Thank you very much for your help. The AD related files of Pre have been posted in #1. You can see that there are schematics in it, as well as the 500 format PCB that I tried to complete.
Open source project: Customized mixing console
- Thread starter mmadu
- Start date
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
MidnightArrakis
Well-known member
"THANKS"!!! ..... I've downloaded all of the files in Post #1, but since it is 2:00 AM here right now and I need to be getting up in about 4-hours, I will check them out sometime tomorrow.
However, I could easily make some real progress with your panel designs..... -- IF -- you could upload/send me your "Front-Panel Designer" files". Is that possible? Also, do you have a BOM created that includes the MFG. Part-Numbers for the switches, pots, knobs, LED's and anything else that is mounted onto the panels. I could do some "interference checks" if I had that information. In any case.....if you -- DON'T -- have a BOM created containing this info.....YOU SHOULD!!!
ARE WE HAVING FUN YET???
/
Oh sure, the BOM and FPD have been added, but given that we're redrawing it in 51x format, panel size is going to be an issue
MidnightArrakis
Well-known member
[the BOM and FPD have been added] -- GOT 'EM!!! THANKS!!! I'll check them over.
[we're redrawing it in 51x format] -- GOT IT!!! Question: Is your mixing console now a "User-Defined kit", of sorts?
[panel size is going to be an issue] -- In what way??? Other than the -- actual physical -- mechanical dimensions not being specifically defined, what's the problem? Or, do I need to go back through and re-read all of the previous posts?
FYI: See the attached PDF file for some examples of what I have previously done along these lines.
/
Good evening MidnightArrakis
Yes, in fact, it has always been a project that supports customization
The size of the panel I once drew does not comply with the 51x standard, so it should be redrawn
MidnightArrakis
Well-known member
DISCLAIMER: While on the one-hand I certainly applaud your effort and initiative in tackling this "Custom Mixing Console" project, on the other hand.....it is of my personal opinion (as I am now discovering while I am digging deeper into your existing work) that both your general inexperience and the particular design engineering tools that you are deciding upon using are going to end up "biting you" in the end by using these types of tools on such a large project such as this!!! In other words....."BIG PROJECTS REQUIRE BIG GUNS"!!!
I am in -- NO WAY -- trying to put you down or dash your dreams of executing this project, I am simply saying that at least based upon my experience of having designed electronic equipment for multiple companies, defense contractors, concert sound-reinforcement providers, medical electronics firms and others.....that if you provide outside sheet-metal shops and PCB-fabricators with your design files as I am seeing them now, they will all come back at you with confused questions and/or inferior end results. Just sayin'.....
As an example, I was able to import your "Front-Panel Designer" file into my FPD program and then output a -- .STP -- file which I could then load into my SolidWorks program. From there, I transferred your front-panel design into the SolidWorks 2D "design/drafting" module and created a basic sheet-metal fabrication drawing. Unfortunately, as I was doing this, it then became apparent to me that your panel holes -- DO NOT ALIGN -- correctly in both the X & Y axis. Not only that, but there is something wrong with the panel mounting-holes, as they were NOT called out as being the same type of countersunk hole!!! In other words.....HOUSTON!!! ..... WE HAVE A PROBLEM!!!
Here's an example of how your panel dimensioned out:
To start off: If you look at the top panel mounting-hole, you will see that it is called out as being a 3.00mm hole countersunk 0.25mm. But, if you then look at the bottom panel mounting-hole, you can see the full "hole callout" of it being a 3.20mm THRU hole, with a 6.00mm diameter countersink that has a depth of 0.25mm.
The little 3.00mm holes that are next to the 9.00mm holes -- ARE NOT IN ALIGNMENT -- with one another in the X-axis, which is shown by the teeny-tiny dimensions of 0.25mm and 0.05mm!!!
I am guessing what will probably take place sometime in the future is this.....you will design and layout all of your sheet-metal work using "Front-Panel Designer" and in reality, your files will contain multitudes of probably nearly imperceivable errors. You will send your files off to FPD and have them fabricated. From their perspective, they won't know or probably don't care, that a set of holes are misaligned by 10-mils or so (i.e., 0.010-inch or 0.254mm). So, while in some instances, these dimensional inaccuracies may not matter.....in certain other instances, especially where the effect is accumulative..... some sh!t ain't gonna fit!!! And.....there's your problem. Money down the drain!!! FLUSH!!!
Some of what I am "ranting" about also pertains to your "future" PCB files. I have taken a look at your schematics and they are fraught with a variety of issues as well. I will address those items in a later post as I need to be somewhere else in a very short while.
