Help me figure an effect out?

[LaceSensor]

Hi guys

got a request off a player friend of mine who wants me to build him a pedal. Its not a run of the mill thing, so does anyone know of a design that does this, or have an idea how to do it?

" wanting to make a pedal thats kind of a cross between a tremolo pedal and a effects loop pedal. Where the signal would alternate between going through the effects loop and bypassing the loop. I was thinking of it in the same way as a square wave tremolo, where instead of the silence it would go through the effects loop.

It would mean that any effect you had in the loop would seem like it was being rapidly turned on and off. Thought you could do some pretty crazy stuff with it. "

Any thoughts?

Thanks!
LS

[jubal81]

Sounds like what you need is an auto panner to pan between buffered clean channel and a loop.
Here's a great article where RG lays out some VCA-based panning circuits

[hammerheadmusicman]

This sounds crazy, but awesome! I'm chiming in so i can keep an eye on when the magic starts to happen

[the3secondrule]

not quite the same thing, but have a look for the Utter Stutter - it's a feedback-looper/trem thing...

[jimilee]

Paramix has a kill switch on it that. That'd be a hassle, but it would work.

[LaceSensor]

Paramix has a kill switch on it that. That'd be a hassle, but it would work.

Paramix is just a "static" blend tool
It wont do the "on/off" thing I am interested in...
Sure you could manually punch in the paramix with a mometary footswitch setup, but thats limited in tempo and reproducibility of the human foot..

[LaceSensor]

not quite the same thing, but have a look for the Utter Stutter - it's a feedback-looper/trem thing...

not quite but i am interested to build that now thanks

[midwayfair]

http://www.commonsound.com/kits/doku.php?id=commonsound:panneur

Pretty sure this is what you need.

[LaceSensor]

http://www.commonsound.com/kits/doku.php?id=commonsound:panneur

Pretty sure this is what you need.

really? isnt it just a stereo panner like a complicated tremolo?

[midwayfair]

http://www.commonsound.com/kits/doku.php?id=commonsound:panneur

Pretty sure this is what you need.

really? isnt it just a stereo panner like a complicated tremolo?

Yes ...

Okay, it might be a *little* more complicated than just using the panneur, but the basic idea you need is there.

Basically, you want to plug an effects loop into the "right" side after the signal split. That side will modulate. You could remove the modulation from the "left" side so that its level is constant or just leave the depth control in -- at max depth . Then sum the outputs (you may need a blend circuit to prevent signal loss, but the Lune has plenty of output).

If I were going to make sure that it's always perfectly synced, I'd use a single LFO, hook one LDR up as normal, and move the other so that it shunts the signal to ground (i.e., it'll be backwards from the normal Lune setup), just like in my Cardinal Tremolo. And unlike the Cardinal, the Lune isn't fussy about LFOs.

Or you can maybe do it with my Cardinal if you want a slightly smaller circuit. You'd just make the "treble" side full-range (use normal sized input and output caps), and then splice in an effects loop to the input of one of them. The LFO is always perfectly out of phase that way.

Your other option is a switching circuit using something like the 555, but that's typically very noisy.

[soldersqueeze]

So now I want a pedal which doesn't even exist?
It is a seriously fun sounding idea

[LaceSensor]

http://www.commonsound.com/kits/doku.php?id=commonsound:panneur

Pretty sure this is what you need.

really? isnt it just a stereo panner like a complicated tremolo?

Yes ...

Okay, it might be a *little* more complicated than just using the panneur, but the basic idea you need is there.

Basically, you want to plug an effects loop into the "right" side after the signal split. That side will modulate. You could remove the modulation from the "left" side so that its level is constant or just leave the depth control in -- at max depth . Then sum the outputs (you may need a blend circuit to prevent signal loss, but the Lune has plenty of output).

If I were going to make sure that it's always perfectly synced, I'd use a single LFO, hook one LDR up as normal, and move the other so that it shunts the signal to ground (i.e., it'll be backwards from the normal Lune setup), just like in my Cardinal Tremolo. And unlike the Cardinal, the Lune isn't fussy about LFOs.

Or you can maybe do it with my Cardinal if you want a slightly smaller circuit. You'd just make the "treble" side full-range (use normal sized input and output caps), and then splice in an effects loop to the input of one of them. The LFO is always perfectly out of phase that way.

Your other option is a switching circuit using something like the 555, but that's typically very noisy.

It only needs to be mono
Its like a trem but instead of cutting the volume (typical tremolo pedal) it sends the signal through a loop to other FX.

Im not a circuit designer so maybe im hoping we can all chime in. I got the idea "2nd hand" now I need a pardner (partner) to get this rolling, Could be a unique effect

[midwayfair]

It only needs to be mono
Its like a trem but instead of cutting the volume (typical tremolo pedal) it sends the signal through a loop to other FX.

I know it's mono. The way a stereo trem works is that it splits the signal and the left side is up while the right side is down.

If you were to feed the left and right side into a single input (sum the outputs to one), it would sound like nothing was happening.

If you instead made the "right" side an effects loop, the signal would alternate between the dry signal and the effected signal when modulating. If you use a square wave, it'll sound like it's switching back and forth. If you use a sine wave, it'll sound like it's fading the effects loop in and out. If you kill the modulation on the dry signal, it'll sound like it's blending in the effected signal. And so on.

You can also use Craig Anderton's stereo trem, which is the same basic idea but uses a 4049 chip to generate an out-of-phase LFO:
http://www.generalguitargadgets.com/diagrams/catrssc.gif

Again, you'll probably need a follower blend circuit to sum the outputs.

[LaceSensor]

It only needs to be mono
Its like a trem but instead of cutting the volume (typical tremolo pedal) it sends the signal through a loop to other FX.

I know it's mono. The way a stereo trem works is that it splits the signal and the left side is up while the right side is down.

If you were to feed the left and right side into a single input (sum the outputs to one), it would sound like nothing was happening.

If you instead made the "right" side an effects loop, the signal would alternate between the dry signal and the effected signal when modulating. If you use a square wave, it'll sound like it's switching back and forth. If you use a sine wave, it'll sound like it's fading the effects loop in and out. If you kill the modulation on the dry signal, it'll sound like it's blending in the effected signal. And so on.

You can also use Craig Anderton's stereo trem, which is the same basic idea but uses a 4049 chip to generate an out-of-phase LFO:
http://www.generalguitargadgets.com/diagrams/catrssc.gif

Again, you'll probably need a follower blend circuit to sum the outputs.

Aha I see what you are getting at now. Im just a dummy.
Dont know if Ill be able to design it or get anything working.