implementing the dry/wet feature so I can record a stereo track properly, I could only record the chorus in mono for now.



Also, I wanted to know your thoughts about using SMD resistors and ceramic caps to save space. Gonna leave the electrolytics and ICs as thru hole.
sammy123
I prefer through hole, but am ok with smd.
logicgate
Yeah, I prefer thru hole too, but I'm concerned with space.

I could try arranging the resistors to be standing instead...
Isaiah
Good work! thumbs up

Personally, I would be happy with the resistors standing.
Dave Kendall
Quote:
Yeah, I prefer thru hole too, but I'm concerned with space. I could try arranging the resistors to be standing instead...


With double-sided, plated thru hole PCBs, you can use SM instead of standing resistors if you want. The newest version of the CGS 43 is set up for standing resistors at 0.100 spacing - this allows SM resistors to be used if desired. In an old thread, Muff member Fluxmonkey showed a very neat pic of a build using SM on the CGS43 PCB.

His comments;
Quote:
not designed for it, but this version of the Cascade Mixer can be built w/ SMT resistors... 1201 size, went really quickly.

Best of both worlds perhaps?

cheers,
Dave
LektroiD
If size is a problem, could it be split into 2 boards to make it skiff friendly?

I'd be happy with SMD, much prefer SMD to standing resistors wink
sonicwarrior
logicgate wrote:
Also, I wanted to know your thoughts about using SMD resistors and ceramic caps to save space.

Depends on the size I'd say. 1206 is a piece of cake. 0805 is doable/OKish but everything smaller is a nightmare for me.
logicgate
Alright!

Yeah I was thinking about 1206 too!


I had recorded more stuff now, but wasn't very happy with my results. I'm not very happy with that emmiter follower dry/wet circuit, gonna try tomorrow using only the dual gang pot, and that other send/return circuit, more simple.


One of the chorus has a lower volume than the other, I have to look into that as well. I didn't use the DMM when breadboarding, I just grabbed the resistors from the bags, I used 5% carbon so I believe that the values are all over the place, maybe that's the issue...
logicgate
It just came to me now that OF COURSE the level is lower than the input... I didn't adjust the resistor values in the opamp at the output, duh...


I think I'm gonna add a trimpot to this section so you can adjust to taste.
xahdrez
whoa, hadn't checked in on this in a while and seems I missed a lot of progress! Loving the samples + panel...definitely interested in a set when you come to totting up order numbers!

applause
Isaiah
Perhaps you could use a crossfade circuit from this thread:
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=87903&postdays=0&pos torder=asc&start=10

Two op-amp buffers (one per input), each feeding one end of a pot, the wiper feeding a non-inverting op-amp gain stage.

Looking forward to this!
Thanks for your hard work! thumbs up
merretich
i haven't got too much experience with DIY stuff, just getting into it. Ive built a few kits and now am gonna get some more practice with the freq. central stuff.
when scrolling through this thread, i noticed, that it might be a little hard f as first projects. What do you guys think?
Actually id really like to solder a chorus as well.
merretich
i haven't got too much experience with DIY stuff, just getting into it. Ive built a few kits and now am gonna get some more practice with the freq. central stuff.
when scrolling through this thread, i noticed, that it might be a little hard f as first projects. What do you guys think?
Actually id really like to solder a chorus as well.
gelder
i would love to have crack one of these too!
logicgate
@Isaiah

After testing both transistor based blender circuits, I came to the conclusion that I will have to take the opamp route. As you can see in the audio below, the blend works fine, the problem is that at noon position (50% wet) both signals are weak:

[soundcloud url="https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/168141188" params="auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_use r=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true" width="100%" height="450" iframe="true" /]


I used the J3RK crossfader I have here to simulate the wet/dry feature and at noon position the signals doesn't loose strenght so, I will test the circuit you mentioned, using a TL074 perhaps will do the trick.


@merretich

For a beginner I believe this is a very ambitious project, but you could try. You need a good DMM and an oscilloscope, at least...
logicgate
Oh yeah, that crossfader circuit worked beautifully!! The trade off is two TL074 and 24 resistors. Check below, I will be obligated to choose this one lol , sounds very good, and the level is kept consistent, perhaps one more resistor adjustment for the 100% wet to be as loud as the input, but I think it's not that necessary:


[soundcloud url="https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/168158707" params="auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_use r=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true" width="100%" height="450" iframe="true" /]


What do you guys think?
ben_hex
I'd much prefer the 100% wet output to be as loud as the input.
logicgate
ben_hex wrote:
I'd much prefer the 100% wet output to be as loud as the input.



Yep, but what do you perceive by listening to the last audio demo? By looking at the audio file you can see that there are some peaks that matches the input level. The thing is that, due to the sweep, there will be cancelling frequencies.

There's no much difference I think, after listening to it a couple of times...
ben_hex
I only listening quietly on iPad speakers so haven't checked the audio out properly yet. Just a general response. If the perceived volume is roughly the same then it's good for me. Actual rms and peaks I know will differ due to modulation. But if the output isn't noticeable quieter then all is good. I habe a few modules that are really obviously quieter than input, don't mind so much but nicer if roughly the same.
LektroiD
logicgate wrote:
Oh yeah, that crossfader circuit worked beautifully!! The trade off is two TL074 and 24 resistors. Check below, I will be obligated to choose this one lol , sounds very good, and the level is kept consistent, perhaps one more resistor adjustment for the 100% wet to be as loud as the input, but I think it's not that necessary:


[soundcloud url="https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/168158707" params="auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_use r=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true" width="100%" height="450" iframe="true" /]


What do you guys think?


Why the need for a cross fader? The effect will only ever need to be a 50/50 mix with the dry signal, wet signal alone will lose the full effect as it needs the dry signal to modulate with, you can hear this clearly in the demos. I personally would just use a basic pot attenuator to bring in the wet until both dry & wet are at 50/50. No need to over complicate the circuitry with cross faders.

The only other thing that this would benefit from is variable LFO. Seems a shame to have anything fixed in the modular world.
Isaiah
I had a quick listen through my eye-phone's speakers as I don't have any headphones with me at the moment.

Could you explain what is going on in the 3rd Soundcloud link please?
I'm not sure if I heard some clipping or filter modulation...
Isaiah
LektroiD
Actually, that's a good point about fading from dry to a 50:50 mix.
But then again, with a full wet signal, each modulated BBD line can be used as a vibrato.

It would be nice if the PCB had pads to wire a LFO Frequency pot.
logicgate
@Lektroid

I myself want to keep things very simple, but TBH, out of the 3 blender circuits I tested, the crossfader had the smoothest response from dry to wet, and the levels are consistent.

The FET blender was good, but at 50% 50% the level is very low. I can try make it louder by augmenting the gain of the wet signal (At the output opamp), let's see if it makes things right.

The FET blender is very simple, 3 resistors, 1 FET and 1 cap...


@Isaiah

What part of the audio, exactly? The audio is only 1 oscillator fed into the chorus, and straight to the output module.

I will sketch two PCB ideas, one with the switch for hack and factory, hack position would be able to control the LFO frequency with a pot.

I will experiment here with injecting external LFO signals right into the point where the LFO modulates the chorus, perhaps using a switching jack can do the trick, this would eliminate the switch, which will take more space, too.
logicgate
Good news!!!

I just tried to modulate the chorus using a signal straight from a Doepfer LFO and it worked! In fact, it even needed a bit of amplification, but I just used the extra channel on the opamp that is already part of the circuit!!!

I modulated with different waves and envelopes and got some very interesting results!

Gonna record something to post here in a few.
Isaiah
logicgate
I'll listen again on headphones when I get home and will let you know.
Maybe the "clipping" was a result of listening on my phone's speakers.

The crossfade circuit definitely has the smoothest transition.
It might use more components, but why cut corners so close to the finish line? hihi

Very pleased to hear that an external CV can modulate the BBDs!
An external CV input (internal LFO connected via a switching jack) would be a fantastic addition!

Also, the optional LFO Frequency pot sounds good - jumper for fixed rate, right?


Thanks so much for your hard work.
This is going to be ace!
logicgate
@Isaiah

Thanks!


Given that injecting external LFO signal ended up being much more simpler than I thought, I think that there's no need to add the switch and pot, just use the external LFO jack.


Here is some audio, I modulated using sine, then saw, ramp and square:

[soundcloud url="https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/168195277" params="auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_use r=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true" width="100%" height="450" iframe="true" /]


I think I gonna leave the crossfader circuit in, is not that complex and the parts are dirt cheap anyways, and the result is excellent. I gave one more shot for the passive pot solution, FET blender and there's no way to have the signal strong at 50% 50% position.
Isaiah
logicgate
Even listening through phone speakers, that sounds so good!
Kills any Cluster Flux lust I had. hihi

The CV input is perfect. Thanks for including that.
Yes, it does make the Frequency/Rate pot unnesscary, but I guess it could still be modded for variable rate, right?

Very excited about this!
Isaiah
Also, what is the P-P Voltage and offset of the LFO you used?
What CV range will the chorus expect?
logicgate
Isaiah wrote:
Also, what is the P-P Voltage and offset of the LFO you used?
What CV range will the chorus expect?