The image I pasted above is kind of "grainy", so I am attaching a PDF file of the same thing here for your review. I don't know how "Front-Panel Designer" works and I don't use it as my primary mechanical design platform. I spent $7,600 for my SolidWorks license, so I use it as my primary 3D mechanical design tool. And, I also know that it is accurate.
You may wish to find out how you can use "Front-Panel Designer" better so your panel designs are actually accurate and all of the design information that you need is included within the design file. Otherwise, you will be gambling when you send your files out for fabrication.
And.....for your "viewing pleasure".....the attached PDF file will show you a few examples of both my mechanical and PCB design work. This is what I do.
[The size of the panel I once drew does not comply with the 51x standard, so it should be redrawn] -- Send me a detailed and dimensioned mechanical drawing "sketch" of what you need, OK???
/
Last edited:
Well, as you can see, I don't know anything about mechanical design. You know, the FPD does not provide any adsorption function so that most of the hole positions need to be set manually (
I would try to redraw it in a "more standard" way, but that would require a modified 51x spec PCB to position the individual switches and pots to ensure everything fits in place.
So, I guess PCB design is a higher priority task than panel design (Woops!)
Thank you for your help MidnightArrakis！
MidnightArrakis
Well-known member
[I guess PCB design is a higher priority task than panel design] -- Not exactly!!! In fact.....you kinda have to work on details of both the mechanical design -- AND -- the PCB-design at the same time!!! It would kinda be like a "hand-in-glove" process where you are designing a glove around a hand, but the fingers also have various different types of rings on them. So, as you are designing the glove, you also have to work with the fact that the fingers are going to occasionally be wearing some rings, so now you need to design the glove to accommodate that fact. Make sense???
I took a look at your BOM Excel file and, like everything else here so far, it has some issues.....as in it is not yet complete enough to work from yet. Items such as the potentiometers and switches need more complete Part Numbers that calls-out a specific type of component/device. If I knew -- EXACTLY -- what component Part Number by which manufacturer is being used in your schematic, then I could search out a 3D CAD-model of those parts, download them and then I would have enough information in order to create a "3D Mockup" of each of your PCBs.
Once I would create a "3D Mockup" of each of your PCBs (with your guidance, of course), I could "virtually marry" each of the PCBs to a 3D 500-Series front-panel, which would then provide me with the exact mechanical dimensions of where all of the component holes and cutouts go. Then, I could transfer the "virtual dimensions" over to a "real" 500-Series front-panel design file, which would then give you a 3D CAD-model of each front-panel that you want. At least that is how I would tackle this "3-Dimensional Jigsaw Puzzle". Sometimes.....you gotta "think outside the box"!!!
Here is a "500-Series Front-Panel Specification Document" that calls-out the mechanical details and dimensions for a single "500-Series" front-panel. Even though it is quite detailed, I personally don't quite fully "trust" it because it is improperly dimensioned. Also notice the panel height of -- 5.247-inches -- which is at least a step in the correct direction in allowing for a smidgen of clearance. However, since this drawing is only allowing for 0.003" (or, 3-mils or 3-thousandths of an inch), it is really inconsequential. A more "real" dimension would be 5.22". That would allow a 15-mil clearance at both the top and bottom of the panel, which would just like a standard 19" rack-panel.
Here is a "500-Series PCB Specification Document" that calls-out the mechanical dimensions for a "500-Series" PCB circuit board. And, just like the above front-panel drawing, this isn't properly dimensioned either. While it does show all of the mechanical dimensions, they're just not being presented in the correct manner. I will create an updated PCB drawing later. For now, this should get you started.
Time for some shut-eye!!!
/
Good afternoon, thank you for your help
The part number for the duplex switch (six pins) is PS-22F02, while the part number for the quad switch is PBS-42D02, and many manufacturers make them to the same standard, such as G-Switch/HOOYA (I think I have it in the BOM attached)
And the part number of the potentiometer is RK0971210DBH, from Alps, you can find its parameters here
https://tech.alpsalpine.com/c/products/detail/RK0971210DBH/.
MidnightArrakis
Well-known member
[The part number for the duplex switch (six pins) is PS-22F02] -- IT IS??? ..... ARE YOU SURE??? -- Technically..... YES!!! You are correct, BUT!!!.....There are a total of three (3) Part Numbers of this switch with each number calling out a variation. See the specifications below.
What I am getting at here and I am -- NOT -- trying to be harsh or mean or anything, OK??? But, you are going to need to -- "WAKE-UP" -- and become aware that there is > MUCH MORE < that needs to be either known and/or specified about practically every component part and -- ALL -- of that information then needs to be included into your BOM!!! Otherwise, you could very easily end up with a box of parts that you have purchased that won't do you any good in the end. Does any of this make any sense to you?
