Quote from: FiveseveN on July 09, 2024, 11:55:17 AMI feel like the goal has been woefully misunderstood.

That's a restatement of proposed solution. The goal as I understood it is to allow momentary usage of the pedal remotely.

QuoteThis can be achieved with a normalling or other kind of switching TS or a basic TRS jack. Absolutely no need for a uC.
The actual bypassing can be done with relays or CMOS MUXes as usual.

Sure, there are lots of ways to skin a cat. "No need for a uC" implies it's somehow worse? By what metric? Your familiarity?

It's equally cheap and simple. Even simpler if you buy it off-the-shelf (though obviously less cheap). You can have the pedal up and running in 4 minutes.

There's nothing wrong with having additional options, especially for folks who stumble on this thread via google looking for related solutions.

Quote from: mark2 on July 09, 2024, 12:03:08 PMIt's equally cheap and simple.

My brother in Jeebus,
I am very familiar with uCs and use them all the time. I'm saying one isn't needed to turn on a relay (or mux), the remote switch can do that all by itself.
In what Universe is literally nothing (or maybe a pullup resistor) "equally cheap and simple" as a whole ass microcontroller?!

Well by all means if you have a helpful solution, you should post it rather than a hand-wavy assertion and an exercise left to the reader. And to be clear, I don't disagree: It probably can be a lot simpler.

But my addition to the thread was in the context of other solutions utilizing uC's, CD4053/CD4051, etc. I thought, and still think, it was helpful to have an alternate similar-cost option that had the added benefit of working off-the-shelf with zero knowledge required.

There are oh so many latching circuits in existence.
Using an MCU here is like putting on a suit & tie to eat at Denny's.
While the only requirement is shoes and a shirt.

In hopes of summer Donna, you're both right! Simplicity is great but so are options! As a lurker turned member, I can testify!

Quote from: jorg777 on July 05, 2024, 10:03:52 AM

Thank you all for your response. Due to family circumstances I was unable to respond earlier. My hobby came to a standstill for a while. Fortunately, I now have some more time.

@Jorg777, I tried to make your post and drawing clear to myself. I just don't understand how to implement the CD4053. Can you connect the missing wires for me?

@Bluelagoon, have you tried to breadboard the suggestion of Jorg777? If so, did it work?





Sophia 

Hi Sophia, No haven't had the time to get on to using the 4053, as Jorg had suggested, In theory looking at how he has it working makes sense that it would work,
There is a good article from RG Keen over at Geofex, where he explains using the 4053 for switching along with a few tips how to get the best performance from them,
Bypass Switching using CD4053
Hopefully Jorg or someone knowledgeable can explain the concept behind using as Jorg had suggested, might be the simplest way to achieve what you were looking for.
Good Luck with it.

Quote from: bluelagoon on August 12, 2024, 11:49:09 AMHi Sophia, No haven't had the time to get on to using the 4053, as Jorg had suggested, In theory looking at how he has it working makes sense that it would work,
There is a good article from RG Keen over at Geofex, where he explains using the 4053 for switching along with a few tips how to get the best performance from them,
Bypass Switching using CD4053
Hopefully Jorg or someone knowledgeable can explain the concept behind using as Jorg had suggested, might be the simplest way to achieve what you were looking for.
Good Luck with it.

To vouch;
I've just implemented the CD4053 switching into a small stone that I've been picking at.
Works as advertised - though I split one CD4049 into 3 flipflop circuits and drove the LEDs with transistors on each output - one had dual LEDs for A/B switching via an NPN and PNP transistor *an example of how flexible the design can be*

Edit:
Sophia, what is your plan for the circuit board? Like, what style proto board are you going to use or do you plan to draw a PCB layout?
I can draw up something for your efforts. Just need to know your preference.

Hi Kevin,

I have experience with KiCad and have (successfully) made a number of PCBs myself. However, my knowledge stops at coming up with new schematics. I need an existing, clear schematic. I don't have enough knowledge to creatively link schemes together. Hence my request to Jorg777 to make slightly clearer drawing of how exactly I should connect the CD4053 together with the TRS jack and the Panner schematic.

Sophia 

Okay, fair enough.
So we understand correctly (too many cooks can ruin the meal)

You want to add no-click bypass as well as a remote switch via a stereo jack (TRS) to actuate the bypass/effect of the Panner pedal. Correct?

Have to know for sure.
-The BIG knob is a remote pedal with a normally-open momentary foot switch connected to the tip and ring of a stereo jack with nothing else? Are these connections confirmed?
*I know nothing about the pedal*

-You mentioned an "always on" switch. Are you open to drilling into the box to add another switch or do you have any other thoughts on how you'd like this to be implemented?