I can see that the Chorus LFO circuit produces a 10V triangle (at least is what my cheapo gear tries to tell me) to modulate the BBD, so I guess it must be around that range. The signal is not injected straight into the BBD, it's a node at a transistor leg.

Given that a 2x amplification work nicely for the Doepfer signal (which is 5V), I believe it's right.

Isaiah
Thanks for the explanation.
So, does it expect 0-10V, or +/-5V?
logicgate
Isaiah wrote:
Thanks for the explanation.
So, does it expect 0-10V, or +/-5V?


-10/+10 I guess lol


I will perform some more measurements and get back to you
Isaiah
20V P-P! eek!
Looking at the schematic excerpt, I can't see anything that suggests an offset, so I would guess the internal LFO is biased around 0V.
Your CV input allows you to set different gains by swapping resistor values, right?

Listened to the test clips again.
Test 4 sounds lovely. I dare say I prefer the external modulation!

Test 3 was the one that I thought sounded distorted.
The second part is a triangle wave (?), but as the mix is adjusted lots of harmonic content appears.
Maybe this is a side-effect that I wasn't aware of.
logicgate
@Isaiah

I calibrated my scope and measured the chorus LFO, it has 16Vpp, whereas the Doepfer has 8Vpp.

So my 2x gain guess for euro level signals to work was correct lol


Yeah you can swap resistors to adjust the gain, I will probably add a trimmer to this part too.
Isaiah
Thanks! thumbs up
logicgate
Ok, I've started sketching the PCBs already.

I have one finished that is only 1 board with 10cm x 10cm (will need to wire everything), and I'm sketching this other version which is composed of two PCBs:

The daughterboard which has the crossfader circuit and the buffer, and the pots and jacks (erthenvar and alpha 9mm)

The mainboard with the rest of the circuit.


The PCB below has 105mm currently of height and 50.8mm of width:




I believe I can still make the width lower but, come on, 5cm is alright...
acidbob
Sounds fantastic!
logicgate
Ah forgot to mention:

I'm pretty sure I can add another LFO input so we can modulate each BBD with different signals, or with only one.


The internal LFO sends a delayed inverted copy of the signal to modulate the BBDs at different rates, I believe one of them is 1hz and the other around 0.86Hz...
Isaiah
Nice! So it can actually be patched as two completely independent chorus units?

Did you decide to omit the I+II Mix out?
I guess that can be created with an external mixer.

I hate to be 'that guy', but while you're laying out the PCBs I think it's the ideal time to ask:
If there is sufficient interest would you consider creating a 4U/CGS-format PCB for this Chorus? (2" x 6", or 3" by 6"; 3mm mounting holes 0.15" from the edges.)

I will be buying a 10 x 10cm PCB either way! thumbs up
logicgate
@Isaiah

If you use only input 1 it's gonna send the signal to both BBD so you will have the stereo out, if you patch In 2 then they will work independently.


10cm x 10cm is still too big, I think I can make it smaller.



I'm not gonna be offering both versions, I will have to choose one.


There's a lot of people who demonstrated interest here so, I'm gonna go with the majority. When I have both PCBs done I will open an "interest thread" to check the viabilty.


The mounting holes are there, the maximum I can do to other formats is to add the power header, if someone could send me the footprint for the powerheader or the right dimensions for the pads I would be grateful.
Isaiah
logicgate
I completely understand. It makes sense to go with the most popular option.
Wanted to ask about a 4U possibility just in case! hihi

I have seen combined Euro/MOTM footprints before.
I think L-1 uses them.
I really need to learn PCB design so I can stop annoying other people with my own agenda ha!

Maybe for a single PCB SMT is a good idea after all.

This will be the perfect Chorus stomp box. Rockin' Banana!
mOBiTh
hey mate

so each board will be stereo?

my 2p's worth:

the sound demos don't sound as lush and full as my mks50 (just sold it) used to sound by quite a big margin. maybe this is a factor of the wet/dry mix amount though?

my 501 chorus echo has a much more subtle chorus circuit - probably more like this effect.
logicgate
@mobith

Yep it's a stereo circuit.

I still have to record a proper demo, I still haven't recorded a true stereo one...

And you are right, the wet/dry parameter needs to be at 50% for a full effect.
ben_hex
logicgate wrote:
@mobith

Yep it's a stereo circuit.


Is it stereo? Or just two independent chorus circuits? Or should I just think of the I and II as left and right? In my head it makes most sense a dual mono chorus. But it's either I guess.
mOBiTh
ben_hex wrote:
logicgate wrote:
@mobith

Yep it's a stereo circuit.


Is it stereo? Or just two independent chorus circuits? Or should I just think of the I and II as left and right? In my head it makes most sense a dual mono chorus. But it's either I guess.


is the internal lfo actually an lfo per channel? or is it shared? looks like it's shared currently, which i imagine won't sound as nice as having an lfo per channel. what do you reckon?
logicgate
Well, to me, in the sense of having two independent audio channels, you can call it stereo.

But for the chorus effect, it's more like a "spread", you gonna a have a wider image of the sound, it will be present at left and right, but each channel is being modulated by a different rate.

It's very noticeable when you switch from mono to stereo, I'm gonna record a passage of chorus I+II in mono and then in stereo so you can notice.

The internal LFO generates a 1hz triangle to modulate 1 BBD, and then sends a delayed inverted signal to modulate the other one. That's the Juno chorus mate, no more, no less... Exact replica of the service manual circuit I did here, just added the crossfader so you can dose dry and wet to your tasting, and I'm adding two LFO jacks so you can modulate the BBDs with different signals at the same time, OR 1 whatever signal you are using will be inverted and delayed and sent to the other BBD.
Isaiah
EDIT: didn't see Logicgate's post until after I had posted myself.

Original, unedited post below:



http://www.flitemedia.com/downloads/juno106/juno106-serv.pdf
Look at page 9.

Unless I'm mistaken, there is a single LFO that modulates both BBDs.
One of the BBDs is modulated by the inverted LFO signal.

The original is mono in, stereo out.
It appears that Logicgate's chorus is stereo in, stereo out with a few caveats:
The inputs (or one of them at least) use normalled sockets to allow mono in, stereo out if only one input has a cable inserted.
Stereo in, stereo out operation only has one characteristic shared by both the Left and Right channels - the LFO (unless it is over-rided by inserting an external LFO/CV on one channel*). Other that the shared LFO and normalled input sockets, the two channels are completely independent (dual mono in/out?)

*Assuming Logicgate decides to add separate LFO/CV inputs per channel.

Perhaps Logicgate can confirm if the above is correct.
mOBiTh
Cool! two lfo inputs would be great i think...

screaming goo yo
Isaiah
logicgate
Perhaps I'm missing something, but it looks like the LFO signal is only inverted.
I don't see how it is "delayed" as well.
logicgate
Isaiah wrote:
logicgate
Perhaps I'm missing something, but it looks like the LFO signal is only inverted.
I don't see how it is "delayed" as well.


Heya. Yeah, I remember I had read at the Juno 60 service manual (which uses the same circuit) that the speeds were different.

Check the page 25 of this PDF file:

http://manuals.fdiskc.com/flat/Roland%20Juno-60%20Service%20Manual.pdf


Page 25 of the file, not the manual.

At bottom right you can see I little graph drawn by hand that says "chorus I 1 sec / Chorus II - 1,2sec / Chorus I+II - 1 sec"

But TBH I fail to understand why...
Isaiah
Hmmm... Seems there is some confusion over I & II and Left & Right.

Perhaps the outputs of your chorus would be more accurately labelled L & R, dropping any mention of I & II altogether.

I & II refer to different chorus modes, not the L & R channels.
In the Juno 60 service manual you linked to it looks like:
I is a triangle LFO, same phase modulating both BBDs.
II same as I, but a slightly faster rate.
I & II is the same rate as I but engages a LPF to obtain a sine from the triangle, and inverts the phase going to one BBD.

That's how it appears to me anyway...
logicgate
Isaiah wrote:
Hmmm... Seems there is some confusion over I & II and Left & Right.

Perhaps the outputs of your chorus would be more accurately labelled L & R, dropping any mention of I & II altogether.

I & II refer to different chorus modes, not the L & R channels.
In the Juno 60 service manual you linked to it looks like:
I is a triangle LFO, same phase modulating both BBDs.
II same as I, but a slightly faster rate.
I & II is the same rate as I but engages a LPF to obtain a sine from the triangle, and inverts the phase going to one BBD.

That's how it appears to me anyway...



Definetely makes much more sense to me now...

I can't see in the schematics any mention to the modes, more specifically, what is necessary to engage mode I and II... I thought that I and II were the choruses (each channel), not the modes.

Because if that's the case, than I can add a switch to the front panel to choose the modes.


But they will be never at the same phase because there's one copy of the signal the gets inverted, no matter what.
Isaiah
Upon further investigation, the Juno 60 and 106 chorus LFOs are quite different.

From what I can tell:
60 - variable rate, shape and phase chosen with modes I, II or I & II.
106 - variable rate, BBDs modulated inversely (this is not variable), chosen with (if I'm not mistaken) just two modes - I or II.
designator
Interested in this, too!

On Page 25 - on the left - there are switches: 'Chorus Off', 'Chorus I', 'ChorusII' , leading to the uP.

IC 1a is a switchable inverting amplifier:

If TR2 is conducting it is in inverting mode, if not, it is noninverting.

