Calrec PQ 1061

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Geoff Tanner might be a good source of info

You could also try Avedis at Brent Averill. Geoff sent me his way to get some oddball parts for a couple of neve modules, and he was very friendly and helpful. Since they redo these modules he might be able to help with some info on the inductor, although I don't know how much he'd be willing to divulge. Could be worth a try.

Zach
 
Yeah thanks Zach, I tried emailing about a month ago and never heard back...

I think we'll suss it in the end. Maybe I'll email again. Does anybody have Avedis' personal email? (PM me if so)

Cheers Tom
 
I think I still have it at work, I'll check tomorrow when I get in. If I find it I'll PM it to you.

Zach
 
Plenty of love....thanks for the bump.

Buz has the gain switch sorted but I think he's real busy with work......he'll let us know eventually.

The only major thing to sort is the MF inductor and I'm still waiting to hear from my ex-BBC engineer friend. If you could perhaps measure yours then we could move forward? I'm not sure how though....

This will not be a quick project at all, I'd expect to be close to redesign by maybe june / july. I'll have more time then as well - no more uni!

Lets wait to see what Buz has. In the mean time maybe you could try to chase Averill/Vintage King about the inductor....I got no joy via email but you're a customer no? Maybe they will divulge that info to someone who dropped some $$$ at them...

Cheers Tom
 
Good to see this popping up again. Just checked in after a while away. Looks like I might get a weekend off and be able to return home so if that is the case I'll post what I have at home, if not I'll try and get creative in my spare time around here. It is something I am planning on spending time on.... eventually. I have been listening to some stuff I had tracked a bit ago with the calrecs and want to make some of these.

Brian
 
Thought I'd lift this again,

I was looking at your foto's Buz and noticed that the BA output TX is a Jensen....I don't think we picked up on that before(?).

I scoured around their site and found a bunch of JT-123 line output TX's but not the 123-DL.

By the looks of it the line output TX is a pretty standard 1:1, 600ohm:600ohm TX, at least thats what the majority of the JT-123 Jensen line appear to be.
Maybe the JT-123-BMCF is useable, its quad-filar and I think the TX Hardy uses (?).

Anyway....

Bumped
-Tom
 
OK, have some stuff here. Actually at home on a moday with more time than to just get laundry done and head out!

Maybe this will help. The TX provide either a gain of 1 or 3 depending whether it is in the line or mic position respectively. The two gain stages follow the standard gain equation for such stage. In this case it is:

Note:this is for the mic positions only, other things happen in some line positions, see below.

Av=5K1/Req where Req for the first stage is R3//Rswitch(1). Rswitch being the cummulative resitance added by those resistors. R3 is 330K.

Note // = parallel

for the secong stage it is R11//Rswitch(2) where R11=8K2.

The attenuation network provides a 5db range from approx(all this is approx, I did roundings roughly) -1.6db to -6.45db when the wiper is in the middle it is about -4db.

The equation for the att (note: this is ignoring R6 the adjust on test resistor, it is not in place in the unit I have.. more on that in a minute)

Rpt=top of pot, Rpb=bottom of pot.

Att=(R9+(Rpb//R7)) / ((R5+Rpt)+(R9+(Rpb//R7)))

Looking at the values as if the gain was in the -30 position. I'll assume they want to o/p to be 0 therfore a gain of 30db was desired.

So Req for Gain stage = 330K//550 = 549, then the gain is 5K1/549+1 or about 10.29

Req for stage 2 = 8K2//open = 8K2, then the gain is 5K1/8K2+1 or about 1.62

With the att. in the '0' db position or techincally -4db or roughly *.62 then we have

TX * Av1 * Att * Av2 = 3*10.29*.62*1.62 = 31

A gain of 31 is approx 29.9 db, so pretty close to 30.

I believe this to be correct, but I don't do this for a living any more.

The gain works out to the expected value. Next I will layout the gain as selected by the according resistors allowing us the set up whatever gain settings we want and still use the ratio of gain from Av1 and Av2. Coming soo. Promise.

As far as the AOT and other differences between the schematic and the unit I have. Well there is a difference and I think even though the front of the box says 1061, the fact that the circuit board says 1161 tells me they are not entire the same. The gain blocks are and the general gain structure is, certainly the TX is but there are things I cannot reconcile between the two. I am going to roll with the schematic as reversing the ciruit is more than I am up to.

Hope this is helpful. Like I said, latere today I (should) be able to post the other info. It is not difficult now that we have the equations.

NOTE: This is only valid when the unit is in the Mic input positions. More than just a TX tap switch happens when it is switched. Some padding occurs on the rotary switches 'backside' R108 etc and that. This is also something I'll do the math on later.

EDIT:
Essentially it throws R108 or R108+R114 in a divider circuit with the 3k3 resistor following Av1

Brian
 
After looking at the schematic, those equations should be accurate to the +5 gain poisition where the line pad after Av1 kicks in. The gain of 3 needs to be changed to 1 when the switch is in the -20 to +10 posistions though.

Brian
 
Here is a link to an MS excel file that shows the gain for all the stages including the line pad and various values etc... After seeing the resulting values I think the eq. are correct. Ok what do we do now?

http://home.earthlink.net/~brianwallen/temp/1061gain.xls

or if you don't have excel, here an html version

http://home.earthlink.net/~brianwallen/temp/1061gain.htm


Brian
 
Freakin' awesome Buz!

GREAT work! I'll cast my novice eye over these when I get some more time. Got to write a paper for school tonight....

As to what we do now...I'm not sure. We can't really breadboard without the input TX. Maybe we should look at the LP/HP filters and decide what can be chucked out?

I would be really happy with three HP positions and no LP filter at all - that also saves an inductor.

Any other thoughts from lurkers, soundguy?

Still need to solve the MF inductor values.....I'm having a hard time tracking down my BBC friend.

Isn't there a guy here who works for Calrec (Toby?) maybe we could just ask them?

Good stuff man.
Cheers Tom
 
[quote author="TomWaterman"]
I would be really happy with three HP positions and no LP filter at all - that also saves an inductor.

Any other thoughts from lurkers?
Cheers Tom[/quote]

I'm Lurking! :cool:

I'd be happy with 3 HP and No LP.

thanks you guys this is amazing! you are amazing. :guinness: :guinness: :guinness: :guinness: :thumb:
 
2 hi pass positions (or none) would even be fine with me. Doing away with the lowpass is also a good idea. If the hi-pass filter is troublesome to get I would say just leave it out of the circuit or optional to make it easier for people to build. I know I dont really need to spend another $30 or $40 on an inductor so I can have a hipass filter, Id assume leave it out. We should design this so its cheap and easy, thats a good way to cut a corner.

dave
 
Yep I see the filters as useful for guys who track to all analogue but if you track to a DAW like me then I prefer to filter non-destructively so to speak, after the effect, in plug-in land.

Even two positions on the HP would be good. Just switchable by toggle switch maybe to save on panel space....

What values though? I like the idea of 47Hz, 82Hz and 150Hz.
Maybe just 82 and 150Hz....that covers most tasks like OH, Vox, Electric geetar etc

The filters look like they use some weird switches, there seems to be a smaller switch in the LF section...DPDT or something...

Does anyone else find it anying looking at the schemo? Its such a big file it takes ages to scroll thru it in microsoft fax picture viewer. PITA

-Tom
 
Not sure if anyone had done this yet put I sent an email to Cinemag about the posibility of recreating the inductor. I know people that have had custom jobs done there. Maybe they know something. Good news is that during the week where I work is just about 15 miles from their location. Maybe something might come of it.

Brian
 
You know, losing the HPF and LPF or simplifying it to what you all are talking about is probably a really good idea. I was just looking at the schematic and I never realized just how much circutry they used to implement those functions. I'd go for the simple 1 or 2 position. Most my mics have a HPF filter anyway, as well as my console and DAW so..... But we could easily implement a singal pole 2 posistion or a simpler 2 pole than they have gone with. Wouldn'e be 'stock' but.... Just thinking out loud.


Brian
 
I dont think this project is best served by keeping it "stock". I would much rather have a project based on that without the filters than no project at all because we couldnt get the inductors or the thing was too expensive or too complicated to put together.

dave
 
Back
Top