CGS514

From circuitbending to homebrew stompboxes & synths, keep the DIY spirit alive!

Moderators: lisa, luketeaford, Kent, Joe.

User avatar
Whelm
Veteran Wiggler
Posts: 513
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2015 7:27 pm
Location: West Coast Ish

Re: CGS514

Post by Whelm » Sat Apr 25, 2020 12:49 am

I'm not interested in buying a board without a schematic. I'm liable to fuck it up and I'll need the schematic to fix it.

User avatar
Isaiah
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1804
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 6:31 am

Re: CGS514

Post by Isaiah » Sat Apr 25, 2020 9:37 am

Another point worth mentioning, is that some very interesting modifications and improvements of CGS circuits exist (very likely) only because the schematics were available for folks to see what was possible.
A few examples:
•CGS59 Programmer Sequencer - The addition of Skip/Stop/Normal switches, similar to the Moog 960.
•CGS77 ‘73 VCF - Some folks, I forget who, were able to repurpose the op-amp buffers and LED driver to implement VC-Q.

User avatar
Statispulp
Common Wiggler
Posts: 91
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2014 4:59 pm
Location: US

Re: CGS514

Post by Statispulp » Sat Apr 25, 2020 11:50 am

GrantB wrote:
Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:53 am
DIY products are a lot less attractive to many of us when they don't come with the schematic. Building, troubleshooting, modding and learning are made more difficult than they should be. This only hurts the customer and obviously doesn't stop cloners.
I fully agree with this. Not only is it more difficult, but I think it goes against the spirit of DIY. I like to understand what I'm doing and how it works. I was hoping things like this would go in a more open source hardware direction like Mutable Instruments and Bastl and Befaco and a lot of others like Ken and MFOS have been doing for a while, this seems like a backward step to me. Of course I don't want this to devolve into an IP discussion because I don't think that the people who invest their time into development should have to share their work, it's just not... DIY

User avatar
CLee
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1735
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 6:49 pm
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Re: CGS514

Post by CLee » Sat Apr 25, 2020 12:47 pm

It's completely up to the seller whether or not to include schematics. There seems to be a well established precedent in Euro-land for not including them, so I think it's a bit unfair to single Elby out in this case. Any CGS/Ken Stone releases are still available in the CGS WIKI, so minimal effort is required to get the schematic. If Elby updates the boards and doesn't include schematics, then that makes things more difficult.

Personally I think it's absurd to sell someone a blank PCB with a BOM and not include the schematic. What happens when something goes wrong. They just need to email me then, because I gave them no resources to solve the problem on their own. They also learn nothing... it's paint-by-numbers building. In the end you've got a working module but you're no closer to knowing what's going on inside. If someone wants to copy a design, tracing the PCB is a pretty simple process. And if someone wants to save the $15 it would cost to buy my board and layout a stripboard build, or etch their own... more power to them. In the end not releasing the schematic doesn't gain anything.

I think the acceptance of it is a sign of where the whole DIY thing is going. There's more kit building and less sharing among a group of experimenters. That's not a bad thing, but if folks main goal is to save some money and enjoy using something they built themselves, then there will be more acceptance of projects without schematics.

User avatar
hox3d
Common Wiggler
Posts: 134
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 6:30 am
Location: Grenoble, Alps

Re: CGS514

Post by hox3d » Sat Apr 25, 2020 2:15 pm

I'd say you don't loose any customer when releasing a schematic. Some people would not buy your board anyway, if the schematic remains closed.
However, if this is DIY, you can't just expect people to build exactly the same way every time. And that's a little bit stupid to say "hey, I gave you instructions, you don't need to know what is going on!". Releasing a schematic allows both things: if you are interested, learn. If you are not, just build it.

But still, if you don't want people making their own run of PCBs (or if you think this is the biggest risk), don't release any gerbers. People who really want to do a layout will still do it, but there are not many people with the tools and knowledge to do that anyway.
I'd consider that a good compromise.