The rate is changed with IC3.
Isaiah
Since you are cloning the Juno 106 chorus, yes, the BBDs will always be modulated inversely (not accounting for your LFO/CV inputs.)



Funny that the Juno 60 has a chorus mode with sine modulation as Test 4 with sine modulation was my favourite!
I might omit the internal LFO completely and hardwire a wide range VCO in its place...
Isaiah
designator
Thanks for the explanation of the Juno 60 Chorus LFO. thumbs up
logicgate
Hey guys,

At the juno 106 service manual I tracked the chorus modes (I & II) to a hex d-type flip flop (IC 40174), the signal comes out of pin 5.


I think that, depending on the mode, it sends +5V, +10V or +15V to the LFO circuit, I have to test here. Perhaps a different voltage at R2 is what changes the rates (in the case of the Juno 106).

Thanks, designator!
logicgate
I think I've started to "see the light" now lol

The Juno 60 service manual is more clear regarding the LFO part modulating the BBDs.


From now on, as Isaiah said, is better to refer to the outs as "L and R", and the choruses as modes.


So, it's clear we will need a switch to choose between non inverted and inverted LFO (modes I and II), and mode I+II is both, I guess (the inverted and non inverted each modulating a BBD, or perhaps they are summed? ) lol
logicgate
Well after obsessively staring at the schematics now I came with a another "vision" of how the circuit actually works:


I think that, in the Juno, you can only use the chorus in stereo. When mode I is active, you have a 100% wet signal summed with a 100% dry signal at Left, and 100% dry signal at Right.

Mode II is the opposite.

Mode I+II is L and R wet+dry. This mode is actually the only mode where we are using both BBD at the same time.

It's clear in the schematics that a copy of the buffered dry signal is sent straight to the output, the only thing that matters is if the chorus is on or off.


Any thoughts?
Isaiah
Personally, I would keep:
*Manual wet/dry fade.
*Fixed LFO phase (one BBD modulated by the inverted LFO output.)
*L & R ins and outs.

If you really want to add switches to emulate other Juno chorus modes:
*Internal LFO rate switch, one slow setting, the other slightly faster.
*Phase switch to selected inverted/non-inverted modulation (from internal LFO, or external LFO/CV) for one of the BBDs.

That would cover all the functionality of the Juno choruses, with the exception of the sine modulation on the Juno 60.
Plus you have the advantage of stereo operation and wet/dry blend! thumbs up
designator
Ok, I had a look at the Juno 106 chorus schematic as well as at the owner's manual. The owner's manual says:
'The chorus effect gives spaciousness and richness to the sound. The effect becomes stronger from left to right' (i think this is relateted to the pushbuttons)'that is II is stronger than I. It is not possible to use I and II at the same time.'

There is no Mode I+II on the Juno 106.

TR1 acts as a switch, shortening R3 - this alters the rate of the LFO.
TR11 and TR12 turn the chorus on and off.
Isaiah
designator wrote:
Ok, I had a look at the Juno 106 chorus schematic as well as at the owner's manual. The owner's manual says:
'The chorus effect gives spaciousness and richness to the sound. The effect becomes stronger from left to right' (i think this is relateted to the pushbuttons)'that is II is stronger than I. It is not possible to use I and II at the same time.'

There is no Mode I+II on the Juno 106.

TR1 acts as a switch, shortening R3 - this alters the rate of the LFO.
TR11 and TR12 turn the chorus on and off.


Thanks for confirming that. My suspicions were correct (yay!)

I stand by what I suggested in my last post.
logicgate
designator wrote:
Ok, I had a look at the Juno 106 chorus schematic as well as at the owner's manual. The owner's manual says:
'The chorus effect gives spaciousness and richness to the sound. The effect becomes stronger from left to right' (i think this is relateted to the pushbuttons)'that is II is stronger than I. It is not possible to use I and II at the same time.'

There is no Mode I+II on the Juno 106.

TR1 acts as a switch, shortening R3 - this alters the rate of the LFO.
TR11 and TR12 turn the chorus on and off.



But what happens if both Chorus I and II buttons are pressed down?


raisinbag
R u still doing this Logic? It just popped back up on my radar
designator
Quote:
But what happens if both Chorus I and II buttons are pressed down?


Don't know, maybe it's the same as Chorus II alone?

BTW, the Juno6 offers a further variant of the Roland dual chorusses.

This is the LFO:
logicgate
Cool!

Well, another option would be to remove the internal LFO completely... I hardly think that anyone building this thing is gonna use the fixed rates when you can finely adjust the rates with external signals...

I can remove the internal LFO and leave only the external modulation inputs, that would also make the PCB smaller.


I could still add the switch so we can choose if you want modulate both BBDs at the same time using the same signal, or independently. Maybe not even a switch is needed, just the switching jacks
Isaiah
logicgate
That sounds good to me!
Much more flexible that way.


A few (hopefully helpful) suggestions:
*Maybe add a CV attenuator per channel. Each channel could have an internal trimmer to set the maximum gain of the CV so it is tailored to one's system (you pointed out that the chorus' internal LFO puts out 20V P-P!)
*Also, perhaps a switch to invert the CV response on one channel.
This would be useful for inversely modulating both channels from a single source (use switching jacks as you suggested**);
or for allowing a unipolar CV (envelope) to modulate in a specific direction.
Perhaps each channel could feature a CV inversion switch, but that might be overkill. Could be easy hardwired to a particular mode though.

What do you think?


**Banana jack builders (like myself) can simply wire a switch off-board instead.
logicgate
@Isaiah

Yeah, definetely. The LFO inputs will have a trimmer at the opamp so you can adjust the gain to taste. The remaining channel can be used to invert the signal, just like in the juno schematics.

I can add the pads for CV in attenuators, yes.


Basically it will remain the same but without the internal LFO so:

Input 1 is normalized to In2 so you have stereo out with only 1 signal. If you want mono just plug a dummie cable at In2 (or only use out 1)

If you want only one BBD line, patch a dummie cable at LFO 2 input, if you only connect LFO 1 you will have a inverted signal going to BBD2.

You can also normalize out 2 to 1.
acidbob
Instead of removing the internal LFO, why not just make it adjustable.
I mean removing it doesn't seem like a good idea to me and I would actually like to use the fixed rate, why? Because the fixed rates works really really well
Isaiah
logicgate

Just to clarify:
*L in, R in (connected internally via switching jacks.)
*L CV in, R CV in (connected internally via switching jacks.)
*L out, R out.
*Mix (controls wet/dry mix of L & R channels.)
*L CV and R CV attenuators.

Is that correct?


I think you might still need a switch to select CV response (non-inverted/inverted) on one channel.
This would cover some of the Juno 6 & 60's functionality, unlike the fixed 106.

Another option is to only have a single CV In and attenuator, with +/- CV response switch on, say, the L channel.
This is perhaps the simplest option (and most faithful to the Juno), but not as flexible as they two channels cannot be used as two completely independent choruses (they share a CV), but... if you want that just build two choruses! hihi
Isaiah
Seems like a poll might be needed! hihi
I'm probably not helping matters haha!

Another suggestion (with internal LFO):
*L in, R in (connected internally via switching jacks.)
*CV in.
*L out, R out, L+R out.
*Mix control (wet/dry mix of L & R channels.)
*LFO Rate control.
*CV attenuator.
*LFO / Ext. CV switch.
*+/- L channel modulation response switch (works with both LFO and Ext. CV.)

Maybe an LFO out as a bonus.
logicgate
Haha decisions decisions...


The problem is that, whatever route I choose, there will be a trade off.

More features, more space.


Yesterday I tried squishing everything and I could barely make the 10cm x 10cm, even with SMD resistor and caps. I have to try again and try using both sides of the PCB while I make the routing.

That is, in the case I go with the 1 PCB route, which certainly won't be skiff friendly. In the case I choose the 2 PCB plan, certainly you will have to end up paying for 2 PCBs, because the daughterboard will contain critical parts of the circuit, not only panel components...


@Isaiah

Yep that's correct. And about the inverting switch, I believe that in the daughterboard example I posted a while back thre's room for more jacks so we can have to jacks per channel: non inverted - inverted
Nordcore
Are both BBDs feed by a Mono-Mixdown of the Input or are they feed by the L and R signal independently?

You should consider building this in NI-Reactor first. There is not that much magic in the BBDs, most of the "good chorus sound" is made by proper parameter selection.

If you want a VST-like chorus, give it a
- LFO speed knob
- Mix knob
- full bandwidth with no Filter, as the user could add proper EQ.
- LFO with perfect triangle and a linear tracking VCO (for the BBD clock), so the modulation sounds clean and boring.
Isaiah
Inverting and Non-inverting CV inputs per channel?
That sounds interesting, but a single input with +/- switch per channel be more practical?

By the way, I'm happy to design a Euro-rack panel for this if you like.
Perhaps if I whip up a few designs based on the options you are presenting it will help people decide...
What is the maximum width you would consider? 14HP? 12HP?
mOBiTh
the three features I would 'anticipate' a chorus module to have would be:

- internal lfo rate (as per mks50/pg300 - this works really well)

- chorus level/mix

- lfo insert jack(s) for external mod

a desirable feature might be a stereo spread control!

those mode I and II switches on the keyboards look inflexible to me. if you get chance to try the mks50 version I think you'll be sold (don't know if it's the same core circuit?)

i personally am more than happy with a 2-pcb sandwich to save panel space - it's a small price to pay for the space savings, and also the panel will be cheaper right?









screaming goo yo screaming goo yo
Isaiah
mOBiTh
Think you hit the nail on the head with those three expected features.
It sounds like all of these will be included now though (still up in the air, I think), though with a wet/dry mix rather than chorus effect level.

Yes, the Juno's chorus mode switches are made obsolete by the feature-set you mention, with the exception of a switch to select +/- CV response for one of the channels.
As I mentioned before, that would actually cover some Juno 6 & 60 territory too (one of the 106's channels has a fixed inverted response to CV, but on the 6 & 60 the response can be switched between +/-.)
The only thing missing then (compared to other Juno chorus modes), is sine LFO modulation. But one can simply plug in a sine LFO and use the attenuator to emulate the lower modulation depth (partly a side-effect of obtaining the sine from the fixed-frequency triangle wave using a passive LPF.)

Of course, said feature-set affords the user much greater flexibility than any of the originals, while being able to approximate them.
ben_hex
acidbob wrote:
... removing it doesn't seem like a good idea to me and I would actually like to use the fixed rate, why? Because the fixed rates works really really well


Yeah, don't remove the LFO. Seems ridiculous, these fixed rates work! The module (for me) needs to be able to take input and come out with a sound instantly. IE have it's own LFO doing the business.

Switching / variable rates and external inputs is great and makes it more "modular" and gives us more scope. But in essence the fixed LFO and Juno Chorus settings is what it's about!
LektroiD
ben_hex wrote:
acidbob wrote:
... removing it doesn't seem like a good idea to me and I would actually like to use the fixed rate, why? Because the fixed rates works really really well


Yeah, don't remove the LFO. Seems ridiculous, these fixed rates work! The module (for me) needs to be able to take input and come out with a sound instantly. IE have it's own LFO doing the business.

Switching / variable rates and external inputs is great and makes it more "modular" and gives us more scope. But in essence the fixed LFO and Juno Chorus settings is what it's about!


Indeed, leave the original modulation in place, and have a switched jack and passive attenuator tapped into the modulation. Best of both worlds. I can't wait to hear how this thing bounces around the speakers with a sequenced sample and hold driving it...
Check Mate
ben_hex wrote:
acidbob wrote:
... removing it doesn't seem like a good idea to me and I would actually like to use the fixed rate, why? Because the fixed rates works really really well


Yeah, don't remove the LFO. Seems ridiculous, these fixed rates work! The module (for me) needs to be able to take input and come out with a sound instantly. IE have it's own LFO doing the business.

Switching / variable rates and external inputs is great and makes it more "modular" and gives us more scope. But in essence the fixed LFO and Juno Chorus settings is what it's about!


I agree and I vote for an "original, fixed chorus mode" too. That's the reason I wanted the module in the first place!
Isaiah
I'm sure it would be easy to accommodate options on the PCB for either fixed or variable LFO rate(s).

If Logicgate is happy to include the internal LFO and make the rate variable (easy enough), perhaps he could also include the footprint for a LFO rate trimmer.
Then, the builder simply omits the panel-mounted pot, or the PCB-mounted trimmer.
It might be possible to have two trimmers and a switch to select between two preset, fixed rates.

Everyone wins! thumbs up
Isaiah
I might be really jumping the gun here, seeing as the feature-set is so up in the air...
But I'm hoping that by posting this panel design, it might help the discussion.

This is just the feature-set that I, personally, would like to see.
The reasons I post this:
*I'm offering to have a shot at designing a Euro-rack panel for this.
*Whether people (and maybe more importantly, Logicgate) like the feature-set or not, it serves as a visual reference.
People can refer to it and say "I would prefer XYZ" or "I'm happy with XYZ" and at least then we'll all know what we're talking about and it might help make decision making easier for Logicgate.

logicgate
If this at all feels like a hindrance to your work, or like I'm stepping on your toes, please let me know and I can remove it. thumbs up
Just trying to help as I'm excited about this and appreciate your work on it.




This is a mock-up of a 14HP panel with bananas and Davies 1910CS knobs. No reason for that other than I had made a template already.

Features:
LFO Rate - sets the rate of the internal LFO.
Dry/Wet Mix - sets the dry/wet mix on both the L and R channels.
Mod Depth - sets the depth of the modulation.

Left +/- switch - sets how the L channel responds to modulation (non-inverted like the R channel; or inverted, the opposite of the R channel).
Int. LFO / Ext. Mod switch - selects whether the L and R channels are modulated by the internal LFO, or an external CV (this switch could be omitted if a switching jack was used).

L in and R in - connected to each other using switching jacks.
Mod in - input for CV signal to modulate both the L and R channels.
L out and R out
L+R out - the sum of L our and R out.
LFO out - bonus buffered triangle output from the internal LFO.




Hope that makes sense!
logicgate
Hey guys! I can see there's a lot of posts, I'll have to go thru them and see what's need to be answered. Yesterday I got home from a 2 days festival so I'll need one more day to recover.... Dead Banana Dead Banana


Very cool panel Isaiah, I much prefer like this than the way I was doing with the inputs on the top, this way the cables do not hang in front of the knobs.

But I see that you've placed only one dry/wet knob, whereas in my mod I have split the two channels in two independent channels (with input 1 normalized to in 2) so, each channel has it's own dry/wet feature. Also, I thought about adding two modulation inputs, so you can modulate each BBD with different signals.

I checked the schematics again and it's not possible to use switching jacks for the external mod input so, a switch will be needed.


But only tomorrow I'll get back to it, I still need to sleep more 24hs for my brain to work properly lol
Isaiah
logicgate
Get some rest, man! hihi

Ah! I assumed you would use a dual-gang pot to fade the L+R channels simultaneously!

If the builder mounts the PCB with standoffs rather than the PCB-mounted pots and jacks, they could wire up a dual-gang pot instead of two independent controls.
Maybe it's possible to have PCB footprints for both a dual-gang, or two separate PCB-mounted pots - best of both worlds for those who want to avoid wiring!
I, personally, will build mine with a single mix control.

Will the internal LFO be routed through the Mod Depth pot(s), or is the internal LFO fixed amplitude?
I think the former would be cool if possible.
Again, I will probably build mine with a single Depth control for both the L and R channels.
Maybe there should be a separate Int./Ext. mod switch per channel then, just a thought.

I will update the panel design:
Independent L and R Mix controls.
Independent L and R Mod Depth controls.
Independent L and R Mod inputs.
+/- response switch per channel?

Sound good?

With some smart planning, this project can accommodate several options from super simple, to fully featured (independent Mix, Mod Depth, Mod in etc. per channel.) Rockin' Banana!
logicgate
Ok, my batteries are 100% now twisted


Gonna start working on the new panel PCB now.


It's not possible to have a "mod depth" for the internal LFO AND the external mod input without adding more components. Things will get cluttered.


I will leave the attenuator for the external signals only. The internal LFO will have the rate pot and a switch for choosing the fixed rate or the pot.


Another switch for mode I and II.


Speak soon

EDIT:

To use the external modulation, 1st you will have to turn off the internal lfo via switch, and then connect the external LFOs, or the signals will be summed. I'll have to add extra paths for the external mod signals because they need to be amplified. They can't share the same path of the int LFO cause it has almost 20Vpp.
ben_hex
Looking forward to it. If anyone wants me to adjust anything on the panel when it's final let me know. Happy to do it.
logicgate
Take a look at the image:




We already have 3 switches on the panel:

Mode I & II
Int LFO On/Off
Factory/Hack (rate pot)

Not to mention we still have more 4 pots on panel:

Internal LFO Rate
Dry/Wet for each channel (we could use a dual gang pot as suggested by Isaiah)
Attenuator for the external mod input

Adding more switches for inverted or non inverted will make the panel too cluttered, I reckon. So the solution is to do like below:




Two ext mod jacks. 1 is normalized to 2 via switching jack. When using 1 jack, whatever signal fed into it will be inverted and sent to the other BBD. To use different signals just plug another signal into 2.
logicgate
just ignore the error on the 1st image (the factory/hack switch), I did the schem rushing.

this is correct:

Isaiah
Interesting...

I believe you could omit Q2 in the LFO and the associated driver circuitry and wire a SPST switch between the junction of R3 & R4 and ground.

I think the Rate pot will need a small resistor in series so the junction or R5 & R8 doesn't short to ground.

I have some suggestions, but I'm just drawing a diagram to explain them.
Bear with me! hihi
logicgate
@Isaiah

Yep a 2K2 resistor is needed between leg 3 (grounded) of Q2 and rate pot.
Isaiah
logicgate
Right, I've done some thinking (ouch!)...

Is it essential to have independent Mod inputs, Mod Depth and Mix controls per channel?
If so, which of these is most essential?
logicgate
Isaiah wrote:
logicgate
Right, I've done some thinking (ouch!)...

Is it essential to have independent Mod inputs, Mod Depth and Mix controls per channel?
If so, which of these is most essential?



I think that independent mod inputs are interesting because you can modulate the BBDs with different signals, in the end this is modular land so, the more modulation options, the better! MY ASS IS BLEEDING


The mod depth is not essential, you could use an atennuator before feeding the signal to the module.

