Tap Tempo LFO Chip

[R.G.]

If we only knew what micro he was using...

C'mon guys. I've posted more for you than you're showing. How hard can it be? There aren't over half a dozen chips on the planet that have the
- right number of pins
- power supplies on the matching pins
- matching functions programmable to the correct pins

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him think. 

[MoltenVoltage]

I feel like John Cleese in the castle with King Arthur and his crew plotting to get in to find the Holy Grail:



Now where is the wooden rabbit!

[R.G.]

Just smile and count your money.

[decc]

Thanks Taylor. I will have to go back and read through that thread. Maybe there is still hope. I keep thinking of things like a Magnus Modulus where both the delay and tremelo could be tap tempo'd but at different beat divisions... But of course I have no idea how to impliment something like that. Time to do some reading.

Hmm. That would be possible but not using any stock chip. I would talk to user "Decc" who made the PTAP. He's a nice guy and knows his stuff. I know he could do something like that, it would only be a matter of rallying enough interested people to convince him.

Presumably the PTAP works for anything which is controlled by a resistance, so in some tremolos where the speed control is a variable resistor, the PTAP would just need to have its tap time-to-resistance slope rescaled (which I imagine would require a lot of testing of the actual circuit).

Correct, the general design used for the PTAP can be applied to tap-tempo control of anything (well, maybe not anything ) that is a resistance controlled time/frequency. The idea being that the two DIP-8 ICs go between the control pot and the point in the circuit where the pot used to be. It has been used in PT2399-based delays, and custom versions have been used in analog BBD-based delays and the EA Tremolo. The Magnus Modulus LFO rate is controlled by a 10k resistor so it should be applicable there too.

However if I understand things the MV-53 being a single chip that replaces an entire LFO section. So for new designs it would get you a lot more features and save board space, while something derived from the PTAP would be more of a drop-in mod for existing pedals.

[Cliff Schecht]

I just read through some of the other crap that people have been giving MV about his products. I'm going to shut up now. It's never fun being on the chopping block like that..

I've been through over two years of professors picking apart my circuits while I was presenting to the class. Luckily, I always have an answer and a joke to look smart and keep the mood light. Some people panic and flip out under the pressure though. I think MV has done a fine job of answering the necessary questions while not getting overly defensive. The "disposable douche" patent gag made me laugh .

I do understand that your chip has been designed to act as a plug-and-play black box, but it's not nice to keep developers (and potential bulk purchasers!) in the dark about some starndard specs.

[sb_grl]

Couldn't care less about which micro. Just wanted the dac spec so I could tell if this would work for us and questioned the 1.23MHz rate as I have worked with many high speed converters and have never seen something at that speed that was 16-bit and was any good. If it is a d-s converter and you are multiplying the sample rate by the oversample rate, then say so. If it is really a 1.23MHz sample rate then state the spec and structure, not going to be d-s at that rate so need to know so I can determine where noise ends up, not going to be way out of band like a d-s converter.

[MoltenVoltage]

Thanks Cliff.  Glad to know someone else has a sense of humor around here!

Just trying to keep a step ahead as you can understand but its just a matter of time before someone figures out that we are using the dsPIC33F chips.

R.G., I'd be counting the money if anyone were actually ordering the chips, but with total sales hovering around 10 chips after about a month, I think the chances of anyone cashing in are remote.  If anyone has a thousand hours to spare and wants to give away their time, then go for it!   just don't copy the tempo-wave sequencer bit

Like we said earlier in the thread, we can customize the chip with an order of 100.  Less than that and it just isn't worth the time.

Someone asked again, so I will repeat that samples of the Tempo-Wave Sequencer chip are available for $20 each.  Just shoot us an email and let us know where it will be shipped and we will send you a PayPal request.  

Now I've got to go back to the shop and work on the next project...

[R.G.]

R.G., I'd be counting the money if anyone were actually ordering the chips, but with total sales hovering around 10 chips after about a month, I think the chances of anyone cashing in are remote.  If anyone has a thousand hours to spare and wants to give away their time, then go for it! 

I think you mistook a bit of very dry humor.

I've seen friends get into the biz of selling customized uCs before. The results so far have all been a return on time of about $0.50 an hour.

