EZ1084EQ NEW BATCH COMING - SEE MY MARCH 27 COMMENT ON PAGE 38

[Bluzzi]

The following is what started this project which is a NEVE 1084 PCB with detailed documentation as a Build Guide and BOM. Extreme effort was made to facilitate purchasing of parts and arrangements were made with some suppliers to provide "parts kits" that can be purchased with 1 part number. So suppliers are kept to a minimum.

I support each build and answer any questions. It is still my philosophy that each PCB must result in a 100% working unit.



==========================================================================================
After much deliberation I am going forward with this project. It replaces the full 1073 one that I started.

I believe that having an EQ section would be a more practical and affordable project to tackle. I'll offer pcb(s), detailed instructions and BOM.

I have designed and tested the EZ1290LE mike preamp add-on I will have stock along with new EQ boards. There are no cases planned (yet) for that combination. A few people requested it and so there it is.


Questions:

The 1084 EQ is a bit more evolved than the 1073 one. I personally prefer it but would add a bit more cost. For those that have had experience with both, is it worth doing the 1084 or not?

1084 needs 5 switches, 1073 3. We are looking at using Lorlin switches to keep costs down to a minimum . The next step would be Grayhill ones. they are about 3 to 4 times more than Lorlins. Anybody have problems with us using Lorlins?

Because I want to make this project as easy as possible to assemble I plan on 1 or max 2 pcb build. Therefore this forces the panel design to be based on the pcb. Any objections to that, and why?

jim

 

[matta]

Hey Jim,

Great looking project! I'm down with using the Lorlins, if they are good enough for Chandler and Jakob, they are good enough for me and I'd like to keep the costs down to actually build something like this.

Since I already own a pair of 1272's the 1073 EQ would be more practical in my case. I assume the case height would be 2U's?

For the 1073 could you make it so that the the gain adjacent tot he FREQ switch rather than below it? It might look neater and will balance out the design since their are only 3 switches.

Just come thoughts, but def. sounds like a cool project.

Rather than burn yourself out on 2 projects why not see who would prefer the 1073 or 1084? Personally I'm done for the 1073 because it is A> Better known to 90& of people/clients, B> Costs less to build!

Cheers

Matt

 

[Bluzzi]

Matt, thanks for the comments.

In response to case size, its going to be 3RU but that may change if design permits.

I'm wondering why you consider the 1073EQ more practical because you own a 1272?

As far as the layout the one above is an example. The objective is to put 2 EQs in 1 case. It could also be 1 EQ above the other.

A 1073EQ will fit easier for sure even with fat knobs (I like fat knobs!). The 1084EQ is going to be tight and possibly demand smaller knobs.

We are not embarking on 2 projects but rather have not yet decided which to go for yet. Right now we lean towards a 1084 because while were at it we might as well add those extra niceties the 1084 has over the 1073EQ.
Unless someone can tell us not to bother right now its a 1084EQ we are going for.

We could add options for you to include or exclude parts so as to choose one or the other but at this time I can't tell you if that is possible or practical. But certainly it would be great to please everyone. But your point on the 1073 is correct.

jim

 

[ChrioN]

I've been waiting for this my entire life :razz:

Count me in for some boards, whichever version you decide!
:thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:

 

[vertiges]

[quote author="ChrioN"]I've been waiting for this my entire life :razz:

Count me in for some boards, whichever version you decide!
:thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:[/quote]

:grin:

I'm interested too...

eD

 

[matta]

Hi Jim,

In response to case size, its going to be 3RU but that may change if design permits.

Personally size is always an issue and if you could get it to that it fits into 1U per channel even better, ALA Brent Averill etc.

This is what I meant by having GAIN adjacent to FREQ, makes it more intuitive while taking up less physical space, I know the FREQ's I've used are for the 1084, but my layout it based on the 1073.

I'm wondering why you consider the 1073EQ more practical because you own a 1272

I have a pair of 1272's that have been 'Hotrod modded' up to 55dB's of gain, so I've always put the thought out of my mind in building a complete channel strip because I'd have to gut or sell them and the costs that go with that. But have thought it would be nice to have the matching1073 EQ's to complement them along with using my collection of pres into the 1073 EQ etc.

I understand why you want to do the 1084 and that is great, just ups the build costs, panel space and personally more people have asked me if I have a 1073 and not 1084 and I'm being selfish, but to have a pair of DIY 1073's on name recognition would be better, even though it is not as fully featured (flawed logic I know!).

Cheers

Matt

 

[ChrioN]

I like matt's layout much more. 3u is 3 x 1u so to speak :grin:

 

[Bluzzi]

Matt - I like your layout more as well. And in case someone wants only 1 channel its better too.

I'm still not sure about the 1073/1084 thing but you are making a lot of sense. But when someone asks you for a 1073 you can always point to this 1084. Will they poopoo it?

Maybe the thing to do is to make it optional. No B194 then its a 1073 and you leave out the extra switches etc. Something I will consider.

Have any of you got a 1073? Its been a few years since I've used one. I may have to rent one to get in touch with the Mojo again.

jim

 

[3nity]

Jim....am i late?? did i missed something??

I'm here to help and bring back all i learned in this group.

cheers.

 

[tommypiper]

Hi Jim, glad to see you moving forward.

Answering your questions in the original post:

Yes, it is worth doing the 1084. Yes yes yes. Don't look back.

However, if you're really insecure about, it's probably not hard to make the 1073 version a build option by omitting parts, for those who want to do that. At worst you may have to adjust the layout of the switches so omitting switches won't leave gaps in the panel, or maybe make the 1073 builders work around it by repositioning the switches and putting some off-board with leads (worse case scenario) and it may require a jumper or two on the board -- otherwise it would be simply omitting the relevant parts to scale from 1084 to 1073.

I would prefer Grayhills and suggest strongly that you consider them. They feel so much better, they will last forever, they give a project a sense of top quality. They are worth the extra cost and they are worthy of any N-type project with great EQ. I understand the cost concern and the appeal of Lorlins. I personally think it's an example of "you gets whats you pays for."

Perhaps there is a way to make Grayhills at least an option? Put footprints for both, or something?

Don't give up on the Grayhills. Bulk discounts can vastly lower the price as well! Their prices drop with quantity. We could do a group order.

You'll be happy I said this one day. Ask Martin, I think he likes them too. Grayhills are fab.

Yes, I think it's GOOD to do this all on one or two PCBs and make the panel design based on the pcb. I won't do this project if it's 5 boards with millions of wires. It's NOT a clone, meaning you're not trying to match exact everything and exact layouts and copy panel designs. Refreshing. And I think that's its strength! Go with one PCB!

 

[tommypiper]

Matt, you seem to be worried about your clients / friends reacting positively to the 1073 name and not to the 1084? Am I understanding that? Just put a bloody "1073+" on your panel, man. That's what a 1084 is!

Tell 'em it's a 1073 with the extras, with the plus. Jim is right, no one is going to poo poo it. If they are ignorant enough to be hung up on the the 1073 moniker to begin with then just put "1073+" on your panel. They'll go, "Cool," you mean it's even better than the plain 1073 down at the other studio?" And you go, "yeah, it is, and I built it."

 

[Bluzzi]

[quote author="tommypiper"]Hi Jim, glad to see you moving forward.

Answering your questions in the original post:

Yes, it is worth doing the 1084. Yes yes yes. Don't look back.

I would prefer Grayhills and suggest strongly that you consider them. They feel so much better, they will last forever, they give a project a sense of top quality. They are worth the extra cost and they are worthy of any N-type project with great EQ. I understand the cost concern and the appeal of Lorlins. I personally think it's an example of "you gets whats you pays for."

Is there any way to make Grayhills at least an option? Put footprints for both, or something?

Don't give up on the Grayhills. Bulk discounts can vastly lower the price as well! Their prices drop with quantity. We could do a group order.

You'll be happy I said this one day. Ask Martin, I think he likes them too. Grayhills are fab.

I think it's GOOD to do this all on one or two PCBs and make the panel design based on the pcb. I won't do this project if it's 5 boards with millions of wires. It's NOT a clone, meaning you're not trying to match exact everything and exact layouts and copy panel designs. Refreshing. And I think that's its strength! Go with one PCB![/quote]

I'm glad you've "piped" in! :razz:

There is the other advantage with Grayhills in that they mount flat on the pcb. The Lorlins would require a 2 board solution. The Grayhills would be a 1 board solution. I don't think having an option of Lorlins or Grayhill is in the plan at all. They don't mount to the pcb the same way.

3nity and me may decide to build our first prototype with Lorlins to keep initial cost down. We will be making mistakes and mistakes cost! We also both agreed that 1 board is the way to go. 3nity even wants to put the Xfrs on the pcb!

Its always down to cost right? We want as many people to benefit from this project, and for some an amount of $100 can mean not doing the project.

As far as decisions 3nity and I will let you all know before we embark on final board.

Please be vocal now because what you all are saying is really helping! There are things that 3nity and I have not yet perceived and maybe some of you out there will make us realize.

1084...1073...1084..1073..and so on. I'm still leaning on the 1084. The 1073 people will love it if they love the 1073.

Only thing is I'm going to have to do a drawing to real size to confirm we can get all 5 switches, 3 pots, 1 power switch and probably a bypass switch on a 19" rackmount case. Probably will but don't expect NEVE style knobs to fit.

jim

 

[Bluzzi]

[quote author="tommypiper"]Matt, you seem to be worried about your clients / friends reacting positively to the 1073 name and not to the 1084? Am I understanding that? Just put a bloody "1073+" on your panel, man. That's what a 1084 is!

Tell 'em it's a 1073 with the extras, with the plus. Jim is right, no one is going to poo poo it. If they are ignorant enough to be hung up on the the 1073 moniker to begin with then just put "1073+" on your panel. They'll go, "Cool," you mean it's even better than the plain 1073 down at the other studio?" And you go, "yeah, it is, and I built it."[/quote]

Not only that, but this design will not have the concentric switches or have the preamp built in (unless you put a EZ1290 in there, and even that is not an exact clone) and so the controls are separated. Its not recognizable as a 1073 or 1084 in any case. Only when you look closely at the controls will you know.

Don't forget I could design an exact clone but it would probably double if not tripple cost as the concentric controls some of which are custom will cost mucho $$$.

Also I'm striving for this thing to be useful and sound great! Otherwise what are we all going to do with them.

jim

 

[tommypiper]

Hi Jim, I was just editing my post when you posted. I added a paragraph about how you could possibly design a 1073 build option into the board, in case it's helpful.

Saving $100 is certainly an appeal. I used to spend DAYS working on something just to save $20 and do it myself instead of buying one. But I've learned that's foolhardy. Unless the goal is to become so engrossed and deeply burrowed into something, it really makes more sense to keep things streamlined and efficient. Otherwise we never have time to make music anymore.

I don't think you'll have any trouble getting all those switches and pots on a panel. Original N knobs are not that large. Unless you're thinking of the metal rings, but that wouldn't make sense without concentric controls. They're impossible to get anyway. Chickenheads or retro pointer switches will look better. We don't want to get sucked into the clone vortex! Its magnetic field limits your brainpower!

 

[Gwaggin390]

Jim,
about omitting the line in transformer,
i know that the G9 tube pre, and Fabio's API board both have "line in"
where they both knock the signal level down using 4.7k resistors and then it goes through the mic transformer.
I don't know specifically if that has detrimental effect on line level signals
(haven't built either yet)
but it seems a common way to go about it.

Some sort of mic/line switch is necessary. Fabio uses a relay.
Maybe you can make it an option. Normal line in transformer, or 4.7k into the mic transformer.

I'm not made of money, but if i built this, i'd probably prefer just a line in transformer. The price of building a pair of these might get a bit pricey compared to other DIY projects, but it will still pale in comparison to even a pair of decent "repros".