And I was thinking here about the universal dry/wet control, it's starting to grow on me more and more, mainly because it would save panel space and components... BUT, if you plan to use it as 2x mono then you can't dose the effect for each channel independently.
logicgate
Not final, but here is the arrangement of the panel PCB, any suggestions?

All jacks at the bottom, inputs are the top row, outputs the bottom row:




I still need to adjust the switches pads and add the pads for the connection between boards.


Height: 99mm
Width: 61mm
mOBiTh
Looking good!

Are the mod inputs normalled so you only need to plug into one if you only have one source yeh?
Isaiah
logicgate
Fantastic!

Please do add some 3mm mounting holes if you can though! thumbs up
jorsteinwiener
It looks great! applause

It's been interesting to follow the development of this and I'm still (as I said some pages back) interested in a couple of the PCBs as well as panels if someone wants to design these.
mOBiTh
I'm excited about more smt work hihi
logicgate
@mObIth

The internal LFO is normalized to the ext mod inputs thumbs up


Alright, I'm done with routing for today, my head is spinning Dead Banana


I don't know, I think it's too dense to fit the remaining core circuit in a PCB with the same dimensions of the panel PCB. I managed to do it, but there's no space to arrange a row of pads to interconnect the boards. It would need some wiring.

I'll try again tomorrow, otherwise I think that the core PCB will have to use 0805 smd resistors and ceramic caps, it's not THAT bad... With 0805 type it will definetely gonna fit.



livefreela
i'm very stoked on this one - though, seeing as this will likely live at the end of the chain, and it looks like space will be available on the panel, how about a bypass toggle normaling to the stereo outs hmmm..... though i imagine such a thing could be accomplished with just some wire and a switch if i'm the only one into the idea...
ben_hex
I'm not fussed for an on off switch. It's modular, I won't patch into it if I don't want it. Or I'll fade/mix etc. Plus is has dry wet amounts? hmmm.....

That said, with panel space to spare I'm not really bothered either way. hihi
logicgate
@livefreela

if you want to bypass the effect you just need to leave the knob FCCW, then the inputs won't be mixed with the effected signal.
logicgate
Success!

After some retries I was able to find the best config and arrange the rows of pads to interconnect the boards. However, the DRY/WET pins will need wiring, no other way around... But easy stuff.

Now it's just a matter of arranging the silkscreen, widening the copper traces where possible and then I'll order a prototype PCB and build one to check if there's any bugs, etc...


Fubard
Hi, I'm kinda new here but am VERY excited by this project. I absolutely LOVED my Juno's chorus, its the only thing I regret about upgrading to the JP6. If I could have my cake and eat it too it would be a dream come true!

Do PLEASE put me down for a board and a panel!

Cant wait!!! This is fun!
logicgate
@Fubard

Cool! screaming goo yo


Good news, I was able to improve the panel PCB routing and now there's no need to wire the dry/wet pot, the boards will connect using only pin headers/sockets SlayerBadger!
acidbob
YOU the man !
livefreela
duh - forgot about the wet dry - been a long week here. sorry logicgate d'oh!
LektroiD
Wow! I've been away from this thread for a little while... So much progress, the board layout looks brilliant! I'm not sure why you used a TH TL072 though, these are readily available in SMD at pretty much any component store.

Any idea of the timescale before this is ready (plus hopefully a euro panel)?
Castratii
This will be great
Fubard
(((Bump)))

I'm still just freaking out, how excited I am about this. I wont have time until december but I would love love LOVE to be teased w/ this a bit more smile

Anyone else been thinking about this at all lately?
sempervirent
Yeah, I've been thinking about it.



^ work in progress
livefreela
sempervirent wrote:
Yeah, I've been thinking about it.



^ work in progress
yeah man! i had my fingers crossed that you would be doing one up for this project w00t

edit: oh yeah, and logicgate, if youre keeping tabs of this thread on "whos in" - please count me down for a set. thanks!
ben_hex
Yeah sempervirent I was hoping you'd do one too.
It's peanut butter jelly time!
LektroiD
Hopefully this project will materialise soon, I'm really looking forward to building this.

I like both sempervirent and ben_hex versions of the panel. Only thing, on the sempervirent version, there is a stereo out and also individual L/R outs, is there any reason for this other than to fill the gap?
Isaiah
sempervirent
Looking good! thumbs up

I realise it's a WIP, but a few suggestions, if I may:
•Change Depth 1 & 2 to Depth L & R.
•Change Xmod and Xmod 2 to Mod L and Mod R.
•Change Stereo Out to Out L+R.
•Change Phase to Phase L or Phase R (whichever side it is, I forget now.)
•Add little triangles to indicate the LFO out is normalised to the Mod inputs (or whichever normalised routing Logicgate decided on*.)


*LFO > Mod L > Mod R might be more interesting than LFO > Mod L, and LFO Mod R.
ben_hex
I can't remember but was the stereo out a mono signal with both present? Or has I missed talk off a stereo jack out? Presuming it's the L+R as a stereo out is a rare thing and also pointless with the L and R outs available anyway.
sempervirent
Isaiah - good suggestions, I'm not completely sure that 1:2 are equivocal to L:R but I'll check with logicgate. I think LFO Out is normalized to Mod 2 so putting an arrow right between those jacks would be a good idea.

Can't comment on the technicalities of the stereo output, I went with the set of elements that logicgate had specified on the latest rev of of the PCB. Maybe he will jump in with comments.
woodster
I thought Chorus 1 and 2 were different settings on the 106, but it has been a very long time since I last touched one.
sempervirent
The chorus modes are not 1 and 2 but I and II – labeled here as Slow and Fast, representing two preset resistor settings for the speed of the internal LFO that modulates the BBDs. (The third speed option is to flip the switch and set the LFO speed with the Rate knob.)

On the panel design I posted, the 1 and 2 numbering represented the separate channels and their modulation inputs (not the I and II preset speeds).

Isaiah suggested that Left and Right would be better labels than 1 and 2. I checked the block diagram that logicgate sent, and that suggestion seems right. The left input goes to one BBD, the right input goes to another BBD. Realistically these are dual mono channels with no panning but shared modulation via the internal LFO or external modulation. But approaching this as a "stereo" module, the Left/Right labeling makes sense.

So here's an update.

LektroiD
sempervirent wrote:

So here's an update.



One thing I would change is the text slw & fst, it looks a bit obscure when you have written 'Rate' in full, and would also suggest there is enough room on the panel for the extra letters to write Slow / Fast in full.

Also is it possible to get hold of the original Roland Juno 106 font for the title?

Other than that, it looks awesome! I just hope the PCBs become available soon...
sempervirent
That's good feedback too. I did try that already but the "Slow" label was a bit closer to the line than I liked. Maybe it's fine though.

Putting the actual speeds might be an option too. I'm not sure what they are but I can find out. The thing I didn't like about I and II is that they were totally opaque and non-representative labels. Even back in the day when I had a Juno-60 I could obviously hear a difference in the two modes but I didn't really understand why there was a difference. Putting the actual speed would be more didactic.
simfonik
I'm interested in a pcb and faceplate when they're ready.
ben_hex
I think going back to I and II would make more sense and be easier to operate in terms of a dual chorus / original design sort of thing. Small thought really as I don't mind either way. Just a preference.

Wonder what the I & II or L & R output is like with two very different signals passed through the two inputs.
The Disquiet
Count me in for one as well!
Fubard
I'm of the humble opinion that it should be as true to the original as possible. Needless to say I'd prefer the speed switch be labeled 'mode' and the settings to be 'I & II' with the output being stereo.


(Edited after realizing some stuff)
sempervirent
I'm not sure the L&R out is "stereo," instead I think it presents the signal after being passed through both BBDs in series instead of parallel.

IMO the I and II labels are arbitrary, I prefer clarity in labeling over nostalgia in this context.
Fubard
So... You're saying, there IS no spoon? hihi but I do see where you're coming from. I can't stand the naming of the 'character' section of Dave Smiths' new gear. Maybe I'm just being sentimental.

Hey it's whatever, I'm just happy to be here and can't wait to make one of these!
acidbob
I would also prefer it to be more true to the original, why change it when it works so great? smile
sceledra
I'll take one when they are ready!
Isaiah
The labels I & II are not interchangeable with L & R.
They refer to completely different things.

The Juno chorus circuits were all mono in, stereo out.
Modes I and II switched between preset settings like LFO rate, LFO Shape and inverted response to the LFO on one channel only.
(This varies between the 6, 60 and 106.)
Bishop Dust
I m in for one too ! It's motherfucking bacon yo
rosch
please count me in for one set when it's available
LektroiD
Any news on this?
jdkee
I am curious as well.
logicgate
Hey there guys! I'm sorry I haven't been active lately, but there's a lot of stuff going on on the "real world" right now.

The thing is that all this DIY stuff is just a hobby for me, and my personal/social and professional life are demanding all of my time lately, so... no time for DIY cry

I have a huge backlog that never ends... I think I've tried to embrace the whole world, but my arms weren't long enough


I have the Juno Chorus prototype PCBs here with me since last month, I could barely solder the vias (I had them made by a friend, homemade so... no metalized holes, there's a shitload of vias to solder, it's HELL) Not to mention solder all the rest, components, wiring, etc... I've been thinking of asking if someone is willing to carry on this project because I don't have the time anymore to put on this... I was thinking of making some money with the PCB sales, cause I've spent lots of hours in this project, but I don't know anymore... Now I just want to see it out there and make people happy, I don't need the money anyways.. I mean, it won't make a difference.