The money doesn't take long to count. Note smiley... => 

[Nasse]

If that tempo thing is so important, all pedals should have a socket or some other kind of input/ouput for sync

If big companies would be smart, they had it done already

But if they did it, soon people want a Tempo Tapper, which does the hard brain work for them

[MoltenVoltage]

I've seen friends get into the biz of selling customized uCs before. The results so far have all been a return on time of about $0.50 an hour.

I've finally found something that pays even less than building pedals!

[Unbeliever]

   just don't copy the tempo-wave sequencer bit

Or else what? You'll sue them?

I'd like to see you try. Perhaps you'll get a chance to have a go a bit later this year.....

[MoltenVoltage]

   just don't copy the tempo-wave sequencer bit

Or else what? You'll sue them?

I'd like to see you try. Perhaps you'll get a chance to have a go a bit later this year.....

Decided to use your regular username again, huh Mike?

Let me give you a hand.  Everyone interested in building the wooden rabbit should email Mike here:
mikeb@prophecysound.com

You mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberry!

[Unbeliever]

Decided to use your regular username again, huh Mike?

I don't know what you are talking about. I'm sure if you really think I've posted under another name, you could ask a moderator to check IP addresses. But, you won't do that because you prefer to continue the sly personal attacks on me (as William did via private email and you did in the other thread) rather than actually answer a question. This is typical bully behaviour. Do anything to distract from the topic at hand, especially if it means taking cheap - and, frankly, immature - potshots at people. And keep on putting little winking smilies after statements about protecting your 'intellectual' property. Yeah, the quotes are placed in this case quite appropriately.

You guys are only willing to be nice and play ball when it's on your terms. But if someone - who could well be a future customer - asks about tech specs, well - people can see what kind of response you give them. There might be some connection between your customer service and your meagre sales figures, in case you haven't worked this out. And if someone else dare challenge your warped perspective on entitlement to protection of your 'intellectual' property, not to mention your Johnny-come-lately ignorance and predisposition to insulting communication, heaven help them also.

Maybe I'm to the point, but at least people know where they stand with me. You, on the other hand, treat people differently depending on if you stand to weasle some money out of their pockets, as compared to them asking hard questions about your product. And that, simply put, is just lame and slimy behaviour.

Oh, and - hey - you DO mention something about FCC approval to customers of your uC product, right?

[MoltenVoltage]

There might be some connection between your customer service and your meagre sales figures, in case you haven't worked this out.

I assume this comes from your infinite experience.

I also fail to see how selling a unique and original product is, in any way, "weasling" money from people's pockets.

As far as being a "Johnny come lately", while there has apparently been talk about a tap tempo LFO for years, we are the first commercial offering.

Don't you have something better to do with your time, dude?

[Processaurus]

I'm going to get a couple and try this out, $20 for a highly specialized part meant for a small market is totally reasonable, many specialty audio chips (think compressor IC's and the like) are expensive compared to the jelly bean chips that sell hundreds of thousands.  This would be perfect for a couple phase 100's that have been laying around for years here, I'll try cobbling together a Mu-tron biphase kind of thing.

[RonaldB]

Dispite off all the negative thing that are spoken here over MV, i have orderd on off there chips and wired it up and it work great.
They did a really good job on this thing, very acurrate and really nice waveforms and features.

Thanks MV

[MoltenVoltage]

i have orderd on off there chips and wired it up and it work great.
They did a really good job on this thing, very acurrate and really nice waveforms and features.

Thanks MV

Glad you like it Ronald, thanks for the feedback.

We have revised the MV-53 page with links to all three schematics here:
http://www.moltenvoltage.com/mv-53.html

[MoltenVoltage]

Now available at SmallBear!

[rustypinto]

Thanks for asking what I was too intimidated to ask, Flo.

I have a BBD chorus (Zombie Chorus), but all my delays are based on PT2399 which is digital and not a bucket brigade type delay chip.  But I am still curious how one would do it for the BBD circuits as well.

I managed to do it with a PIC:

http://www.vimeo.com/7521606

or

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0G_TEPZpRMk

It helps to know a lot of C! The PIC just turns into the free-running clock.

Here is a pic of the prototype PCB: