Neve 1084 PCBs and other stuff

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
You could take martin's 1290 and hook it up yes but you'd have to "plug-in" yourself.

Since there are redundant components in both boards Martin will make a board with minimal components (Martin, I'm assuming you are still on board with that?"). That board conceivably plugs in to mine and will make a full 1084. You could still use his full 1290 and bypass unnecessary components I guess. You would use the output XFR on the 1084 though.

So my board alone allows you to make a line in version. Both boards would allow you to make a full 1084 (mike in as well as line in). I could have made a full 1084 but I felt Martin was already on the mike pre so why not do a line in design and ask Martin to bring his mike pre part into it. Also I heard from a lot of people that use 1084s on a daily basis that they seldom use the EQ with the mike pre but rather mostly line in only.

danjpiscina said:
Cool Bluzzi! I'm not sure if I fully understand. You said you'd be doing a line-in version. Would that mean all you'd have to do is take one of Martin's mic pre boards and attach the line out from that to the mic pre in? Couldn't we even have some boards made like that (if there was enough interest)?

DP.
 
baadc0de said:
If it's a line level version, it probably still is mated with a transformer on the input and output, so you couldn't just bash the 2 PCBs together (as far as I understand) economically because you'd use 4 transformers.
Exactly! Although you could conceivably use the output XFR from the 1290 on the 1084 pcb instead if you found a way to connect the 1290 to my 1084 board. There's probably a way but I haven't honestly looked at that solution. Either way you still need both input XFRs.

I propose we work together and make an extension to the EZ1290 that's basically a bypassable 1084 EQ. Since both (afaik) use PCB mounted switches or pots, a common panel layout would have to be worked out together with assuring that both PCBs fit one alongside the other.
If by that you mean a 1084EQ board that mates with the 1290 then I'm not too hot for that idea because I would make a 1084EQ board that essentially does nothing on its own. By making a line in version only it becomes useful on its own but still expandable with the mike pre if others want it.


Regarding options and methodology for this project, I think Jim nailed it with making the low pass and bypass optional and making sure it works on a prototype level before it goes "to print". If I understand correctly however, Jim, you'll make a line in version and check that - would it change your plans much if you made the prototype as an EZ1290 extension?
Hmmm...I said Low Pass filter option. I didn't think people would want to leave out a High Pass filter. I could look at that and put it in as well. The Low Pass filter is less used I think (I could be wrong) and it uses an inductor and the most expensive of the switches. All the other switches could be substituted for Lorlins if one wants (making it even cheaper but a little harder to build).

If by EZ1290 extension you mean to be able to use the EZ1290 as is and I guess tap into it then connect to mine, then probably. It depends on how many out there with 1290s want to make a 1084 I guess. In any way you could do it on mine by finding the right traces and tapping into them. If its just you then I'd rather just help you with that when the time comes.

Jim
 
baadc0de said:
For me, the lack of a true line input is not important or relevant to the applications I would mostly use the 1084 for. I can assume some people would like the option, though, but well... As was already raised in this thread, that S800 would probably be, well, more appropriate for general application, and that's why it is a line level box. But, then again, there's this certain something that those inductors and transformers do that some of us like on some stuff (like drums!!).
I think for most that want a 1084 its for the way the 1084 sounds. I haven't heard a S800 but my guess is that they are two different beasts. I still maintain that most people will use 1084 EQ at mixdown much more than at tracking stage. If I use EQ on tracking its extremely minimal (is that redundadnt). Its only when I hear all the tracks together that I make my EQ decisions (be it no EQ, small amount or drastic).

Whatever I do I will never be able to meet 100% of all requirements. My logic is to provide a DIY EQ project that doesn't exist. After much talk, thought, discussion and research I came to the conclusion that a line in would be the most viable project for the majority. The option for the mike pre covers most others that seek a 1084 specifically and not just an EQ.

Jim
 
3nity. A 1073 EQ useless while tracking?! Very useful. I'm sure most people here would agree.

We would definitely need a line in to the EQ. I, and again I'm sure others would agree, would like to have the option of using the EQ with another mic pre, or with a different chain (IE: different mic pre->compressor->EQ!) and for mixing. we would limit ourselves way too much by leaving this out.
 
It seems this is coming down to Martin's preamp pcb and Jim's EQ pcb.  You guys have already done much of the work, so it just is a matter of the best way to finish out the project.  At the risk of being a possible 'downer' I am convinced that unless these are INTENDED to work seamlessly together then you're inviting headaches for many within the group, no doubt.  Redundant components on both boards (preamp and output stages) is asking for confusion, IMO.  These two pcb's, two separate and complete projects, mind you, mashed together, doesn't really represent an elegant solution to the original request at the top of this thread.  True, an experienced DIY'er should be able to take two such boards and, with a little modification and effort, put together a finished, functioning 1084 circuit, but for the less experienced it is destined to become another 1081 project.

Besides the redundancy of circuits the other significant problem is how to arrange the gain switch for a graft of the two pcb's.  Both mic and line inputs on a 1084 were functions of a single gain switch, a rather complex switch that 1) routes signals from various transformer secondaries to active stages, 2) selects/routes the total number of gain stages involved, 3) incorporates switched pad networks at various points throughout, and 4) controls actual active gain from one of the 'NV' sections.  All with one 3x24 switch.  The EZ1290 gain switch handles these functions for the mic gains only.  Adding a second, line-input only version (is yours just unity gain or multiple gains, Jim?) means adding a separate gain control (particularly if you want more than just a unity gain input), yielding a different final circuit than the 1084.  Despite best intentions, and regardless of how fabulous the final circuit sounds, this will confuse some folks and disappoint others, since it's a different final circuit.  

Perhaps the bottom line is that either way, I think you're limiting the final number of folks who will want to climb aboard an otherwise desirable project.

If I may be so bold, Martin and Jim, why don't you guys work together, modifying the designs of your boards to make a project that fits together seamlessly, without redundancy?  I know you don't like this idea of an eq-section-only pcb, Jim, but follow me for a moment:  Martin, you could simply alter the design of your existing EZ1290 pcb to omit the Grayhill gain switch and all the associated resistors, and instead provide clear markings for connections to be made from a properly populated Elma 3x24 mic/line gain switch (using the classic Neve arrangment for both  mic and line inputs).  Add the right pair of input transformers and the proper output transformer, and you've got all the input and gain arrangements used in a 1084 (and 1064, 1066, 1067, 1073, etc.).  

You can also offer the EZ1290 platform, as is, for folks who only want a mic pre with eq.

Jim, you can then focus solely on the eq section.  Not only would this simplify the design but it would shrink the size (and cost) of the final pcb.  I don't believe the lack of gain stages will diminish interest in your EQ boards.  On the contrary, I think it would significantly increase the scope of interest.  

Think about it.  How many people here (and on other forums) have already built Neve class-A preamps, or have purchased BA283 boards, hot rod 1272 boards, Seventh Circle kits, etched their own pcb's, etc, and would LOVE a simple solution for adding proper Neve eq to those circuits that they already have?  It doesn't matter what flavor of 2 or 3-stage class-A Neve preamp they have, your pcb would work with ALL OF THEM!  They'd even be useful to folks who own commercially-built Neve preamp-only clones (Vintech 72's, Averill 1272's, etc.).  After all, it simply fits between the output of the last preamp stage and the input of the output stage.  ANY class-A Neve preamp project could use your EQ pcb, and the lack of redundant components makes it more desirable for people who either already have some Neve's or already have the parts to build them.  People then have the freedom to choose the type of preamp they want to use with your EQ board.  They can decide if it will be a line-line-level only device, unity gain or gain options, both mic/line inputs, 2-stage, 3-stage, whatever, and still have a simple solution for the proper EQ.

And an incredibly detailed set of instructions on how to implement it within a class-A Neve circuit would even be a cinch to produce.  Neve EQ.  Simple, elegant, authentic, and useful for just about everyone!

I have several 1272's that I'd love to add eq to for drum tracking, as do many friends of mine.  I would happily snag 8 or 12 of your EQ-only pcb's if you decided to go that route.  That's really all we need to turn our past, current, and future Neve preamp builds into full-blown channel amps!

If you do this, I'm in for a stack of them!

Lastly, you and Martin could offer a package with the two cards together along with directions on how to build them out depending on what you want the final project to be (any of the various 1272 types mic pre's, the 1084/1290-type mic pre, or a line-level only device).  The clarity of this arrangement will make the total project far more accurate and also accessible, to even novice builders.  

And you, Jim, would have totally new, and large additional market for your pcb's.

Win/win.

JC

PS - I do hope you will forgive the long-assed nature of this post.  ;D
 
Jim: The highpass/lowpass filter was a typo/brainfart on my part. I ofcourse meant the lowpass filter

Regarding line input and project itself, the most elegant solution is surely what JC proposes. It would make a lot of sense for this project and I agree it's a win/win situation for everyone - owners of other preamps, us wanting to make 1084s and if all goes well, you could make a line input 1084 eq-only. To add, I'd take 8 of the eq board if they're done in this fashion and possibly more when I get word to my tech friend.

All said, this is a very interesting project and I can't wait to get my hands on building some of the modules when we sort out all of the problems :)
 
JC I agree with what you're saying, but it comes down to finding a quality PCB mount solution for the 3X24. As far as I know there is no such thing. I have used a 1X12 for line-in and a 3X12 for mic-in (both Grayhill). I would LOVE IT if Grayhill or Elma made a 3X24 PCB mount.

I also think it would be beneficial if the 1084 EQ section had clearly marked "splice-in" points/pads for connection P and L from a mic/line amp - for all the guys with 1290's, 1272's etc. It will be very easy (as in two wires) to mate an eq section to a mic and/or line amp. Someone would just have to draw a little wiring diagram and I would be happy to do this.

FYI I have recently finished the 1073 line-in section as a standalone board, see: http://www.groupdiy.com/index.php?topic=34292.0 It would be an excellent frontend for Bluzzi's board should he choose to omit the line-in on his eq.

I frankly like Great River's thinking; make a mic pre (MP-2NV), make a line level EQ (EQ-2NV)

I'm liking this discussion.

Best,

m.
 
sorry guys. i gotta say, i've read in this thread time and time again the term "line-level eq".... all eq's are line level! (unless it's a guitar pedal or a passive one where the output is dropped to lower than line). there's no such thing as a mic level eq!
 
It is a given that people would hand wire the 3x24 Elma, since, as you point out, there is no other pcb mount solution.  That's the only way to make a true 1073/1084-style gain control. 

I was proposing that you leave off the gain switch and its related components and leave this decision to the builder.

Another practical approach, perhaps to offer a pcb solution, even though it is a bit of a compromise, would be to stick with your Grayhill switch and go from 0dB line level setting (the unity position) at the bottom of the throw, to 70dB of mic gain at the top.  You'd lose the 75dB position with this arrangement, but that's not a position most people will ever need, and it does give the circuit a useful, line-level input.  The pcb could fit all the needed resistors, but ALSO have clear markings for pads to connect a hand wired Elma 3x24 as well for those who want to go through the trouble.  That way, there is a simpler practical way to build it, and there is also the original method as well with the choice left up to the builder.

JC
 
danjpiscina: ofcourse, electronically, there are rarely any non-line-level eqs. But when you've built a box that has mic in and onboard eq, well, you can think it will be a box that you can't just open in the middle of the session and start fiddling with its innards to have it's eq work "at line level". It's fine to think about it as a mic-level-eq (from the user perspective), though it is, electronically, not really. So that's what was thought - on the usability level, it's not really line level if it's not built to be readily utilized as such.
 
danjpiscina said:
sorry guys. i gotta say, i've read in this thread time and time again the term "line-level eq".... all eq's are line level! (unless it's a guitar pedal or a passive one where the output is dropped to lower than line). there's no such thing as a mic level eq!

In case it is not understood let's assume, for the sake of this discussion, that ALL of the finished designs discussed so far have line level output.  That is my understanding anyway, and I've not read anything to the contrary.  Therefore "Mic level" and "line level" shall refer solely to the type of input provided on the device. 

JC
 
In the spirit of general consensus, I feel that a line input is a very good idea for most recordists. Done right (economically), I would certainly  take it, especially if that's the difference between a non-existent and existent project :p
 
danjpiscina said:
sorry guys. i gotta say, i've read in this thread time and time again the term "line-level eq".... all eq's are line level! there's no such thing as a mic level eq!

When it comes to rackmount boxes you are certainly correct. When it comes to mixing consoles you are not. All large format consoles have the option to take a mic level input or line level input and EQ it. Since most people here would build a rackmount version of this EQ I think it makes sense to make a line-only version of this. Even for a console, the way I work, having a line-in only is just fine since all my mic pres are in a separate rack and I don't EQ on the way in to my A/D... But that's just me. :) (and the reason I've built a line-in only module)

[quote author=rascalseven]
It is a given that people would hand wire the 3x24 Elma
[/quote]

Oh yuck!!! Have you ever had to do this? It is really annoying work (right up there with drilling holes for a case in a hot, un-airconditioned garage in 100+ degree heat). I have wired up four Elma 3X12's by hand before I had the EZ1290 boards and decided life's too short - total waste of my time. A few weeks later the EZ1290's arrived at my doorstep  ;D I would rather have a board with a PCB 3X12 and 1X12 and toggle between them with a switch before I would attempt to hand wire a 3X24.

Best,

M.
 
Yeah, wiring an Elma IS a royal pain (I've done a bunch of them), and most folks won't want to bother, but this thread began with a desire to clone a 1084.  That's the issue I'm trying to address.  

By all means, keep the Grayhill.  I do think it'd be wise for you to 1) provide wiring documentation with the pcb's for those who wish to substitute the traditional Neve gain switch for the on-board Grayhill, and 2) provide documentation on how to add a simple 0dB line input (from the 1084 drawing), perhaps something as simple as a toggle switch to select the 0dB line in or the mic gains of the Grayhill switch).  This way you don't alienate anyone who would otherwise buy your pcbs.

If you do this, and Jim does the matching EQ pcb, I think you'll both have a TON of interest.

I, myself, am a 2-stage kinda guy (1272) modified to provide a nice 65dB of gain (With drums I pretty much don't get about 20 or 25dB anyway).  I would LOVE to snag a bunch of ready made EQ pcb's to go with them, however.

Jim??

JC
 
Listen to Martin. This is the concept with the 2 boards that will make up a full 1084.

Actually if you want a PCB mount Elma you can get it. It won't "mount" on a PCB but rather you use 3 PCB, 1 for each wafer. Its a custom part. I have looked into it and even made the layouts for the PCBs. You save wiring but you make it up in assembly. It costs around $90.00 and you have to buy 25 or 50 minimum if I recall. Grayhill are standard parts and you can use Lorlin if you want to save some $$$ or make your own front panel layout (except for Low Pass filter where you have to use 3P12T which Lorlin does not make).

I came to the same conclusion as Martin. 2 PCB mount Grayhills with a toggle to flip between mike and line. Presto!

Fellow DIYers,

1:  You will be able to make a 1084 EQ that you can plug any line level into.
      Its essentially a 1084 EQ minus the mike preamp (1084 has line in as well).

2:  If you want to incorporate a 1290 preamp, Martin will make a board to hook up to mine
      (I will provide connection points on mine to mate to his).
      In other words Martin's add on board will allow you to make a full 1084.

3:  If you have an existing EZ1290, you will be able to (although a bit clutsier)
      hook it up to my board (output XFR wil have to be hooked up to mine as well).
      I'm sure between Martin and I we can come up with instructions to easily do this.

4:  You will have the option to exclude the Low Pass filter section.
      This saves you $$ if you do not need it.

5:  You will have the option to include a "Hard Bypass".
      Relay switched input to output bypassing all components.

The concept behind this project is to provide a PCB with up to date BOM and full build instructions.
I would like to make it possible for even a beginner to successfully build this 1084EQ (with decent soldering skill at least).
This takes careful planning and a lot of thought to make it as easy as possible for anyone to make it.
The most difficult part will be to get the front panel to fit properly.

For those who want to play around with the board what I can do is to label the various I/O points.


Jim
 
madriaanse said:
When it comes to rackmount boxes you are certainly correct. When it comes to mixing consoles you are not. All large format consoles have the option to take a mic level input or line level input and EQ it. Since most people here would build a rackmount version of this EQ I think it makes sense to make a line-only version of this. Even for a console, the way I work, having a line-in only is just fine since all my mic pres are in a separate rack and I don't EQ on the way in to my A/D... But that's just me. :) (and the reason I've built a line-in only module)

really? not sure if i understand you correctly. EQ a microphone level signal (IE the signal that comes out of a microphone), and THEN boost it to line level? wouldn't that add so much noise that it would render it useless? what console can you do this on and why would you do it?

anyway, all racked 1073/1084/etc. that i've seen have a line in and they are used all the time for all sorts of reasons. we need to incorporate this.
 
madriaanse said:
When it comes to rackmount boxes you are certainly correct. When it comes to mixing consoles you are not. All large format consoles have the option to take a mic level input or line level input and EQ it. Since most people here would build a rackmount version of this EQ I think it makes sense to make a line-only version of this. Even for a console, the way I work, having a line-in only is just fine since all my mic pres are in a separate rack and I don't EQ on the way in to my A/D... But that's just me. :) (and the reason I've built a line-in only module)

danjpiscina said:
really? not sure if i understand you correctly. EQ a microphone level signal (IE the signal that comes out of a microphone), and THEN boost it to line level? wouldn't that add so much noise that it would render it useless? what console can you do this on and why would you do it?
I'm not sure I follow you but a Mike level signal is always boosted to either line level where it is used by external equipment or a nominal level to use in a mixer to go to the next stage or be distributed to auxiliary mixes. All consoles do this! They do not work internally at mike level! Like I said maybe I am not understanding your statement/question.

anyway, all racked 1073/1084/etc. that i've seen have a line in and they are used all the time for all sorts of reasons. we need to incorporate this.
It is. read previous messages.

Jim
 
I came to the same conclusion as Martin. 2 PCB mount Grayhills with a toggle to flip between mike and line. Presto!

I think this would be the best solution!

Everyone could decide if he will do a line-level only solution or add the mic pre!

regards,
Wolfgang

 
Back
Top