Torpedo Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 I want this arrangement because sometimes my wife and I watch and listen to the same movie using different phones, with different sensitivity and we also enjoy different volume levels, so that feature would be extremely handy. When watching some action movie in the night you can have way better sound and involvement using phones than the speaker system at low levels not to bother the neighbours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torpedo Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 LOL you woulnd't like mine doing it though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j4cbo Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 The left and right channels will have independent attenuators, yes. The UI for controlling two separate channels at once might be kinda awkward, though, since there will only be one knob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torpedo Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 The left and right channels will have independent attenuators, yes. The UI for controlling two separate channels at once might be kinda awkward, though, since there will only be one knob. So the board would be able to do what we are planning, being able to regulate separately the level of each channel on balanced mode, and setting the level for each separated amp on SE. If the board also controls the source input, it could even be taken a step further and being able to use different sources for each SE amp. Could that be done? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icarium Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 Er there is still the problem of how you want to control things with one knob. The logic could start getting a little hairy and the UI could get very unwieldy. So I don't think the design concept as it stands now can support your first suggestion. Thoughts j4cbo? Like yes there are separate attenuators but there is only one actual user facing volume control planned right now. Your second suggestion with regards to different sources with different amps will be even more hairy... how would you try and control that with just one knob that can turn left to right and depress inwards like a button? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torpedo Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 Maybe just having the option to tell the chip if you're turning the pot for amp1 or amp2? The same could be done for each channel on balanced mode. As I see it this could be just a software thing. You need to be able to tell the chip controlling things what are you using the pot for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icarium Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 Yeah so how it works now is you push the knob in to switch from between change volume, select input, check current info, check temperature info etc. I suppose j4cbo could insert slect output in there and bounce between left/right/balanced operation... but it would be pretty unwieldy since you'd have to cycle through everything to move from left to right. Moreover if this isnt something a majority of people want then they would be inconvenienced by having an extra thing to cycle through. I suppose it could be jumper disabled or something maybe? But complexity just seems to keep on increasing? Dunno. Paging j4cbo! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grahame Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 Er there is still the problem of how you want to control things with one knob. The logic could start getting a little hairy and the UI could get very unwieldy. So I don't think the design concept as it stands now can support your first suggestion. Thoughts j4cbo? Like yes there are separate attenuators but there is only one actual user facing volume control planned right now. Your second suggestion with regards to different sources with different amps will be even more hairy... how would you try and control that with just one knob that can turn left to right and depress inwards like a button? The knob on the Transporter, or the Boom provide a model. Consider PUSH = select mode, TURN = +/- SO PUSH = Menu Mode +/- Scroll through Menu to find Mode/value/setting you are interested in PUSH = Select Mode Setting +/- Change value you are interested in. PUSH back to menu mode. Default would be volume, so +/- changes volume , until you push it and then you're into menu/select mode. Seems very workable to me. Even better if you can define the order/Text/mapping of modes offline + upload them. Then everyone's happy. They can even internationalize the text on the display Use case for Torpedo. PUSH Select Mode Scroll to OUTPUT MODE +/- BALANCED SE SPLIT SE PUSH Select Mode Scroll to INPUT for SE 1 +/- PUSH Select Mode Scroll to INPUT for SE 2 +/- PUSH Select Mode Scroll to VOLUME for SE 1 +/- PUSH Select Mode Scroll to VOLUME for SE 2 +/- That work? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torpedo Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 Yep, that's the idea. If this can be done using the J4cbo controller then it'd be great. Otherwise we'd do it the old fashion system of using two separate volume pots which in balanced would control one channel each, and in SE mode (switchable) one separate amp each. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j4cbo Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 Graheme: That's exactly what I'm thinking. I'm going to be using the same knob module as the Transporter. The UI won't be quite the same since they have a separate "back" button, which I'd like to do without, but overall the concept will be similar. And yes, coming up with a good way to manage the potential customizability of it all will be tough... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naamanf Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 If your feeling really froggy I know Alps makes a rotary encoder that does push as well as directional functions. Similar to the BMW iDrive type knobs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grahame Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 Graheme: That's exactly what I'm thinking. I'm going to be using the same knob module as the Transporter. The UI won't be quite the same since they have a separate "back" button, which I'd like to do without, but overall the concept will be similar. And yes, coming up with a good way to manage the potential customizability of it all will be tough... The Back button is a side effect of having a hierarchical menu system. This appears to have a flat menu system. If all we have are doing is selecting a property, (read only , or read/write name value pairs) Then push toggles us between two modes, select name/property, and set value for selected named property, set being a no-op for read only properties. (The display the just displays property name + value) The set of properties is bounded, and can be treated as a flat list or menu. This may make it easier to do the IR remote, as you could just map the push + & - keys, Numeric keys map to a property Dedicated volume +/- keys perhaps. If you are using the Transporter module, does that mean there is haptic feedback? Or that once you selected the right menu item on the transporter, Transporter knob inputs would be treated as amp knob inputs ( ditto for the controller I guess). Hope I'm not adding to much noise to the signal here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j4cbo Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 Haptic feedback, yes. (I could also add an RS232 connection from a Transporter to the amp, such that the amp could be controlled via a Transporter or Controller, but not everyone who will be using this thing has a Transporter ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morphsci Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 Haptic feedback, yes. (I could also add an RS232 connection from a Transporter to the amp, such that the amp could be controlled via a Transporter or Controller, but not everyone who will be using this thing has a Transporter ) That is something that I would find useful as I do have a transporter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torpedo Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 No Transporter here, but remote controlling the thing would be just awesome Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smeggy Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 Is it pretty easy to integrate one of those motorized volume pots in a build like this? I'd like remote but nothing overly complex and a motor seems like a nice cheap option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j4cbo Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 Depends on how you define "pretty easy" and "like this". I'm primarily doing the controller board design for the builds I'm doing. I'll release everything, yes, and it'd be straightforward for someone who's competent with AVR C programming to integrate pretty much anything in... but I don't really have time to add support for the kitchen sink if I won't be using it myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smeggy Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 I'm just talking about a motorized RK27 or similar to replace a standard pot. I looked about and haven't see how they're controlled yet. Maybe I'm thinking they're something they're not regarding remote control. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digger945 Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 LED3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PICaudio Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Talked with Jeff of Glass Jar he said he had received payments for Team Canada (Looser101), luvdunhill, Team Jacob, Team Spain and has shipped the shipments. The S22 kits of Team Spain arrived to my home the las saturday, all things 100% OK . -- o -- Rodrigo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icarium Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Hooray! Yeah I think j4cbo is already done populating most of 8 boards (No diodes/heatsinks/fets yet)... So I think he will try and get the release candidate updated tonight or soon... but just out of curiosity would anyone else be interested in SumR toroids? I know we shouldn't do anymore buys until prototyping, but since this guy has already worked out the quoting with me extensively I figured I'd start moving forward with it. Luvdunhill/team j4cbo is looking at so far 6 SumR Size is: OD: 6" HT: 3.25" Primary: 2 x 120Vac 60Hz, Sec : 4 x 30V, Total 260VA Price fully encapsulated and shielded: US $ 107.00. Luvdunhill may be on his own as far as transformer since he wants bottom exiting leads and I think team j4cob wants top. Anyways if we have enough to get 10 I think there's a price break, but it's not that significant... so if no one is interested then no worries. If you are let me know and I'll toss your #s into the mix. 300VA I think was the limit of how much VA he could cram into this size can with it still being suitable for audio purposes... we decided to go down a little bit to not push that limit as hard in case our needs are more stringent than his guestimation... but 230VA was the limit of the next size smaller.. and we didn't ask about the next size up. The rate at which cost goes up seems pretty low so if you wanted to get an insanely huge xformer I'm sure it wouldn't be too much more (under 200). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digger945 Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Yeah I think j4cbo is already done populating most of 8 boards (No diodes/heatsinks/fets yet)... Prototypes on pcb's? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icarium Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Sigma22s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luvdunhill Posted March 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 (edited) not directly related, but I'm messing around with my first input transformer tonite for single-ended to balanced conversion and balanced input isolation. I like what I hear so far, much better sounding than the IC solutions I've played with. I'll report back once I get the Sowters in house (I have a pair of Cinemag on loan). I'm interested in seeing if the center tap on the Sowters provides any benefit over the pair of resistors after the Cinemags. edit: one note so far, seems the input impedance really needs to be < 600 ohms. So, I'll throw that out there as the one constraint I've seen so far. Edited March 23, 2009 by luvdunhill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PICaudio Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 I made a little change in the heatsink, I changed the pins for metric screws (M3), it's very easy mod and I prefer the screws. -- o -- Rodrigo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.