I'd vote for the 1084 as well, but had a couple thoughts.
Maybe a hybrid. Make the 1084, and have the "Q" control and the selectable high frequency, but don't go for the high cut filter?
it's a triple deck rotary and has to be pricey

Using Greyhills would be good, and allow the single board option,
but was also thinking if it saved some space and some money, you could put the hi shelf freq. selector and perhaps the locut filter(if you omitted one of the frequencies) onto an on-on-on toggle switch.
Instead of dual deck greyhills one could use a DPDT on-on-on toggle.
One would also need an on/off toggle for each "band" using the toggle freq. selector though, as one of the normal selections on the usual rotary is "off". So 2 toggles instead of a $30 switch. Just a thought.

 

[Bluzzi]

tommypiper - We certainly would love to have as many options designed in. We are just not sure we can do it yet.

First objective is to have an EQ on 1 board that will interface with martin's EZ1290. Remember the transformers are already there so we have no worries about matching the outside world. It's handled by the EZ1290 as it becomes a 1073 or 1084.


jim

 

[Bluzzi]

[quote author="Gwaggin390"]Jim,
about omitting the line in transformer,
i know that the G9 tube pre, and Fabio's API board both have "line in"
where they both knock the signal level down using 4.7k resistors and then it goes through the mic transformer.
I don't know specifically if that has detrimental effect on line level signals
(haven't built either yet)
but it seems a common way to go about it.[/quote]

For the moment its going to patch into Martin's EZ1290. For sure after that we want to build in a way for others to use as line in/out. Doesn't have to be expensive xfrs. don't worry.

Some sort of mic/line switch is necessary. Fabio uses a relay.
Maybe you can make it an option. Normal line in transformer, or 4.7k into the mic transformer.

I'm not made of money, but if i built this, i'd probably prefer just a line in transformer. The price of building a pair of these might get a bit pricey compared to other DIY projects, but it will still pale in comparison to even a pair of decent "repros".

Well this is correct! Its not going to be cheap. The cost comes mainly from the inductors and switches. If you have the EZ1290 you are going to find it a lot cheaper. However there again, will we design a line in for the EZ1290? I don't think so, we have our hands full with just this. The line is in the next step after that for sure. That is when it may get a bit more expensive.

I'd vote for the 1084 as well, but had a couple thoughts.
Maybe a hybrid. Make the 1084, and have the "Q" control and the selectable high frequency, but don't go for the high cut filter?
it's a triple deck rotary and has to be pricey

Yes that may happen. Not a bad idea. This is a compromise for various reasons, thats one more to wonder about.

I'll ask for other's opinion on this on a separate message here, because how many of us really use a Low Pass?

Using Greyhills would be good, and allow the single board option,
but was also thinking if it saved some space and some money, you could put the hi shelf freq. selector and perhaps the locut filter(if you omitted one of the frequencies) onto an on-on-on toggle switch.
Instead of dual deck greyhills one could use a DPDT on-on-on toggle.
One would also need an on/off toggle for each "band" using the toggle freq. selector though, as one of the normal selections on the usual rotary is "off". So 2 toggles instead of a $30 switch. Just a thought.

I think the OFF postions must stay there otherwise the filter would always be IN circuit. I'm not comfortable with changing things that much.

This is going to be an expensive design but probably less than an LA2A! Or at least the same. Many of us built LA2A and love it. I certainly love mine and think it was worth every $.

3nity if you are reading this let us know what you think.

jim

 

[tommypiper]

One more idea and then I'll disappear.

If you want to offer the option of Lorlins and Grayhill switches...

Seems it would be easy to design it like this: the footprint for the pcb mount Grayhills on the main pcb. But terminals/holes for wires to connect a second board which would hold the Lorlins. Done! Then the builder could choose.

You'd design the main board as if you were using only the Grayhills. They would mount on the main board. But, put holes in the traces to connect wires to the second board, designed as if you were planning to use only the Lorlins.

That way, the builder could either just solder on the Grayhills and be done. Or, could solder wire leads from the main board to the second board, and solder the Lorlins to the second board. Easy! Either way works and both options could be on the main board without any problems.

Bye.

 

[Bluzzi]

tommypiper - If we would do it it would probably do it that way, thanks.

And please...give as many ideas as you want!

jim

 

[Bluzzi]

What do you guys think of leaving out the Low Pass filter section in the 1084?

I'm for keeping it in but let me know what you think.

jim