GSSL SuperSC board

Has anyone done a PCB layout for Clintrubber's combined ext/hpf/thrust schematic yet?

I'm working on one now, which I'll probably finish even if another exists, just to get a bit of practice with PCB123.

I'm also considering new PCB layouts for the GSSL itself. Nothing wrong with the originals for a stereo unit, but I'm thinking of making it modular; a signal path (VCA) board, a sidechain board (with combined filter/ext options) and a PSU board.
I imagine I'll keep the front panel control board the same, probably a direct reprint.

That thrust filter sounds interesting. I'd like to try a board like that if anyone ends up making them.

About a different GSSL layout, assuming you have permission, I think it's a good idea - assuming you have permission. The current board is tricky, solder pads very close, and it would be nice to have the parts numbered, like C1, C2 and the schematic with corresponding numbered parts to make navigating the circuit easier for slow guys like me. -- Assuming you have permission from Gustav and whomever.

edits: added GSSL comments.

[quote author="DaxLiniere"]Has anyone done a PCB layout for Clintrubber's combined ext/hpf/thrust schematic yet?[/quote]
Not that I know of, but you could use my pic (or that from Purusha) as a parts placement diagram - since this is such an easy circuit the wiring will follow from there. Or just veroboard is, sounds better :wink:

I'm working on one now, which I'll probably finish even if another exists, just to get a bit of practice with PCB123.

Click to expand...

Always nice, would be interesting to see it before it goes to fab.

Bye,

Peter

I have a pcb for that, but I want to test it before , I hope this week I will finish it.

I have the PCB layout ready also. I have test it and it works. If anyone wants it you can download it http://users.volja.net/purusha/PCB-print.rar but it's a part of my other circuit adds.

@ purusha:

do you hear a big difference with your distortion switching??

I couldn't hear any distortion at all, when I adjusted
the thd trimmers of the vcas...

I think the level indication of the output signal is a good idea..

but why do you only take the level oft the left channel??
wouldn't it be more precise to sum left and right,
or to compare both levels and indicate the loudest one??
in a lot of other circuits I've seen the typical lm339 comparator ic for that purpose..

Matthias

Actually I didn't hear the distortion either when shortly testing the first unit.

Otherwise I used only the left channel just to make it more simple. I also don't have any schematics for the summing version. Though I could double up my existing level indicator circuits. If someone has the schematics for the lm339 comparator, please, I'd be very happy to have it.

Well, here it is.



It's probably not a very good design, but hey, it's my first layout and I'm sure it's correct.
Having said that though, I'd love it if someone had the time to go over it and check it against the schematic please.

I couldn't find the schematic on the forum, so here's a link to the file hosted on my server:
Edit: Link removed, see post below

I suppose if this PCB is popular, I can organise a group buy.

Cheers guys.

I just realised I left off the 100nF caps between each of the supply rails and ground. I will add those next revision.

[quote author="DaxLiniere"]I couldn't find the schematic on the forum, so here's a link to the file hosted on my server:
http://www.puzzlefactory.com.au/THIS IS IT!!! (except C22 (150nF) should be 47uF electro).pdf
[/quote]
Hi,

Instead of that one on your server I prefer we link right away to where you got yours:

Thr*st-circuit

It was there and still is.

I'll correct the 150nF-value this evening, that way we have one source and not several to choose from, like for the Melcor 1731-schematic :wink:

I suppose if this PCB is popular, I can organise a group buy.

Click to expand...

[rant]BTW, I don't see much difference with the recent HotRod-Neve-PCB issue between Greg & Joe Malone and what seems around the corner over here. The Neve design is not Joe's, but his adaptation of it is, at least in a sense.

Same here imho: I'm not owning anything A*P*I-sidechainish of course, but 'reverse-engineered' half of it (better said: I mapped a circuit on a published graph).
So I wouldn't have any problem with it that PCBs were made, but if that had happened without a short 'fine-by-you ?' question to me then I would have considered that not completely correct.[/rant]

W.r.t. the non-'reverse-engineered' part of it, be aware that it's covered under a patent. I couldn't tell you what that would mean in practice if you were selling PCBs for it. (It would in fact be interesting to learn about the legal side of that).

Regards,

Peter

[quote author="DaxLiniere"]I just realised I left off the 100nF caps between each of the supply rails and ground. I will add those next revision.[/quote]
As said one post above, let's stick to one source for the schematic. I'll add those caps as well.

Bye,

Peter

here is my pcb.
http://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&ufid=691A99043B78C455

I can´t up load it on the forum gallery. I don´t know why.
is little big pdf 2.7Mb, how do you do pdf files? photoshop don´t seems to be the right tool.

I thought to test it this week but I had some problems with the toner.
it should work well.

if you don´t want to use a 12 position switch just wire what you want.

[quote author="12afael"]here is my pcb.
http://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&ufid=691A99043B78C455

I can´t up load it on the forum gallery. I don´t know why.
is little big pdf 2.7Mb, how do you do pdf files? photoshop don´t seems to be the right tool.[/quote]
I don't want to be a &*$%, but that file should even have been a bit larger in size. I mean, why copy the schematic and leave out the notes I added ?

And note C22 needs to be larger in value, as noted in the thread after I posted the schematic (C27 in your renumbered schematic).