Here are the details of your "PS-22F02" switch:
So.....moving right along here.....let's say that you have 16-channels and each channel has 5 of these switches on it. That comes to 80 switches. Since these switches are so cheap, you go ahead and you gleefully order 100 of them. They arrive and you assemble and solder them onto your PCBs. >> THEN-N-N-n-n-n-n << you find out that all you have done is order the basic switch!!! You don't have any caps for the switches!!! .....OH!!! ****!!!.....NOW you have to go back and order 100 switch caps!!! DO YOU SEE??? ..... You gotta be totally aware of what a -- COMPLETE PART NUMBER -- actually needs to be for any and every project that you design and build for the rest of your life!!!
And.....this same thing goes for capacitors, resistors, LEDs, connectors, cable assemblies, transistors, ICs and on and on and on. As I said previously, if you don't spend the time and effort to diligently dig down and come up with a COMPLETE "Part Number", then all you have done is order a boxful of useless or semi-useless parts!!! That's how it is!!!
During my time designing electronic equipment, I have been directly responsible for purchasing $3,000,000.00+ (YES!!! ..... That's >> 3-MILLION DOLLARS!!! <<) of electronic and electro-mechanical components/devices/hardware and outside vendor services (i.e., cable assembly companies and sheet-metal and PCB-fabrication shops). So, TRUST ME!!! when I say to you.....>> YOU NEED TO CAREFULLY AND DILIGENTLY RESEARCH AND COME UP WITH A COMPLETE MANUFACTURERS PART NUMBER << on a BOM before you go and order ANYTHING!!! Otherwise, if you don't..... you're just gambling and hoping that everything turns out OK!!!
While in today's world everything is "discovered" or "found" on the Internet, during my time of doing what I do, I had built and compiled my own personal "Technical Library" which gave me "fingertip instant access" to practically EVERY component/device/part/service I had ever needed while I was designing anything!!! My "Technical Library" also far exceeded that of every company that I have ever worked with. Not only that, but because this library was with me in my home, I would spend my afternoons and evenings and into the wee-morning hours going through and individually reading -- EVERY -- databook, catalog, specification sheet, guideline, etc.
So.....when I would be sitting in engineering meetings discussing the design and development of some new product and an engineer would make a comment something like, "Yeah.....then we would need a type of switch that can be mounted like this (explains) with "Faston" (tm) terminals for easy wire termination and has a (explains) type of actuator on it". Then, I would speak up and say something like, "NO PROBLEM!!! There's a company in Topeka, KS that makes those types of switches and they have a distributor right here in town"!!! Then.....the entire engineering team would look at me with complete perplexed looks on their faces and someone would say, "HOW IN THE HELL WOULD YOU KNOW THAT"??? I would just answer by saying, "I read a lot".
>> "Personal Technical Library" consisting of -- 2-1/2 TONS -- of databooks, catalogs, etc.
In any case.....I'm hoping that you get my point here, OK???
/
Last edited:
Anyway thanks for the help, I respect what you learned from the commercial project, the part number will be 22F02A - the version with the round switch cap attached; in the BOM I have the package for all the components, so locating it shouldn't be a problem .
mrchapp
Active member
I'm following this thread with interest and hope for an update.
I concur! How’s this project coming along?
Here I’m studying console schematics hoping to simply rack some old channel strips and you all are designing something fun from the ground up!
It makes me think of the many greats who achieve “that sound”, some with their own custom gear that you can’t get unless you work with them. Very cool!
Here I’m studying console schematics hoping to simply rack some old channel strips and you all are designing something fun from the ground up!
It makes me think of the many greats who achieve “that sound”, some with their own custom gear that you can’t get unless you work with them. Very cool!
Hi, long time no see. I'm glad that some people are still interested in this project, but in the past two months, some location recordings have caught me off guard.
This project is still ongoing, and I am building a power board (using 7815/7915) and trying to build an API style preamplifier (312/325s) because they have simple wiring - using a 2520 style operational amplifier may be more stylish (due to a lot of transformers), and the drawings will be released after testing!
To be honest, I actually don't have any experience using the 500 module, so the project is progressing slowly towards the exhibition.
In short, remain open and welcome any suggestions!
This project is still ongoing, and I am building a power board (using 7815/7915) and trying to build an API style preamplifier (312/325s) because they have simple wiring - using a 2520 style operational amplifier may be more stylish (due to a lot of transformers), and the drawings will be released after testing!
To be honest, I actually don't have any experience using the 500 module, so the project is progressing slowly towards the exhibition.
In short, remain open and welcome any suggestions!
chrispbass
Well-known member
I would just get it to the point where you’ve decided what features you need and how you’re going to implement that electronically and go from there.
Obviously it is a two handed approach if you’ve definitely decided to go with a particular format, but from my own experiences (with any project related or otherwise), It’s very easy to get caught up in perfection and detail and that can massively impact the creativity and drive, especially when we have limited time to dedicate to an endeavour.
