possible to fix Ernie Ball pan pedal with RG's Panning for fun?

[tempus]

Hey all;

My live setup relies fairly heavily on being able to pan between the piezo and magnetic pickups on my electric guitar. My current setup incorporates an Ernie Ball stereo pan pedal which pans both the inputs (i.e., the 2 different pickups) and the outputs (the piezo to the PA, and the magnetic to my FX chain). This works, but has some issues; not the least of which is that neither input/ouput combination is ever completely off. IOW, if I've got the pedal set to full magnetic going to my FX, I can still hear the piezo going to the PA and vice versa. This is a known issue with this pedal (seems like kind of an obvious shortcoming that should have been corrected at the design stage). Here's a link to the schem: http://www.synthmanuals.com/manuals/ernie_ball/500k_stereo_pan_volume_pedal_po6165/schematic/po6165_vp_stereo-pan_500k_1999-10-12.pdf

First, would removing those 1K resistors fix the problem?

Also, I was thinking about adapting the EB and using it to build RG's panner in the "Panning for Fun" article. I think I'd have to make some adjustments to make the panner pan between 2 ins and 2 outs, but would this design correct the never-quite-off problem, or is that a mechanical problem with the pedal?

Thanks

[PRR]

The EB design is fine. The 1K are not the problem. Any problem would be the pedal not turning the pot ALL the way, or end-resistance in the pot.

End-resistance effects should be small. You might hear it but your audience shouldn't.

Check the mechanicals. If you work the pedal to the end, mark everything, disconnect the rack, can you turn the pot a little more and get complete shut-down?

In theory the end-leakage can be nulled with an out-phase signal mixed in. But this requires some active parts (power) and probably need complicated EQ/phase-shift networks to get full-band null.

[tempus]

Thanks for the reply PRR.

Yes - if I manually (not pedally) turn the pot, I can get it to shut down, so the problem is likely mechanical then. Maybe I can mess with it a bit and see if I can get it turning things all the way off. Regarding my other question, would this problem persist if I were to switch to the active pan system prescribed by RG?

Thanks again

[Chrisfromiowa]

Hey all;

My live setup relies fairly heavily on being able to pan between the piezo and magnetic pickups on my electric guitar. My current setup incorporates an Ernie Ball stereo pan pedal which pans both the inputs (i.e., the 2 different pickups) and the outputs (the piezo to the PA, and the magnetic to my FX chain). This works, but has some issues; not the least of which is that neither input/ouput combination is ever completely off. IOW, if I've got the pedal set to full magnetic going to my FX, I can still hear the piezo going to the PA and vice versa. This is a known issue with this pedal (seems like kind of an obvious shortcoming that should have been corrected at the design stage). Here's a link to the schem: http://www.synthmanuals.com/manuals/ernie_ball/500k_stereo_pan_volume_pedal_po6165/schematic/po6165_vp_stereo-pan_500k_1999-10-12.pdf

First, would removing those 1K resistors fix the problem?

Also, I was thinking about adapting the EB and using it to build RG's panner in the "Panning for Fun" article. I think I'd have to make some adjustments to make the panner pan between 2 ins and 2 outs, but would this design correct the never-quite-off problem, or is that a mechanical problem with the pedal?

Thanks

Hello Tempus,
I think I am trying to do something similar to actively mix two signals with a foot pedal, my Roland guitar synth only does full on/full off/50-50% and I'd like a little more subtlety. The stereo Ernie Ball does 1 input to 2 outputs allowing you to determine how much of either, since its passive, have you ever tried it backwards, inputs into two outputs and output from the mono input? Thank, regards Chris

[tempus]

Just to be clear, I'll connect 1 gtr to each of the 2 inputs and see if it pans between them to a 1 amp output? I'm pretty sure it will, but I'll check for you. I've got a couple things on the go, but give me a couple of days and I'll try it out and let you know.

[Chrisfromiowa]

You rock!!! Thanks

[tempus]

Just checked this. It does work as you suggested. It may be my imagination, but it seems like the gtr signal was a little attenuated when set up this way. I went back and forth between straight into the amp and through the pedal listening closely, and I thought  the pedal version seemed  just a bit less gutsy. The difference (if any) was pretty small though.

[Chrisfromiowa]

Ok, that is great news. I hoped since it was passive it won't have many components to block the signal going backwards,  just the double pot and some extra wiring for the panning toggle, but now is going to be the hard part, finding one I can afford and convincing my wife I NEED it....  Thanks again Mr fugit, or tempus if I might be so familiar