Curious; are you modifying an existing panner pedal or trying to incorporate these things into a new build/pcb layout your working up?

I can throw a schematic together tonight once I have the facts straight.

Hi Kevin,

No problem!

I have the following wishes:

-The effect is switched on with a 3pdt switch. Nothing special about this.
-It is intended for a bass guitar. That's why I want to implement the Panner. This allows the player to choose 100% dry, 50/50%, 100% wet or something in between (with a potentiometer). With a bass you often want a bit of dryness in the sound, especially with effects such as a Big Muff. I have combined the Panner several times with various schemes and am very satisfied with this.
- In addition to the Panner, I would also like to have the option to bypass the Panner and momentary switch to 100% wet. For example with an envelope filter. One can think of a song where the bass needs an envelope effect in some parts, but the rest of the time just a clean dry sound. In summary, I actually want to expand the Panner scheme whereby I go to 100% wet with a momentary switch.

So:
- Momentary switch open: Panner
- Momentary switch closed: bypass Panner and get a 100% wet effect signal.

This gives a lot of freedom. For example, I could set the Panner to 100% dry (so no effect). With the external momentary switch closed I then go to 100% wet. I could also set the Panner to 50/50% and with the momentary switch I go to 100% wet to get an extra effect boost at certain moments.

Then the hardware. It should look something like this:

Quote from: Kevin Mitchell on August 12, 2024, 04:38:17 PMYou want to add no-click bypass as well as a remote switch via a stereo jack (TRS) to actuate the bypass/effect of the Panner pedal. Correct?

See my explanation above. The no-click bypass via a stereo jack (TRS) to bypass the Panner pedal and get a 100% wet signal.

Quote from: Kevin Mitchell on August 12, 2024, 04:38:17 PMThe BIG knob is a remote pedal with a normally-open momentary foot switch connected to the tip and ring of a stereo jack with nothing else? Are these connections confirmed?

Correct.

Quote from: Kevin Mitchell on August 12, 2024, 04:38:17 PMYou mentioned an "always on" switch. Are you open to drilling into the box to add another switch or do you have any other thoughts on how you'd like this to be implemented?

See my beautiful Picasso drawing It's all custom made.

Quote from: Kevin Mitchell on August 12, 2024, 04:38:17 PMCurious; are you modifying an existing panner pedal or trying to incorporate these things into a new build/pcb layout your working up?

Incorporate these things into a new build/pcb layout.

Let me know if anything is still unclear. Thank you very much for the help!

Sophia 

Okay! I'm sure at first a few of us had our heads spinning (guilty). Your photo helps a ton though I have to ask, did you leave out the send & return jacks by mistake? -Just want to be sure I'm not missing something.

So you want;
A-3PDT on the looper - when off you get only clean signal as the panner circuit is totally bypassed.
B-Momentary remote switch for 100% wet signal - which will of course only work when the looper circuit is switched on.

Question on A:
Would you be apposed to having a no-click switch for bypassing the looper? The CD4053 has 3 SPDT switches built in - we can use the other portions to bypass/disengage the panner.

Question on B:
-The way you describe it, it's as if the remote switch has no latching effect and only provides 100% wet signal while the switch is depressed. I'd guess this isn't what you want but that's how I'm reading it.
-Assuming the above is not correct, you want the momentary remote to have supporting latching circuit and is used simply as a luxury (which is why I came up with question A, no-click luxury all around).
-Or, do you want the option for both latching and non latching? We can add a toggle to the panner pedal for this - so in one mode the remote latches the wet signal to 100% and in the other mode it's only 100% wet while the remote switch is held down.

I have most of the circuit drawn up in Kicad. Just need to know your preferences.

Quote from: Kevin Mitchell on August 13, 2024, 08:12:59 AMOkay! I'm sure at first a few of us had our heads spinning (guilty). Your photo helps a ton though I have to ask, did you leave out the send & return jacks by mistake? -Just want to be sure I'm not missing something.

I don't blame you. English is not my native language and it is difficult to translate my idea into words. A drawing helps, hopefully. The send and return jacks are not missing, because the Panner + effect (for example envelop or Big Muff) are located in the same enclosure! I use SMD so PCB space is not an issue for me. Note: I did not draw the DC jack and wiring, but it's there of course. This helps? My main question is how to connect the pink/purple wires and include the CD4053 into the schematic?

