Mn3006

[artstomp]

..just wondering what will happen if i retrofit an MN3006 ic to MN3007 on a flanger circuit...knowing the MN3006 has a shorter delay time..guyatone ps004 utilizes this ic...tnx for your reply..

[lars]

Your pedal will actually finally sound like a flanger instead of a metallic chorus, and with less noise. The MN3007 has to be compensated with very high clock rates that the chip was not designed for in order for it to get into some of the flanging territory. The MN3006, with a normal (read: non-overclocked and buffered) .32ms - 6.4ms delay range is pretty much perfect for flanging; it also has much lower Ccp (100pf vs  700pf), and a better S/N ratio and THD% than any MN series BBD ever made.
Why wasn't it used more then? One mistake word in the datasheet:  "Economy". The MN3006 was pigeonholed as the economy type BBD, whereas the MN3007 was marketed as expensive and special. That's why you'll find MN3006s in cheap, off-brand flangers, but all the boutique stuff is "too good" for it.

[artstomp]

..tnx Jesse..that was a load of info...so replacing an MN3007 on an existsing flanger pedal would require some parts replacements, too, I guess?..

[culturejam]

Great info, Lars. 

[Scruffie]

There are problems with using the MN3006, you have a trade off between filtering (noise) and delay time.

Let's say for a moment that .32ms - 6.4ms is the exact range for our flanger we want. To get the 6.4mS the clock has to be at 10kHz, which means to avoid heavy noise the filtering has to be very heavy, most of the most beloved flanger designs (A/DA, Mistress) use very little filtering and both have a low clock rate of 35kHz/14mS from their 512 stage BBDs.

So what does that mean? If you stick it in either of those flangers your low clock point is going to be only 1.8mS, which personally I think is far too short and can lead to a thin sound and if you try to lower it, you're heading in to whine and hiss territory. 8-12mS is a good starting point to avoid those chorusy tones IMO.

Flanger designs also usually include the range/manual control so if you don't like those longer delayed chorusy tones, you can shift the range so it doesn't hit them... you can also just raise the low clock point with an MN3007 to avoid them, no it isn't designed for the higher clock rates but that doesn't mean it wont work with them with the clock buffers pretty much every flanger project includes so I don't see the point in that argument.

One other thing to mention, it can't be denied the 3006 has great specs in the S/N department... but consensus is that the SAD1024 sounds 'best' to most people in flanger circuits which has much worse specs than the 3007 or 3006 regarding S/N and personally I think that is part of it's charm, a little bit of the right noise in a flanger can be a good thing (think running a synth through a phaser).

So as with everything, there are trade offs, I might suggest looking at a 3009 instead of the 3006 as a (kinda) mid-way.

[artstomp]

..thank you very much, scruff...that was a load of info my brain could handle...but im learning a lot...by the a ve got a MN3009 i pulled from my Pearl chorus ensemble...i replace it with MN3007 and do some tweaks on some resistors...tnx again