If there's anyone willing to do it, I can send the diptrace files, some notes of what I did, the full schematic used, etc... I just wanted a set of PCBs when they're done haha hihi


Cheers
sempervirent
Sorry to hear this but it's understandable.

I'll try to work with someone to get this finished and released. I have someone in mind but if anyone else wants to collaborate, let me know.
InfraXpert
I could do the PCB, just need the complete schematic.
If someone else could do the panel it would be great.
baloo
I offer myself for collaborating ... I could make the panel in aluminum with black & white graphics.
InfraXpert
InfraXpert wrote:
I could do the PCB, just need the complete schematic.
If someone else could do the panel it would be great.


If I make 5-10 prototypes maybe another group could take care of the protobuild and testing.
acidbob
I was also thinking about asking Ladik if he maybe would have interrest in making this into a finished module, he has good experience and the prices are good. I am not sure if he would want to do the PCB and Faceplate for the DIY people but it could be worth asking, what do you guys think?

I know handing over the schematics could be kind of "eeeh" for someone who has spend a lot of time on it and just see it go out the window, none the less, this way we could have a finished module. And I know that he has been working on something similar anyways so?
ben_hex
I have to say VJ / LADIK crossed my mind too acidbob. Didn't know he was working on "something similar". Not managed much conversation yet.
Fubard
I can do a protobuild! Not much on diagnostics but I can definitely stick the parts in the board, n tell you if it works or not.

Oh n I can write one hell of a build guide!

thumbs up
jorsteinwiener
I really like the panel that sempervirent/grayscale has already designed and he mentioned he had someone in mind for the PCB thing. Don't know how concrete that was anyway.
baloo
I can test protobuilds and creating b&W aluminum panels.
Send me some lines...;-)
designator
I can help with testbuilding/prototyping - I actually have some MN3009s already.
LektroiD
I'd be happy to put a proto board together too.
acidbob
Yeah I talked to Vladislav/Ladik long before this thread was started.
He also got the schematics, different than the one in this thread!
But now there seems to be a fair bit of interrest after a standstill.

So who is doing what.

Do you guys want me to help coordinate the shit out of this? hihi
And should we consider starting to collect money for the PCB's so we know how many we really need and to fund the one making them?

I have a little bit of time and I can build the proto too, I have no experience in PCB design or how to make them, well ok except for some electronics classes with 50% failed etchings

In my opinion we need to establish a team who sees this through
ben_hex
acidbob wrote:
In my opinion we need to establish a team who sees this through


I'll be chief thread watcher! hihi I can't offer much else to be honest as I've no experience in any of it or in any DIY to build anything. I can however test finished builds (doing so for a fair few euro companies now) and provide video demos. If things are wanted to be taken further than just getting ourselves sorted with some moudles (i.e some to sell). I'll do a video if I end up with one at some point anyway.
logicgate
Hey guys

Just to inform you that sempervirent found someone to carry on this Project. I Will be sending The Project files over to him.
ben_hex
logicgate wrote:
Hey guys

Just to inform you that sempervirent found someone to carry on this Project. I Will be sending The Project files over to him.


Great, looking forward to it.
Fubard
Maybe a silly question here, but will this project remain a muffwiggler DIY kind of thing? Will this continue to be its official thread?

I really wanna keep up to date on this no matter how it ends up happening. thumbs up
acidbob
Great thanks Ben, and thank you logicgate, good news indeed.

I Think it's hard to say, as we do not yet know who was send the project files,
I figure when the project is finished it will gain enough interrest to get posted on the euro thread, dunno.

If any of you need help please let me know, if there are any problems with the build or the proto you can try and contact me and I will have a look, my skills are ok but I am no professor smile
sempervirent
Fubard wrote:
Maybe a silly question here, but will this project remain a muffwiggler DIY kind of thing? Will this continue to be its official thread?

This will remain a DIY project, no question about that. I'll post here when there's some news to share.
rosch
sempervirent wrote:
This will remain a DIY project, no question about that.

thumbs up
bkbirge
sempervirent wrote:
Fubard wrote:
Maybe a silly question here, but will this project remain a muffwiggler DIY kind of thing? Will this continue to be its official thread?

This will remain a DIY project, no question about that. I'll post here when there's some news to share.


Coolness
lamouette/rck
Yup! ready to build we're not worthy
sempervirent
Got the schematic and other files from logicgate (thank you!) and they are now in capable hands. Will post more as things develop.
woodenbox
I am soooo hot for this we're not worthy
Isaiah
logicgate
Wow, how did I miss the updates on this?!
Sorry to hear you can't finish this after all the work you put in.
Hope you're making music with the time that would've been spent on this! thumbs up
Seems very wise to nominate a single party to see this through to completion and Greyscale is a great choice!
Thanks again for your efforts and passing the project over, and to Greyscale for realising Logicgate's hard work.

I'm looking forward to this!
sempervirent
Thanks Isaiah, I appreciate the vote of confidence!
acidbob
After the forum meltdown, can I ask, what is the status on the project
sempervirent
Nothing new to report. I'd recommend signing up at http://grayscale.info/mailing-list/ if you want to make sure that you hear of any announcements.

Hopefully all the old threads will be restored soon, particularly because I have no other list of people who were interested in the project and the URL was not cached.

http://grayscale.info/panels/juno-106-chorus-eurorack/
acidbob
I am still interrested in 3x pcb etc. and 2x faceplates
Signed up for the mailing list
ThecureForSin
I'm still interested in 1 set smile
necrobious
I'm interested in 1 set also.
cleahy
I'm definitely interested in a set!
Check Mate
I'm interested, too! thumbs up
oscarthesquirrel
Count me in..I'm waiting for my Greyscale email to verify my addition to the mailing list though...
jdkee
Definitely in for at least one set.
zvonx
I'm in for a pcb panel set!

Will this be using the MN3009? I happen to have a set lying around screaming goo yo
InfraXpert
I'm in for two pcbs, please
sempervirent
Thanks guys, I'm keeping a list, will make sure that everyone is notified when these are available.
Zaibach
This looks great. I'm also in for a pcb+panel set!
andrewradtke
I am also in for a pcb+panel set! applause applause
senorfrio
I am in for a Panel + PCB! Hyped for this! It's motherfucking bacon yo SlayerBadger! applause
Fubard
Me too, me too! 2x pcb's n plates
Jop
I'm in for one set, thanks! thumbs up
BARE BONES
One set please!
Synthsense
Count me in for two full sets with panels please, Cheers!
dirkwiggler
Count me in! SlayerBadger!

PCB & Panel or full kit whatever surfaces! Mr. Green
LektroiD
Just noticed this is back on again. If I didn't chime in before, count me in for one PCB & one panel please...
raisinbag
Cool is it alive again? Please let me know when ordering time happens and what is availible and how much $ yada yada.
Thanks.
sempervirent
raisinbag wrote:
Cool is it alive again?

It never died, I've just got some other modules in the works that pre-date the Chorus project and R&D for those is taking longer than expected (of course). But the Chorus is still on the horizon and I've made note of everyone who was interested.
raisinbag
Sorry dude, didn't mean it in any douchbag way hihi I more meant the activity is alive and pcbs close to production. I haven't been on muffs as much as I have been in the past (due to growing my case business) so I keep missing all these cool projects (not that I have had time to build them!!! Hahahah).
sempervirent
No problem, I didn't take it that way. There's definitely activity, just a lot of design decisions to make before more concrete steps are taken. For example the MN3009 BBD chip is not reliably available, so a modern in-production alternative needs to be chosen. Also iterating further on the layout and thinking about ways to add new features. It'll take some time but I think the outcome will be worth it.
raisinbag
That's an interesting turn. The reason I have a bonner for this build is because of the 3009. But man they are brutal to get a hold of and expensive. Almost as bad as my search for the 3005. Then when like 100 or more of us are all searing at the same time it will suck. Is there an smd remake or cool audio version? I'll poke around myself to see. Maybe a 3007 or something? I think they are easier to find? I'll tey to keep a better eye one this. wink. Thanks for doing it. I know it's a shot ton of work.
gwpt
Hi sempervirent,
Just saw your comments about perhaps not using the mn3009...

I was wondering if it is possible to allow the user to use either the original mn3009 or a more modern replacement? Couple of jumpers or something?

A bit like the SID Guts can take the old chips or the swan chip?

I have some mn3009, so I'd to use them if possible but realise not everyone does
Thanks
Guy
zvonx
Hmm, i bought these MN3009 a few months ago for my Juno-106. Cheap, plentiful and work great. I was hoping new ones would reduce the swooshing noise but the eBay ones sounded just the same as the old ones in the 106

http://www.ebay.com/itm/161292266684?_trksid=p2059210.m2749.l2649&ssPa geName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT
gwpt
I bought the same ones and they seemed to work fine.

