Parallel resistance calculation and changing a fader's value - Gearslutz.com

Gearslutz.com

All Advertisers
Go Back   Gearslutz.com > The Forums > Geekslutz forum


Parallel resistance calculation and changing a fader's value

New Reply New Reply Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10th April 2008   #1
Lives for gear
 
jsteiger's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Suburban Chicago
Posts: 821

Thread Starter
Parallel resistance calculation and changing a fader's value

Oh technical slutz,

I’m gonna see if I can ask this clearly. I have been researching building some new cards for my console. In doing so, I’m calculating the loads for many different nodes. This math got me curious about modding my input channels. I am planning on 4 individual pots for the echo sends instead of just 1-5K pot. I charting out the different loads place on the input opamp, it got me thinking about the faders I replaced. Some of you chimed in to help with that. I’m happy to say, I understand a bit of the math now! Remember, the stock 440 faders (in my desk) were 600ohm. I changed them with more obtainable 5K faders. I have noticed how the load the opamp sees, drastically changes when plugging in 5K.

Soooo, a question! Can I add a 681ohm shunt resistor just before the 5K fader, to give the same parallel resistance load as the singal 600ohm fader has?

I have calculated that the lowest possible load the 2520 sees at this stage is 472.13ohms. The highest possible load is 584.07ohms.

The range is 1535.12ohms to 4074.07ohms with the 5K fader in place of the 600ohm fader. It seams like API tried to stay around a 525ohm load in all possible situations at this point in their circuit. It appears that they had their reasons.

I’m trying to stay as true to their old school design as possible. NO pun intended what so ever.

What do you guys think??

Thanks, Jeff
__________________
Visit our Internet Store featuring EA replica A*P*I transformers, killer aluminum knobs and more...www.classicapi.com

GroupDIY 51x Racks
jsteiger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th April 2008   #2
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Location: Burbank, CA, USA
Posts: 1,037

Fader math can be a little ambiguous and in the end, I think this is mostly about the tracking. I don't think you'll run into any issues with headroom, distortion, etc. My main goal here would be that the new faders to track the same way as the old ones.

Putting aside the question of impedances and loads, the tapers of your new faders might not match the tapers of the original API's. In fact, they probably don't. So really there are two X factors here.

It would be nice to see a schematic or at least know the load impedance on the wiper of the fader. If it's high (5-10K or more) everything will probably be fine. If it's low (2K or less) the fader may be overly loaded down, with the result that the center of its travel will have too much attenuation. (Do the fader wipers go straight to a patchpoint? I believe that some API desks were built this way.)

In the end, this will probably be a trial and error kind of thing. Sure, you can shunt the fader with a 681 ohm resistor, and the parallel resistance will be closer to 600, but you might not need to, and this probably won't help with tracking anomalies.

A little confusing but to summarize, the input impedance of the fader is *probably* not critical, though it depends on the circuit. The fader output should have the impedance match it's designed for, but it still may not match the silkscreening on your desk or match the old faders.

Penny & Giles once published a paper all about fader impedances, I have it somewhere, maybe I should pdf it and post it.
__________________
http://studioelectronics.biz

Service & Restoration of UREI dbx Eventide Marshall AMS Tube Gear and more
David Kulka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th April 2008   #3
Lives for gear
 
JohnRoberts's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Hickory, MS
Posts: 2,047

+1

I am not familiar with specifics of the API but in general solid state electronics will perform better when driving lighter loads.

I would not expect any degradation from using a modern fader value, and perhaps some improvement.

JR
__________________
John Roberts
www.CircularScience.com
JohnRoberts is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10th April 2008   #4
Lives for gear
 
nosebleedaudio's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Location: Birmingham, AL USA
Posts: 3,700

Send a message via AIM to nosebleedaudio
Another advantage of a lower value pot/fader is you can, if needed, add more pots to the same point and not load the op amp, ex; 4- 5K pots will not load the 2520, I would not be concerned about maximum loading on the 2520.
I would also suspect that many designers used mostly 10K and 5K for this reason and they bought pots at a higher quantity, getting a far lower price...
__________________
Michael Keith
www.jmkaudio.com
nosebleedaudio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th April 2008   #5
Lives for gear
 
jsteiger's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Suburban Chicago
Posts: 821

Thread Starter
Schematic

Thanks for the posts and input gentlemen. BTW David, great work on my RMX...she is sounding very sweet!

I have already changed the faders from 600ohm to 5K. That was actually done a while ago. A tech/friend helped with a new legend. The desk came with Auditronics facia's so the legend was wrong from the beginning. One day I will get around to all new fader facias.

Anyhow, I guess I'm more looking to make sure I am understaning the math correctly. In trying to learn and understand my input modules, I had noticed that the load on the 2520 appears to always be around 600ohms.

Can someone double check a few of my calculations to see if I am understanding?

For me, I am most unsure about the node when the Echo Pre-Fader is selected.
This is what I came up with. I calculated the Level pot at 100% or 5K.

1 Echo engaged, node=48.7K
2 Echos engaged, node=29.2K
3 Echos engaged, node=22.7K
4 Echos engaged, node=19.5K

I think I understand the rest of it

Thanks again guys, Jeff

Here's a quick and rough schematic of this part of the module.
Attached Thumbnails
Parallel resistance calculation and changing a fader's value-schemo.jpg  
jsteiger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th April 2008   #6
Lives for gear
 
jsteiger's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Suburban Chicago
Posts: 821

Thread Starter
Bump

A little "check my math" bumpage.
jsteiger is offline   Reply With Quote
New Reply New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread Thread starter Forum Replies Last Post
RFZ Calculation Assistance? tubeman Studio building / acoustics 22 21st April 2008 05:50 PM
Latency calculation superburtm So much gear, so little time! 5 5th August 2007 04:07 AM
By my calculation.... thenoodle So much gear, so little time! 12 28th May 2006 01:45 AM
PT Changing tempo w/out changing midi performance?? d.dot Music computers 0 11th November 2005 11:41 AM
Variable Resistance quesiton. Mattsson Geekslutz forum 8 17th August 2004 08:44 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:45 PM.

Home - Search Forum - Contact Us - Terms Of Use - Advertise on Gearslutz - All Advertisers - Archive - Top
 
 
Powered by vBulletin®
Gearslutz.com LTD - UK Company Number 7597610.
Registered Office - 35 Ballards Lane, London, N3 1XW.
Hosted by Nimbus Hosting.

SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.