Read again this, I think it gives nice thoughts about open-source.
Matte-fueled habits

KSS
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 2519
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: CGS514

Post by KSS » Sat Apr 25, 2020 8:56 pm

CLee wrote:
Sat Apr 25, 2020 12:47 pm
It's completely up to the seller whether or not to include schematics.
100% true. Which makes it important to speak up and let them know the result of their choice may *not* be what they're expecting.
There seems to be a well established precedent in Euro-land for not including them, so I think it's a bit unfair to single Elby out in this case.
Huh? Who in euro DIY isn't including schematics? Elby is being singled out because he has a long history. And more importantly, because he's using BS to reduce the DIY element in his offers in a self-serving way. As you said above this is his right (outside of US legal issues he's ignoring).
Any CGS/Ken Stone releases are still available in the CGS WIKI, so minimal effort is required to get the schematic. If Elby updates the boards and doesn't include schematics, then that makes things more difficult.
Slippery slope. One could just as easily say the PCB can be traced. Each step away from providing schematics is one step farther down the slippery slope. Not a good thing.
I think the acceptance of it is a sign of where the whole DIY thing is going.
Another slippery slope. Each step accepted as inevitable is another step in the wrong direction. Those coming into a world where schematics are not expected have no prior reference. So it's their normal. It's up to us who have a different reference to care enough about them to protect their rights even as they don't or may have dismissed them. After all, that's what prompted my first reply here. The attempted 'normalizing' of this poor practice.
There's more kit building and less sharing among a group of experimenters.
I'm not seeing that. Look how many new names are showing up in the DIY section of MW this year. Some are asking really good questions, and there are plenty of folks providing answers too. Sharing among experimenters seems alive and well.
That's not a bad thing, but if folks main goal is to save some money and enjoy using something they built themselves, then there will be more acceptance of projects without schematics.
The things that will make this practice acceptable is to accept it. If we don't do that, it won't happen. No different than the shelter-in-place many of us are following right now. That's being done for the common good. For other than ourselves, we're taking a stand and making choices.

User avatar
CLee
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1735
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 6:49 pm
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Re: CGS514

Post by CLee » Sun Apr 26, 2020 9:13 am

Hey KSS,

I agree with you. It's unfortunate that Elby is taking a step backwards, and it's hard to protest that by not buying from him if he's the only source for some modules.

It's my understanding from previous discussions of this that it's fairly common for Euro kits to not include schematics. I don't build Euro, so if that's not true I stand corrected. I do include schematics. The schematic for every one of my modules is freely available on my web site. Which is linked in my signature. As I said, I think it's absurd to expect someone to build without it

User avatar
Navs
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 4173
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:49 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: CGS514

Post by Navs » Sun Apr 26, 2020 10:10 am

Ken' site, the circuits and schematics got me started in synth DIY. Building a Lockhart folder on perfboard was painting by numbers, but it gave me the confidence to try other things. I changed aspects of my two Serge VCS modules, a Bananalogue and a Doepfer, improving the response and adding an EOR, burst and 'hold' circuit:

https://navsmodularlab.blogspot.com/search?q=vcs

This would not have been possible for me without the schematics.

tardishead
Wiggling with Experience
Posts: 311
Joined: Sat Aug 03, 2013 3:00 pm
Location: London

