Dual Core Flanger concept

[frequencycentral]

I have a dream.......

Two flanger cores in parallel in the same box. Each with it's own LFO, but also the ability to share an LFO - the second flanger core getting an inverted version of the LFO. And the ability to 'stop' the sweep of one flanger core and manually set it's delay time for TZF. As well as the ability to bypass one flanger core for standard flanging.

[oldschoolanalog]

I have a vision...
Rick is up to something...
(Do you ever sleep?)

[frequencycentral]

(Do you ever sleep?)

I have a dream.......

You don't sleep - you don't dream..... 

I actually despite myself for having to sleep now and again. I consider it a weakness. Life is so short. So many ideas to explore.

[oldschoolanalog]

There is daydreaming.
Either way, you never cease to amaze!

[iccaros]

I have been kicking this ideal around with dual rebot 2.5,

[deadastronaut]

I actually despite myself for having to sleep now and again. I consider it a weakness. Life is so short. So many ideas to explore.

yeah know what ya mean!..not enough days in an hour ........yawn....stretch......
sounds like another great project man.....

[earthtonesaudio]

How about continuously adjustable phase difference rather than normal + inverted?  That would really open up the "spacious" capabilities, especially for stereo outs.  Of course, that almost demands using a microcontroller for the LFOs, which may be a turn off to a lot of people.

[culturejam]

I think FF_Pedals (the guy who did the Magnus Modulus) mentioned something remotely similar to this. He talked about using a pair 2399s to do a pseudo dual flange type thing. Maybe I'll see if I can get him to chime in here.

Nice thinking as usual, Rick. 

[frequencycentral]

Going to base this around MN3101 and MN3007 as they're reletively cheap and easily available. Fernando Ruz did some nice mods to a FL301 to get some really deep flanging, he's kindly consented to me using his mods for this project.

[Puguglybonehead]

The FL301 looks to have a fairly low parts count. (for a flanger) Perfect choice for this. This looks exciting! A DIY flanger that can do through-zero flanging. It would be cool to build this into a wah pedal and have a manual sweep option like the old Morley Pro flanger.

[R.G.]

Try looking up "barberpole flanger" too.

[Scruffie]

I dunno if you're set on the 3101/3007 pair but I 'designed' a Flanger which I thinkkk has a lower parts count than the Hollis Ultra Flanger, without any tick issues etc. Using a V3207 & 4047/4049 clock Set up... nice and swooshy.

It's got the same filtering as the electric mistress aswell so it should be fairly easy to work with and research.

[Strategy]

I have what I think is a fake MN3007 and it's just leaning me more and more towards thinking current production chips are better...where possible...

Strategy

I dunno if you're set on the 3101/3007 pair but I 'designed' a Flanger which I thinkkk has a lower parts count than the Hollis Ultra Flanger, without any tick issues etc. Using a V3207 & 4047/4049 clock Set up... nice and swooshy.

It's got the same filtering as the electric mistress aswell so it should be fairly easy to work with and research.

[frequencycentral]

I have what I think is a fake MN3007 and it's just leaning me more and more towards thinking current production chips are better...where possible...

Strategy

I dunno if you're set on the 3101/3007 pair but I 'designed' a Flanger which I thinkkk has a lower parts count than the Hollis Ultra Flanger, without any tick issues etc. Using a V3207 & 4047/4049 clock Set up... nice and swooshy.

It's got the same filtering as the electric mistress aswell so it should be fairly easy to work with and research.

Yeah that's a really good point. I was thinking 3101/3007 because I've got a few and because you do see them around at decent prices, but fakes are around too. You're right, this project would have more legs with a current production chip.

[petemoore]

  For the LFO's, a question...whether or not digital and all it's trouble might be easier to get what you want [in the end] with the twin LFO synchronicity or assynchronious behaviours.
   Not really a suggestion or real contribution, just posing alternatives.

[LP Hovercraft]

What about an LFO with the ability to have quadrature outputs w/90 degree phase lags tapped from different points around the lfo circuit?

[LP Hovercraft]

I saw a circuit called a "Bubba Oscillator" the other day with that ability.  It makes sine waves, though, not triangles and certainly not Schmitt triggered waves.

[Thomeeque]

How about continuously adjustable phase difference rather than normal + inverted?  That would really open up the "spacious" capabilities, especially for stereo outs.  Of course, that almost demands using a microcontroller for the LFOs, which may be a turn off to a lot of people.

Actually, on the other hand, pre-programmed PIC (or other microcontroller) with such functionality could be interesting selling article..

With smart firmware it could have zillion of interesting features - 2 or even more LFOs /sync, async/, different shapes incl. hypertriangularity and random, "infinite" speed range, voltage control and much much more, all of this with minimal PCB footprint and part count (custom shapes could even simplify additional LFO signal processing circuitry, so it would not replace LFO only), it could be relatively cheap (expenses for "manufacturer"/seller would be minimal)..

Hm hm hm, T.

[oldschoolanalog]

Read ALL of this:
http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=72676.0
And COPY what interests you before it is taken down. If you search "Quadrature LFO" and go through the threads you will know why I am suggesting this.

[puretube]

Read ALL of this:
http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=72676.0
And COPY what interests you before it is taken down. If you search "Quadrature LFO" and go through the threads you will know why I am suggesting this.

Afraid that good ole "walters" will re-introduce the edit-button , osa?