Single pole rotary switch parametric eq?

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

spreemusik

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2005
Messages
77
Location
Berlin, Germany
I have a bunch (20 or so) of 1x31 rotary switches lying around, and would love to use them for a mastering EQ. But all designs I've found so far require at least 2-pole switches (instead of pots) somewhere.
Any pointers for a simple, good-sounding design?

 
Almost impossible in a conventional way; a parametric filter has two frequency elements that need to be tandem-controlled. If you control only one of them, the Boost/Cut and Q will vary also with frequency. This will be contrary to the definition of a parametric EQ, in which the three parameters are independant.

But you could use the rotary switch to control CMOS switches...
 
I do have a whole bunch of cmos switches too, from an old router, but I'd prefer not to go that route.
Perhaps I could only use the switches for the boost/cut, maybe even for a passive eq? A 2x6 switch for frequency is no problem,
 
If I understood correctly, you could go the LC (or gyrator-C) route. This way you could use one switch to set the center-frequency, and another switch to set the boost/cut.

Perhaps there are other ways?
 
I just saw that the 3deq could work. Okay, it isn't parametric at all  :p
Still browsing my collection for a nice LC-design. I have a bunch of inductors from a vermona eq. But I really doubt they'll sound good for a mastering EQ.

 
tv said:
If I understood correctly, you could go the LC (or gyrator-C) route. This way you could use one switch to set the center-frequency, and another switch to set the boost/cut.

Perhaps there are other ways?
Then it's not a parametric anymore; it's a switchable-frequency EQ, on which you can't easily change the Q.
 
It looks like I can make them into 2x15 by stealing a "wiper" from one, so I guess they become more useful that way. But I'll probably lose a few in the process. Strange things, got them off the bay a long time ago.

I might try making a 169 eq, although a general colour eq doesn't really need that kind of step resolution.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top