Re: CGS514

Post by tardishead » Sun Apr 26, 2020 12:50 pm

I’ve been building CGS stuff for 20 years
Never had any issues with Ken’s stuff mainly because of the included schematic even though a lot of people moan about CGS stuff
I bought a batch of about 10 new PCBs from Elby to see that they had all changed to “better” versions and none of the schematics were included. I used to love Ken’s documentation, the manner in which he explained the circuits and also supplied multiple possible wiring diagrams. I learnt a lot
Had all kinds of problems with new Elby stuff
Build guides and BOMs had loads of missing information which could have easily been resolved with a schematic. All the new Elby stuff does not support any other format apart from 4u “serge” style and only 12v even though it all works with 15v. I wrote to complain about my grievances and I got a really dismissive reply. A lot of changes and amendments to documents were from my beta testing.
It took me a while to get my head around this new format-centric approach.
This might be the end of the road for me which is sad after 20 years.
Personally I can’t stand DIY stuff without schematics.
I’ve built a few recently and I’ve found it really frustrating. Especially when you find an anomaly in the design and want to tweak anything to your own specs - it’s very time consuming and awkward, especially with modern double sided or even multilayer PCBs.
I don’t want to name names but there are some shockers out there. There’s some pretty well known brands that have zero after sales support so much so that people use these forums to troubleshoot. Cloners are the worst!

BartBral
Common Wiggler
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:47 am
Location: IC1

Re: CGS514

Post by BartBral » Tue Apr 28, 2020 8:14 pm

I know i'm threading thru a minefield here, but...
...Aren't we all standing on the shoulders of giants?

For example: Low Pass Gate's...
Elby? Serge? Buchla? Or R.P.Sallen and E.L.Key?
And there might be loads of names in between... That I (and probably others) do not know...

ps. I am patently waiting for the CV-Slippery Slope module! ;)

KSS
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 2519
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: CGS514

Post by KSS » Tue Apr 28, 2020 8:40 pm

BartBral wrote:
Tue Apr 28, 2020 8:14 pm
ps. I am patently waiting for the CV-Slippery Slope module! ;)
It's called Slippery Slopes, and it's not CV, but waveform centric. Six slope-slippers, two three phase LFOs. Not in Euro though. ;)

BartBral
Common Wiggler
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:47 am
Location: IC1

Re: CGS514

Post by BartBral » Tue Apr 28, 2020 8:50 pm

Not in Euro!!!
... Well never mind I'll ask me friends Ken Butterworth ans Stephen Stone to clone me one! ;)

BartBral
Common Wiggler
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:47 am
Location: IC1

Re: CGS514

Post by BartBral » Tue Apr 28, 2020 8:54 pm

... That is, if they have time...
Mr Volta and Ampere have a courtcase against them, that is taking a lot of there time lately.

Electric Moose
Learning to Wiggle
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat May 02, 2020 10:13 am

Re: CGS514

Post by Electric Moose » Sun May 10, 2020 1:21 pm

I love DIY any way....
So back to a problem I have whit a CGS 114 in my BOG.
The building notes say about the transistors:
“2N3904 and 2N3906 has been substituted for 2N5089, 2N3563 and 2N4250 These have reverse pinouts”
In the BOM these a replaced with BC557B and BC557B!
Should I still put the BOM transistors in reversed position?

KSS
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 2519
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: CGS514

Post by KSS » Sun May 10, 2020 2:52 pm

Electric Moose wrote:
Sun May 10, 2020 1:21 pm
Should I still put the BOM transistors in reversed position?
The only truly safe answer is to obtain the datasheets for the transistors you have and then confirm the pinout on the PCB using the schematic. Match datasheet pins to empirically confirmed PCB pinout,and you're safe.

A cheap Chinese LCR do it all tester can replace the datasheets. It's a worthwhile investment for anyone building SDIY these days.

Electric Moose
Learning to Wiggle
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat May 02, 2020 10:13 am

Re: CGS514

Post by Electric Moose » Mon May 11, 2020 1:40 am

KSS wrote:
Sun May 10, 2020 2:52 pm
Electric Moose wrote:
Sun May 10, 2020 1:21 pm
Should I still put the BOM transistors in reversed position?
The only truly safe answer is to obtain the datasheets for the transistors you have and then confirm the pinout on the PCB using the schematic. Match datasheet pins to empirically confirmed PCB pinout,and you're safe.

A cheap Chinese LCR do it all tester can replace the datasheets. It's a worthwhile investment for anyone building SDIY these days.