Just use whatever tools you have to hand and are comfortable using including ‘the back of a *** packet’.
A roughly mocked up front panel using a bit of cardboard or a rats nest of components on the bench is more inspiring (and productive) than trying to iron out tiny engineering and cosmetic details, of which many will change as you refine and extrapolate the basic design.
A mixer is not something I’m personally interested in building (at this point), but plenty of people here or are, however I’m always interested in the endeavours of group diy, so stick with it and you will get there.
I can't agree anymore! Perhaps I have indeed fallen into self doubt, sad:（
But I did learn a lot through continuous construction, such as Gold Finger and CAD (although I have never learned CAD)
However, it is gratifying that some things are indeed progressing. Many people on this forum have built their own mixing consoles, complete clones of APIs, Neves, and SSLs, but it seems that most people have taken three to four years to complete and have been using
So, thank you all for your support and encouragement, this thread will never stop!
But I did learn a lot through continuous construction, such as Gold Finger and CAD (although I have never learned CAD)
However, it is gratifying that some things are indeed progressing. Many people on this forum have built their own mixing consoles, complete clones of APIs, Neves, and SSLs, but it seems that most people have taken three to four years to complete and have been using
So, thank you all for your support and encouragement, this thread will never stop!
chrispbass
Well-known member
I can't agree anymore! Perhaps I have indeed fallen into self doubt, sad:（
But I did learn a lot through continuous construction, such as Gold Finger and CAD (although I have never learned CAD)
However, it is gratifying that some things are indeed progressing. Many people on this forum have built their own mixing consoles, complete clones of APIs, Neves, and SSLs, but it seems that most people have taken three to four years to complete and have been using
So, thank you all for your support and encouragement, this thread will never stop!
That’s the spirit and you are making progress!
It’s a massive undertaking designing/building a mixer so it will take time…that’s a given. Also, as noble as it is to ultimately make it available as a forum project, concentrate on your needs first to take that pressure off with regards to trying to finalise ‘that design’.
I’ve just sent off some pcb designs for manufacturing after starting with easy eda and I’m excited and also slightly apprehensive about getting them back in case I’ve messed up. I was beginning to go around in circles with that, and in the end I just set a little deadline and told myself to push the bloody button! First time designing layouts etc, but I’m hopeful everything will go to plan, but no worries if not…I’ll just go with Rev2
New progress: The construction of the q8am10 operational amplifier has been completed, and the 9K style preamplifier has been replaced with an API style preamplifier. Completed PCB drawing for 500 series API 312/325 combination modules, PCB Gerber file attached (note: not tested!)
MidnightArrakis
Well-known member
[Any suggestions are welcome!] -- HEY!!! >> I WOULD NOT SEND YOUR GERBER FILES OUT FOR FABRICATION JUST YET, AS THERE ARE SOME MAJOR ISSUES WITHIN THEM!!! << >> I AM NOT KIDDING!!!
I have downloaded your -- Gerber_PCB1_2024-4-15.zip -- file and took a quick look at what you have. What I found was not only is your entire PCB layout -- upside-down -- in relation to what is being shown as your 0/0 Datum, but there are also bits of silkscreen and a bunch of drill-hits located at -- X = -1430mm / Y = -1430mm from your 0/0 point!!! Once your PCB-fabricator sees these anomalies, they will certainly be contacting you to let you know that your PCB -- CANNOT -- be fabricated!!! For us Americans, what I am saying is.....you have silkscreen and drill-hits that are over >> 4-FEET AWAY FROM THE "0/0" DATUM OF YOUR PCB <<!!! I wouldn't do it!!!
Right now, it is after 9:00 AM in the morning and I have literally been awake all night!!! My going to bed right now means that I probably won't be getting up until sometime around mid-afternoon here. In any case, just as soon as I am able to, I will take a closer look at your GERBER and N/C Drill files and provide you with some screen-shots that will show you exactly how your GERBER and N/C Drill data are all messed up!!! From there, you can do whatever you need to, to correct the problems that I can see.
HANG ON!!! OK???
/
Thank you Midnight Arakis. I have checked the gerber file, but I have not found any silk screen or drilling files located at -1430, -1430
As you can see, some silk screens exceed the frame layer, but that is only for identification purposes. In multiple projects I have collaborated with my PCB manufacturer, these silk screens beyond the frame layer will not be manufactured, and I believe this is a consensus.
I certainly respect everything you know in commercial manufacturing, but it should be emphasized that this is a non professional project and I am not a professional designer. All I have done is to make this project operational. Forcing myself to follow the standards will cause me to lose interest in this project and abandon it
Similar threads