Are these meant to be fakes? or are there still real ones floating around? or are the fakes so good we can't tell??!?!? hihi
zvonx
ha i'm wondering the same thing. they look different than what I pulled out of the 106 but I can not tell any difference in the sound. still sounds like the glorious 106 chorus.
JoeMatt
Count me in for at least 1, maybe 2 depending how the price turns out. Mr. Green
Dan Michaels
I'm going on to take 2 "Sets"
Royalston
Put me down for one!
a100user
Yep one of these would be nice.
cheeseandbiscuits
damn! yes please!
plus one on the full set!
papaZooZoo
I am in for a Panel + PCB!
frozenkore
I'd be interested in a full set. Looks great.
gwpt
Forgot to say before:

Please put me on the list for a full set too.

Cheers:)
Stides
Definitely a pcb and panel.
gwpt
The wait is killing me.... Any word? hyper
aladan
gwpt wrote:
The wait is killing me.... Any word? hyper


Yes, and the word is... "relax"

lol
gwpt
ok. deep breath... that's better.. hihi
XPump
Goldfish Please put me down for a set . . ...Goldfish - - - -- --- -Goldfish
Kickflip
I could be tempted by a set as well!
brother303
Cool project! Count me in as well...

SlayerBadger!
sempervirent
Thanks guys, this one is still in the queue but not slated for imminent release. Still curious to know who's interested though.
raisinbag
Still game. Curious if you are still planning on using 3009 or subbing it?
sempervirent
Not sure yet, we will try different BBD chips and see if the MN3009 really adds anything special.
raisinbag
Cool! I'm curious...... I think you can also use two bbds to achieve a larger one? I REMEBER something about reading on Smallbear website about fake 3005's where you could use two 512's to get a full 1024..... (My numbers and facts could be so effing off, so hold your tometoes). But might be worth tryjng to use a few 3007's which are easier to get a home of since I beice they are being made by cool audio now.
Zaibach
I am definitely looking forward to this! Ready to snatch a pcb and panel as soon as it's available hyper
notmiserlouagain
I´m following the thread for a long time, I´m very interested in the project!
acidbob
Yes I am also still interrested in 2x faceplates and 3x pcb's, I am glad you are still working on the project smile
BARE BONES
Still want a pcb and panel
cheeseandbiscuits
Definitely still 1000% interested over here!! Love the Juno chorus! It's a sea of awesome.
finnurbjarna
I would definitely be interested in a set!
jackmattson
I want one!
jackmattson
the bad producer wrote:
I think Grayscale would need 100 orders? Maybe Wes can chime in? I use Re:Synthesis for smaller runs, very good quality and anything from 1 to 100 panels can be done, here is an example:


BTW beautiful look on that one.
Fubard
I went to the Grayscale website n it says they're sold out. Did I miss something?
Fubard
Fubard wrote:
I went to the Grayscale website n it says they're sold out. Did I miss something?


Edit: ops apparently I missed where it says it's still in development on that same page hahah!

Just ignore me when I get like this. d'oh!
Zadik
Count me in for a set. smile
simfonik
still interested in a set
flip
interested! smile
andrewradtke
I am definitely still interested in this project when(ever) it happens.


we're not worthy we're not worthy we're not worthy we're not worthy
notmiserlouagain
bump very frustrating bump very frustrating bump very frustrating bump very frustrating bump very frustrating
jackmattson
Really looking for ward to getting one. smile

Any news?

BTW must have missed it but are schamatics online?
It's it a 3 phase stereo thing, right? (don't know just know I love records made with the Juno and Juno Alpha)
LektroiD
What happened to this project? I was really looking forward to it, sourced all the BBDs etc, seems for nothing. Will this ever surface, or will this foever be the Hiatus Chorus...
acidbob
Any news here? I keep coming back to this in hope
Fubard
Did this get dropped? I was really psyched about it Dead Banana
ZibraZibraZibra
ftr wrote:
Quote:
If this goes ahead, put me down for one PCB and a panel...


Same for me, absolutely love the Juno chorus.

Cheers.



SAMEEEE couple of pcb's
yan6
only saw this now, but if it's a go I'd be interested in one!
a100user
ZibraZibraZibra wrote:
ftr wrote:
Quote:
If this goes ahead, put me down for one PCB and a panel...


Same for me, absolutely love the Juno chorus.

Cheers.



SAMEEEE couple of pcb's


Me too
r.staettler
yes. interested!
jdkee
I am still interested as well. Will order if/when ready.
7C
want!
PWM
I'm up for it! smile
apophis93
I am up for a set (PCB & Panel) if available.

- Daniel
LektroiD
Fubard wrote:
Did this get dropped? I was really psyched about it Dead Banana


Looks like it :(
PWM
Well.. I am still very bussy with my Octave Cat Dual VCO clone - probably PCB + Panel deal.
When I'm done, I can look into my earlier design of the Juno-106 Chorus. No reason to throw out my 3009's.. smile
jdkee
Bamping.
Coconuts
Hopeful bump. Octave Cat clone sounds promising too. One of the best sounding monosynths I've ever had. Since I'm selling my Juno 106 please count me in for pcb/panel as I know I will sorely miss that noisy chorus.
jackmattson
monthly bump
sempervirent
No progress at all on this since I realized that MN3009s are unobtainium. Without the main ICs being readily available I am not sure the project is worthwhile. Perhaps there are alternate solutions but my brain is wrapped up in front panel and microcontroller-based projects and decoding the intricacies of obsolete ICs is not really my idea of a good time. If any analog wizards out there want to take on the challenge of making a modern, easily-built version of this project without using rare parts, let me know.
LektroiD
sempervirent wrote:
No progress at all on this since I realized that MN3009s are unobtainium. Without the main ICs being readily available I am not sure the project is worthwhile. Perhaps there are alternate solutions but my brain is wrapped up in front panel and microcontroller-based projects and decoding the intricacies of obsolete ICs is not really my idea of a good time. If any analog wizards out there want to take on the challenge of making a modern, easily-built version of this project without using rare parts, let me know.


Readily available on AliExpress, I can confirm the ones I got are working too, as I used them to replace the ones in my Juno.
sempervirent
There are dozens of sellers offering the chips though, how would someone know which place to buy from? Not to mention that you can make multiple orders from the same seller and end up with different things. Same problem as eBay. I went through this fun game trying to get a 5U Blacet Time Machine to work properly years ago (counterfeit MN3005).

Even with a big pile of known-good chips, this project doesn't really fit into my immediate plans. The original idea evolved into something more complex that I might want to revisit in the future, but that project is on the shelf for now and I don't want to fall back on just doing a straight clone of the original. I still think the panel design is a good one and I'd be glad to collaborate with someone who just wants to make PCBs for a straight clone.
sempervirent
Just noticed another 106 clone project, FWIW:
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=158257
sonicwarrior
sempervirent wrote:
Just noticed another 106 clone project, FWIW:
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=158257

Unfortunately only bundled with a Eurorack panel and currently sold out.
logicgate
Hey guys, it's been a long time since I last checked in here haha

I'm not dead hihi

I'm still returning from stasis, my life had turned upside down a while back, phases of life... then I "retired" , went to hibernation, meditation cycle, now I'm slowly waking up again. I can't remember the last time I soldered a component.

I have spoken with Fubard, he has experience with prototyping stuff and asked me to finish the project too.

I asked him to speak with sempervirent to sort this up, one extra helping hand wouldn't hurt, I think. I just want to see this baby finished and kicking ass for you guys, maybe all this work won't be in vain.

Cheers Guinness ftw!
Rob Lo
I will buy one when completed
LektroiD
sonicwarrior wrote:
sempervirent wrote:
Just noticed another 106 clone project, FWIW:
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=158257

Unfortunately only bundled with a Eurorack panel and currently sold out.


I bought one and scrapped the panel as this chorus deserves to be standalone. Documentation was rubbish, no schematics except what you find in the 106 service manual (this is where I was directed when I asked), so the component designators didn't make sense. A money spinning project not in the true spirit of DIY. Basically another kit for dummies.

I really look forward to fruition of this 106 chorus.
markhendy@btconnect.com
LektroiD wrote:
sonicwarrior wrote:
sempervirent wrote:
Just noticed another 106 clone project, FWIW:
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=158257

Unfortunately only bundled with a Eurorack panel and currently sold out.


... A money spinning project not in the true spirit of DIY. Basically another kit for dummies. ...



A touch harsh?

I've just ordered two of those kits by Feedback (Kit 3 is available again) and two of the Mouser BOM, albeit this latter was done by another member here. I'm sure it's not too hard to identify mod points, if you really want to add to it or hack it a bit; I'll certainly be looking at this in the longer term. I will feed back on my experiences, on the relevant Feedback thread, once I've built it and had a play ...
LektroiD
markhendy@btconnect.com wrote:
LektroiD wrote:
sonicwarrior wrote:
sempervirent wrote:
Just noticed another 106 clone project, FWIW:
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=158257

Unfortunately only bundled with a Eurorack panel and currently sold out.


... A money spinning project not in the true spirit of DIY. Basically another kit for dummies. ...



A touch harsh?