I have tried that but it twisting my head around when I have to do it in four stage due the different data sheets of the transistors and hoped for a shortcut ;) :bang:

KSS
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 2519
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: CGS514

Post by KSS » Mon May 11, 2020 3:38 am

Shortcuts are great if you like magic smoke.

User avatar
the bad producer
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 2528
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:43 am
Location: Clapton Pond

Re: CGS514

Post by the bad producer » Mon May 11, 2020 6:01 am

Unfortunately we need a bit more info to help, what Rev PCB is it, the original single sided green CGS114 PCB or the new CGS514 red dual PCB?

What BOM are you looking at? And surely not BBC557 AND BC557?

Electric Moose wrote:
Sun May 10, 2020 1:21 pm
I love DIY any way....
So back to a problem I have whit a CGS 114 in my BOG.
The building notes say about the transistors:
“2N3904 and 2N3906 has been substituted for 2N5089, 2N3563 and 2N4250 These have reverse pinouts”
In the BOM these a replaced with BC557B and BC557B!
Should I still put the BOM transistors in reversed position?

Electric Moose
Learning to Wiggle
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat May 02, 2020 10:13 am

Re: CGS514

Post by Electric Moose » Mon May 11, 2020 12:22 pm

the bad producer wrote:
Mon May 11, 2020 6:01 am
Unfortunately we need a bit more info to help, what Rev PCB is it, the original single sided green CGS114 PCB or the new CGS514 red dual PCB?

What BOM are you looking at? And surely not BBC557 AND BC557?

It’s vers 1.0 CGS114 singel sided that came in the bog kit
Attached a pic of the boom
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Electric Moose
Learning to Wiggle
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat May 02, 2020 10:13 am

Re: CGS514

Post by Electric Moose » Mon May 11, 2020 12:26 pm

Should have been
In the BOM these a replaced with BC557B and BC547B

User avatar
cygmu
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1503
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2016 3:33 pm
Location: UK

Re: CGS514

Post by cygmu » Mon May 11, 2020 12:35 pm

These can be installed aligned with the silkscreen.

Having said that, I should remind you that I’m just some person on the internet. The advice above to test your parts’ pinout and verify against the PCB is better.

Gandalf
Common Wiggler
Posts: 128
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2018 8:59 pm
Location: Australia

Re: CGS514

Post by Gandalf » Tue May 12, 2020 1:53 am

On the green CGS114 PCB BC547/BC557 can be used without changing the orientation. 2N3904 and 2N3906 will need to be reversed

Electric Moose
Learning to Wiggle
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat May 02, 2020 10:13 am

Re: CGS514

Post by Electric Moose » Tue May 12, 2020 6:05 am

KSS wrote:
Mon May 11, 2020 3:38 am
Shortcuts are great if you like magic smoke.
Thanks Gandalf!

This forums made of magic smoke :tu:

GarbageTart
1-Post Wiggler
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2020 5:33 pm

Re: CGS514

Post by GarbageTart » Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:04 pm

Gandalf wrote:
Tue May 12, 2020 1:53 am
On the green CGS114 PCB BC547/BC557 can be used without changing the orientation. 2N3904 and 2N3906 will need to be reversed
Thanks, Gandalf! Had the same question, this clears it up.

All, first post, so please bear with me :party:

I have a few related questions, but these concern resistors:

1) My BOM shows parts for the CGS514, but I actually received the old CGS114 board. I've started construction and populated all resistors (sufficiently voiding my warranty :hihi: ). I received a total of 2 150K resistors**, but based on the BOM, I should have 4: 2 for the CGS58 LFO and 2 for the CGS114.

The CGS114 board has two open spots, both marked for 150K resistors. Oddly enough, when I look at the BOM for the CGS114, it suggests a substitution of 100K resistors in place of these two 150K, but I also don't have any extra 100Ks at that. My question now becomes--do I order extra 100Ks or 150Ks??

