Options
would these be useful to anyone?
exhausted
Posts: 6,638
http://www3.telus.net/alcoholiday/guitar/pedaldesigns.gif
these are two utility pedals i am going to make at some point for my board. since i'm switching from an SKB with integral routing etc. i want to make the same thing for my new board but with some added functionality.
so, the loop combiner would be used to switch the order of two loops of pedals. as you know, a delay before a distortion sounds very different then after. same for wah and whatever. so with this you can switch the signal chain order with one stomp.
the input/output box is just a line selector and a patch bay basically. i have an acoustic loop and an electric loop. but you could use it for a dirty amp and a clean amp each with it's own effects etc. i haven't decided whether to use two or three switches yet.
if i go three, the layout would be:
1. AMP 1 on/off
2. AMP 2 on/off
3. tuner (mutes outputs)
another option for three would be:
1. switch between AMP1/AMP2
2. both AMP1 & AMP2 on
3. tuner (mutes outputs)
if i go two, the layout would be
1. switch between AMP1/AMP2
2. tuner (mutes outputs)
right now, i'm showing the first config.
both pedals have 9V feed for the LEDs.
so what do you think? would these be useful for the general population? the concepts are all out there already in expense controllers etc. (even the LS-2 and a morley A/B aren't cheap) but these would be cheap and small.
these are two utility pedals i am going to make at some point for my board. since i'm switching from an SKB with integral routing etc. i want to make the same thing for my new board but with some added functionality.
so, the loop combiner would be used to switch the order of two loops of pedals. as you know, a delay before a distortion sounds very different then after. same for wah and whatever. so with this you can switch the signal chain order with one stomp.
the input/output box is just a line selector and a patch bay basically. i have an acoustic loop and an electric loop. but you could use it for a dirty amp and a clean amp each with it's own effects etc. i haven't decided whether to use two or three switches yet.
if i go three, the layout would be:
1. AMP 1 on/off
2. AMP 2 on/off
3. tuner (mutes outputs)
another option for three would be:
1. switch between AMP1/AMP2
2. both AMP1 & AMP2 on
3. tuner (mutes outputs)
if i go two, the layout would be
1. switch between AMP1/AMP2
2. tuner (mutes outputs)
right now, i'm showing the first config.
both pedals have 9V feed for the LEDs.
so what do you think? would these be useful for the general population? the concepts are all out there already in expense controllers etc. (even the LS-2 and a morley A/B aren't cheap) but these would be cheap and small.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
The problem with the morley, LS-2 and whirlwind is that they are noisey
You need to use a high quality 3pdt switch to make it true bypass and these will be great, the lone problem the 3pdt's are expensive but they last forever.
the loop combiner shouldn't need anything but a switch and wires but the I/O might be hairy. i still haven't wrapped my head around why an A/B box has more than switches and wires. buffers i know but.....
lots of reading to do i guess.
wait, neither of these should need any buffers. it's just signal routing.
Robert fuller breaks down why you need 3pdt. on his website (fulltone.com) you can get away with 2pdt (carling) but the 3pdt is a much better cleaner switch.
i also just found a true-bypass scheme w/ LED using a DPDT switch which means i don't need to buy $15 stomps.
but again, true bypass isn't really an issue since there's no effect in these boxes.
Basically everything you need is at radioshack. I suggest browsing the keeley website for news on capacitors or just e-mail robert and ask. The guy will go out of his way to tell you how to wire something up or tell you the correct cap to use.
I like the big green film caps and the tantalum caps. They have cool colored LEDs at Radio Shack too.
oh well. not that i thought i invented something anyway.
I'm really not as dumb as I look.
sorry, totally didn't mean to imply that at all. you've got more knowledge then i do on this stuff.
for instance "You're cleverer than you look."
"Still better than looking cleverer than you are."
i can't believe how gorgeous this body is. the finish looks like it's about a mile deep.