It may look that way now, since you've snipped out my justification for this comment.
cupwise
nah you're just being kind of a jerkwad, to say the least. it's a eurorack kit so yeah, it has a eurorack panel. since when are there laws of diy that say anyone who designs something with a particular format in mind has to also do all this extra work to make it easy for you to adapt it to something else? no, they don't. and some people like just using their soldering irons to make stuff. since when is it a diy law that anything someone puts time, work, and money into offering us to build, also must be designed to teach us about electronics? people can do what they want. it wasn't stated or sold to be anything but what it is. you had no reason to expect anything more, and your comment is just plain out of line.

maybe the true spirit of diy is you figuring out this thing you want to do, which wasn't the intention of the people who made this kit, for yourself? it's ok to ask for help but if they can't help you have no place to complain, ya know?
Starspawn
No schematic if they have schematic is indeed very annoying.
Ofc we can trace it if we want, but thats not a feature of happy real DIY timespending bonus. Its just an annoying chore you know someone could easily have spared you for, and didnt for some reason that usually is just silly.
diablojoy
Quote:
No schematic if they have schematic is indeed very annoying.

true getting referred back to the originals service manual is a little lame
especially when the parts designations are non existent let alone correct.


Quote:
A touch harsh?

hmm maybe but then if you are releasing a DIY project here for others to build and perhaps debug - a correct schematic is pretty much a minimum requirement.

for the record I also bought one of feedback's kits and built it
and if feedback posted a correct schematic for it I would recommend it to anyone. though it is a little deep for some euro skiffs razz
LektroiD
cupwise wrote:
nah you're just being kind of a jerkwad, to say the least.


While it's ok to attack a subject, it's not acceptable to attack a forum member. Even if their views differ from your own.

Quote:
since when are there laws of diy that say anyone who designs something with a particular format in mind has to also do all this extra work to make it easy for you to adapt it to something else?


I never mentioned laws, I mentioned the spirit of DIY, ie. "Do It Yourself", which suggests a project should be accessible to adapt and/or troubleshoot. Omitting vital documents, ie. schematics then becomes a reverse-engineering job, rather than a DIY project. Blindly throwing a load of components into a PCB to match up with a silkscreen is absolutely not in the spirit of DIY.

Furthermore, there is no "extra work", since part of the process of design is drawing up the schematic - or at least letting the software of choice do so; pretty much every current PCB design software package will produce a schematic to reflect the layout. Basically, if there is an end product there must be a working schematic.

The seller of this 'project' has also made a fully assembled (non kit) version, and if that (as he claims) is taken directly from the service manual, without changes, then not only does this go against forum rules, but inevitably he is running up against a whole load of patents and copyrights. By using someone else's (or at least another company's) design verbatim would suggest it is in fact a money spinning project. So I'll continue to stand by my word.

Quote:
it's ok to ask for help but if they can't help you have no place to complain, ya know?


If there is a problem with this project, and it doesn't work as expected, as some have already reported, there is nothing to refer back to because vital documents have been purposely omitted. It's not a case of 'can't help', it's a case of 'won't help'.

cupwise wrote:
and your comment is just plain out of line.

My comment is entirely justified and correct (despite previously being quoted out of context), but it seems you've decided to make it personal.
keninverse
I bought a few boards thinking that there was at least a schematic out there that I can reference. Now I'm regretting this relatively expensive endeavor. Lektroid is right in that he is treading on thin ice being that it's not even his design and not releasing a schematic just adds to the shadiness.
cupwise
bit hypocritical of you to say i'm making it personal or attacking you when you called it another kit for dummies, implying that people who just like putting kits together without modifying them are.. dummies. isn't it?

just seems to me you really could've made your points in here without resorting straight to snark and basically slandering the guys by suggesting all they care about is money and selling kits to dummies. how was that not a personal attack but an attack of ideas, exactly?
LektroiD
cupwise wrote:
bit hypocritical of you to say i'm making it personal or attacking you when you called it another kit for dummies, implying that people who just like putting kits together without modifying them are.. dummies. isn't it?

just seems to me you really could've made your points in here without resorting straight to snark and basically slandering the guys by suggesting all they care about is money and selling kits to dummies. how was that not a personal attack but an attack of ideas, exactly?


Really? Slander now? After insulting me publicly, you resort to this? I guess you're going to say Microsoft is now 'slandering' the entire world's population for releasing a library of "for dummies" books. Ridiculous. It's a kit released to be put together blindly by anyone without the need for electronics knowledge, then it's a kit for dummies.

I referred to the KIT as being for dummies, not any particular person. However, you insulted me directly by calling me a "Jerkwad" publicly on the forum. What is your problem?

Furthermore, he has openly claimed to have made a 1:1 copy directly from Roland's service manual. Selling products based 100% on Roland's copyrighted design is not only illegal, but it is absolutely a money spinning project.
kinrat
This is just the sort of petty argument I don't want to read here! Take it outside.
sduck
cupwise wrote:
nah you're just being kind of a jerkwad, to say the least.


Enough with the personal attacks. Stop.
m0d
LektroiD wrote:
Selling products based 100% on Roland's copyrighted design is not only illegal, but it is absolutely a money spinning project.

Not adding fuel to the fire. Just mentioning what I've read over the years. Copyright protection cannot be applied to circuit design/layouts/diagrams/schematics. (IC masks might be a different story, but that doesn't apply here.)

Besides, spend any time on TGP and you'll see that almost every $200 booteek dirt pedal is based on the same $3 circuit.
eek!
LektroiD
m0d wrote:
LektroiD wrote:
Selling products based 100% on Roland's copyrighted design is not only illegal, but it is absolutely a money spinning project.

Not adding fuel to the fire. Just mentioning what I've read over the years. Copyright protection cannot be applied to circuit design/layouts/diagrams/schematics. (IC masks might be a different story, but that doesn't apply here.)

Besides, spend any time on TGP and you'll see that almost every $200 booteek dirt pedal is based on the same $3 circuit.
eek!


Interesting! Does the same rule apply to patents?

Just that I remember a Moog synthesizer clone which was pulled from Electro-Music forums a few years ago for infringing on copyrights (or patents)...
markhendy@btconnect.com
LektroiD wrote:
cupwise wrote:
nah you're just being kind of a jerkwad, to say the least.


While it's ok to attack a subject, it's not acceptable to attack a forum member. Even if their views differ from your own.

Quote:
since when are there laws of diy that say anyone who designs something with a particular format in mind has to also do all this extra work to make it easy for you to adapt it to something else?


I never mentioned laws, I mentioned the spirit of DIY, ie. "Do It Yourself", which suggests a project should be accessible to adapt and/or troubleshoot. Omitting vital documents, ie. schematics then becomes a reverse-engineering job, rather than a DIY project. Blindly throwing a load of components into a PCB to match up with a silkscreen is absolutely not in the spirit of DIY.

Furthermore, there is no "extra work", since part of the process of design is drawing up the schematic - or at least letting the software of choice do so; pretty much every current PCB design software package will produce a schematic to reflect the layout. Basically, if there is an end product there must be a working schematic.

The seller of this 'project' has also made a fully assembled (non kit) version, and if that (as he claims) is taken directly from the service manual, without changes, then not only does this go against forum rules, but inevitably he is running up against a whole load of patents and copyrights. By using someone else's (or at least another company's) design verbatim would suggest it is in fact a money spinning project. So I'll continue to stand by my word.

Quote:
it's ok to ask for help but if they can't help you have no place to complain, ya know?


If there is a problem with this project, and it doesn't work as expected, as some have already reported, there is nothing to refer back to because vital documents have been purposely omitted. It's not a case of 'can't help', it's a case of 'won't help'.

cupwise wrote:
and your comment is just plain out of line.

My comment is entirely justified and correct (despite previously being quoted out of context), but it seems you've decided to make it personal.


It would be well worth noting that the maker has now updated the user manual and the related thread on here with schematics and PCB layouts, ... and that you have acknowledged that fact on the maker's thread.

The PCB layouts are new, not copied from the Juno 106 designs, but the circuit schematic appears to be directly derived from the circuit diagram in the Juno 106 service manual with no changes that I could see in circuit architecture or components or values that I could see in a sampling of the overall circuit, albeit the Juno 106 ran on +15V/-15V supplies while Eurorack is +/-12V. I've not looked deeper to see if there is any specific adjustment to cater for the supply voltage differences.
ADSRelease
So is this dead in the water for now?
diablojoy
Quote:
So is this dead in the water for now?


I personally can't see a reason for it to be dead .
ADSRelease
diablojoy wrote:
Quote:
So is this dead in the water for now?


I personally can't see a reason for it to be dead .


Maybe I misunderstood then. Can I get a board then?
diablojoy
OOP'S d'oh!
sorry thought this was the other 106 chorus thread.
I think logicgate dropped this ages ago
if you are looking for a eurorack version try here
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=158257&highlight=

strat1 is selling PCB/panel and kits
loveslap
Would recapping the chorus block on my Juno106 lessen the ocean sound? Can zero ocean sound be acheived?
Jdavidk wrote:
logicgate wrote:
Jdavidk wrote:
Any updates on the boards? Am very interested in this.



still cooking slowly.

I noticed that I can omit more parts from the original circuit that won't make any difference so, i think that the board will be a bit smaller.


Fantastic. The chorus on my 106 has no noise at all for the first 15 minutes or so of use, but slowly the noise level ramps up. I suspect it's due to heat building up in the case. But then again i should probably recap it at some point....
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Music Tech DIY  
Page 1 of 16
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group