2) I also have an extra 3K9 resistor... based on the BOM this should be for the LFO but there's no mention of it in the wiring schematic OR printed on the board. I've already replaced one 1k as described in the build guide with the 3k9, but there's only 1 replacement described on the image online. Is there supposed to be another one replaced?

3) I have one extra 47K resistor the BOM suggests is for the Wave multiplier, but again there's no space for it on the board. The webtek mentions 2: one for the FCV and one for the PWS, but the BOM says the multiplier needs three 47K... where does the 3rd one go?

4) Finally, I have one extra 2K2 resistor. I think this is also meant for the wave multiplier (based on the BOM), but I'm having the same issue as #3: I can't find where it's supposed to go on the board or wiring. Is it that the 22K that's supposed to be Lockhart input is actually a misprint and should be 2k2? (seems unlikely because even the picture suggests a 22k resistor).

Has anyone else encountered any of these issues?

I recognize #s 3 and 4 could totally be just my own problem populating the board, but figured i'd ask given the other two bits of confusion above.

**packing sticker confirms "2x 150K 1% 0.5W Metal Film, so I'm sure it's not just a case of losing the parts

Gandalf
Common Wiggler
Posts: 128
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2018 8:59 pm
Location: Australia

Re: CGS514

Post by Gandalf » Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:42 pm

GarbageTart wrote:
Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:04 pm
Gandalf wrote:
Tue May 12, 2020 1:53 am
On the green CGS114 PCB BC547/BC557 can be used without changing the orientation. 2N3904 and 2N3906 will need to be reversed
Thanks, Gandalf! Had the same question, this clears it up.

All, first post, so please bear with me :party:

I have a few related questions, but these concern resistors:

1) My BOM shows parts for the CGS514, but I actually received the old CGS114 board. I've started construction and populated all resistors (sufficiently voiding my warranty :hihi: ). I received a total of 2 150K resistors**, but based on the BOM, I should have 4: 2 for the CGS58 LFO and 2 for the CGS114.

The CGS114 board has two open spots, both marked for 150K resistors. Oddly enough, when I look at the BOM for the CGS114, it suggests a substitution of 100K resistors in place of these two 150K, but I also don't have any extra 100Ks at that. My question now becomes--do I order extra 100Ks or 150Ks??

2) I also have an extra 3K9 resistor... based on the BOM this should be for the LFO but there's no mention of it in the wiring schematic OR printed on the board. I've already replaced one 1k as described in the build guide with the 3k9, but there's only 1 replacement described on the image online. Is there supposed to be another one replaced?

3) I have one extra 47K resistor the BOM suggests is for the Wave multiplier, but again there's no space for it on the board. The webtek mentions 2: one for the FCV and one for the PWS, but the BOM says the multiplier needs three 47K... where does the 3rd one go?

4) Finally, I have one extra 2K2 resistor. I think this is also meant for the wave multiplier (based on the BOM), but I'm having the same issue as #3: I can't find where it's supposed to go on the board or wiring. Is it that the 22K that's supposed to be Lockhart input is actually a misprint and should be 2k2? (seems unlikely because even the picture suggests a 22k resistor).

Has anyone else encountered any of these issues?

I recognize #s 3 and 4 could totally be just my own problem populating the board, but figured i'd ask given the other two bits of confusion above.

**packing sticker confirms "2x 150K 1% 0.5W Metal Film, so I'm sure it's not just a case of losing the parts
Looking at the datasheet for the CGS114 it says that for improved triggering at higher frequencies, make the changes noted which includes changing 150K for 100K. So 100K are needed.

Looking at the BOM for the LFO it says 3K9 is used in place of 1K for the LEDs. This is to reduce the brightness. You can put any value between 1K and 4K there dependent on the efficiency of the LED and its colour and the desired brightness you want.

The 47K goes in to VCM2 and is the resistor connected to point D on the PCB.

not sure about the 2K2

Post Reply

Return to “Music Tech DIY”