I don't want to be a &*$%, but that file should even have been a bit larger in size. I mean, why copy the schematic and leave out the notes I added ?

Click to expand...

I didn´t want to put the schematic, but I use diferent number for the part so I had to put it, if no, there would be confusion. I don´t know how make a 2 page pdf on photoshop so there is not a lot of space for the notes.

And note C22 needs to be larger in value, as noted in the thread after I posted the schematic (C27 in your renumbered schematic).

Click to expand...

I replace the value of C22 (C27) for 47uF and add your notes, I remove the note 4 because the supply rails caps are on the pcb and schematic.

here is the new pdf.(1.7Mb)
http://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&ufid=53EF7C903D0252BE

Hi Peter,
I started writing a huge, long response, complete with quotes from your posts in this thread, but realised it would make me seem as narky as you and so I have given up. Instead, I shall apologise and hope we can put this behind us and get back to having fun.
I'm truly sorry you are enraged and I don't know how I hit such a nerve.
I am surprised you missed the casual nature of this thread.

I couldn't find where the file originally resided, so to present any onlookers with ALL the information, I decided to host it myself. The only thing changed was the filename, which I did when I first downloaded the file; another reason I couldn't find the original link.
But yes, I agree, just like star-ground, we should have one source. :wink:

If I actually did get a quantity of these boards printed, I would be selling them the same way I would expect anyone else on the forum to do so, as a non-profit exercise i.e. as a service to the DIY community. To say thankyou for the many, MANY wonderful things this forum has given each and every one of us. It may seem hard to believe that, in this day and
age, someone is willing to be nice for no other reason but to "pay it forward." Great movie, great concept.

"the non-'reverse-engineered' part of it, be aware that it's covered under a patent."

I gotta say a big thanks for this one though, I hadn't thought of that yet.
But I just had an idea. What if the PCB had no parts values on the silkscreen, just part numbers (r1, c12, etc) and the PCBs shipped with no documentation? Surely that would allow anyone to put any parts anywhere they wanted on the board, making it universal.

And by the way, I prefer Rafiael's layout anyway. (with the exception of my pin header for the switch connection)

[quote author="DaxLiniere"]Hi Peter,
I started writing a huge, long response, complete with quotes from your posts in this thread, but realised it would make me seem as narky as you and so I have given up. Instead, I shall apologise and hope we can put this behind us and get back to having fun.
I'm truly sorry you are enraged and I don't know how I hit such a nerve.
I am surprised you missed the casual nature of this thread.[/quote]
Please don't use 'narky' & 'enraged', since I wasn't. Please don't depict me like that. I'm all for fun, but also for the nice way of doing things - as we've 'developed' here over the years. So to give credit where it's due, like Greg for instance did by mentioning Stef's name for designing it (since he got all this sidechain-stuff started). And I'm not touchy, it's just that I considered the HotRod/Greg-PCB the correct way to do it (like it finally turned out). That was all. Note that Gregs boards are non-profit as well, and what you want to do it of course a nice action, that wasn't my point.

But yes, I agree, just like star-ground, we should have one source. :wink:

Click to expand...

Right ! You may have seen all the confusion caused by the multiple 1731-versions out there. Let's avoid that.

"the non-'reverse-engineered' part of it, be aware that it's covered under a patent."

I gotta say a big thanks for this one though, I hadn't thought of that yet.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Your usage of the word 'though' gives me the feeling that you are madder at me than I was at you :wink:
But w.r.t. the patent, I guess it'll be not too hard to avoid 'issues' indeed, once realized.

Enough, best regards,

Peter

[quote author="12afael"]

I don't want to be a &*$%, but that file should even have been a bit larger in size. I mean, why copy the schematic and leave out the notes I added ?

Click to expand...

I didn´t want to put the schematic, but I use diferent number for the part so I had to put it, if no, there would be confusion. [/quote]
I see an alternative way to solve that, just stick to the original numbering

I don´t know how make a 2 page pdf on photoshop so there is not a lot of space for the notes.

Click to expand...

Wouldn't know of an elegant solution. If you have the possibility you could generate two separate graphic files and combine these into a two page pdf (may be clumsy though).

And note C22 needs to be larger in value, as noted in the thread after I posted the schematic (C27 in your renumbered schematic).

Click to expand...

I replace the value of C22 (C27) for 47uF and add your notes, I remove the note 4 because the supply rails caps are on the pcb and schematic.

Click to expand...

That's it :thumb:

I see an alternative way to solve that, just stick to the original numbering

Click to expand...

I have another one , put a note that say

*2* note component numbering doesn't match other drawings

Click to expand...

:wink:

my original idea was to maintain the same numeration but it was too much work .

Wouldn't know of an elegant solution. If you have the possibility you could generate two separate graphic files and combine these into a two page pdf (may be clumsy though).

Click to expand...

I don´t know how. could fine print do this????

here is a better link
http://groupdiy.twin-x.com/displayimage.php?pos=-1199

Hey Rafael,

Not sure if you've put it together yet or not, but last night I traced out your PCB design and can confirm that it's identical to Clintrubber's schematic, so I will (hopefully this week) print this PCB and put it together.

Thanks very much for the layout, it kicks my layout's ass!

What software did you use?

thanx for check it.
I use eagle , a problem of the PCB is that it does not have some parts holes, now I know how do it in eagle well so I will fix it soon.