Quote from: Kevin Mitchell on August 13, 2024, 08:12:59 AMSo you want;
A-3PDT on the looper - when off you get only clean signal as the Panner circuit is totally bypassed.
B-Momentary remote switch for 100% wet signal - which will of course only work when the looper circuit is switched on.

Correct!

Quote from: Kevin Mitchell on August 13, 2024, 08:12:59 AMQuestion on A:
Would you be apposed to having a no-click switch for bypassing the looper? The CD4053 has 3 SPDT switches built in - we can use the other portions to bypass/disengage the panner.

Sounds like a nice solution, but more complicated. I prefer to use the simple 3pdt solution for now and perhaps use your suggestion as the next challenge. By "looper" I assume you mean the yellow/sand colored enclosure and not the red enclosure, right?

Quote from: Kevin Mitchell on August 13, 2024, 08:12:59 AMQuestion on B:
-The way you describe it, it's as if the remote switch has no latching effect and only provides 100% wet signal while the switch is depressed.

This is what I had in mind and I would be very happy if it worked like this

Quote from: Kevin Mitchell on August 13, 2024, 08:12:59 AMOr, do you want the option for both latching and non latching? We can add a toggle to the panner pedal for this - so in one mode the remote latches the wet signal to 100% and in the other mode it's only 100% wet while the remote switch is held down.

That sounds even better! if it doesn't make this too complicated then that would be my preference.

Sophia 

I typed looper by mistake - meant panner.
Converting the panner's bypass switch to no-click is rather trivial - especially since we'll have unused circuitry leftover from the remote switch circuit to facilitate this. I'll draw up options for both for you to consider.

Be back later with a pic & kicad file.

Just playing with the idea before I add it to the kicad schem (I'm away from my workshop PC);

I spoke too soon about the panner's no-click bypass addition - have to use 2/3 of the CD4053 for the initial remote idea.
Though adding another isn't asking for much, I'll keep it simple for now.
I've thrown together a simulation to test my idea. Falstad glitches aside, it should work as intended.
Of course, the kicad drawing will show the complete circuit with all connections.

https://tinyurl.com/2d29pcpe

I've done two versions and included an LED for both.
First is per your simple request - non-latching.
Then one with a latching circuit and switch to make it non-latching - per the simulation I did earlier (it's also what I had used myself recently).


Non Latching

kicad schem file here

Latching

kicad schem file here

I suggest that you breadboard it first to make sure that the switch order is correct. I think I have it right though.
Let me know if you have any questions & good luck with your project!

Awesome Kevin! I don't have a CD4053/CD4049 in stock. I'm going to order it and then test the setup on a breadboard. To be continued! This may take a while. Thanks in advance for all the effort you've put in.

Sophia 

Here I am again.

I found some time to make the schematic on a breadboard. I used a ON/ON Momentary Toggle for the moment (instead of the TRS jack/footswitch). The results:

- I made an effect (envelope). Works.
- I made the Panner. Works.
- Effect + Panner. Works
- Effect + Panner + non-latching. Works. (Thanks Kevin!!!)
- Effect + Panner + latching. This is where it goes wrong...

With the Latching schematic almost everything works, except when the switch is in the non-latching position. When the Ring/Tip are connected to each other the effect is completely gone and a loud noise can be heard. The LED sometimes also shows a delay. The momentary switch is then back in the original position but the loud noise can still be heard for a short moment. When the switch is in the latching position everything works properly in combination with the momentary switch.

I have checked the schematic several times. I see no errors on the breadboard. Did I connect the switch correctly? Any other ideas?



Sophia 

Your diagram looks right.
I wonder if I was wrong about the non-latching mod idea in my second schematic and it's causing the inverters to oscillate while the mom switch is pressed

An idea for redemption;
If this oscillation is happening at a high frequency, I wonder if a low pass filter could be the easiest fix. Instead of the switch signal coming from pin 15 of the 4049 and going straight into the 4053 & buffer/led part, insert a 1K resistor followed by a 1uF to ground (a low pass filter) - these are values I would start with but may require tweaking - such as raising the cap value.


A viable workaround would ultimately be using a DP3T switch to more-or-less switch between the two schematics I had provided - I can draw that if you'd like. Plus, it's sure to work.
I'd try the low-pass idea first.


I'll think on it a bit more for a more simple solution.

Hi Kevin,

I built a low pass filter into the schematic. I notice a big improvement, but I'm not satisfied yet. A soft sound is still heard. I have tried various resistor/capacitor combinations, up to 47uF and 10K. No luck.

May I ask you to draw the 3dpt switch suggestion?

Sophia