Archive for the 'Construction' Category

09
Jun
18

Piezos Pt 7 – Hydrophones

While making the piezo contact microphones described earlier in this series, I decided to adapt a couple of them for the specific purpose of recording sound underwater in rivers and ponds.

In this case, I wanted them to be compatible with my Marantz PD660 recorder, which records in stereo via two XLR external microphone sockets.

For my first attempt, I began by using 3m twin shielded cables, which had two 6.35mm mono jacks on one end – what was on the other end didn’t matter, as these connectors were cut off and the ends attached to piezo elements.  As with the others, the shields were attached to the brass outsides, the cores to the centres, and they were given two coats of Plasti-Dip.

In this way I was able to record in stereo, but my attempts were bedevilled by extraneous noise.  I also realised that underwater recording required much greater amplification than I was getting from the simple preamp I had used  for the simple percussion instruments I had been making.

Looking around the internet to see what others had done, I came across the idea on this site of using two piezos back-to-back for each channel.  Actually, this is probably more accurately described as front-to-front, as it requires the two piezos to be sandwiched together with flexible silicone sealant.

Having read somewhere else that the air gap behind a piezo affects what it picks up, I decided it would better if there was some air between the two piezos, rather than completely filling the space between them with the sealant.  Hence, I just put a ring of sealant round the edges before sticking the discs together.

The main thing is to keep the centres of the two discs from touching.

To connect the discs to the recorder, I used a 3m twin XLR cable.  Each channel used two discs: the black leads from the discs were connected together, and the two red leads were connected to the left and right connectors of the XLR lead.

In fact, I made two sets, to see if there would be a difference between 35mm discs and 50mm discs; the 35mm discs are shown above.  The 50mm discs came with no wires attached, so I had to solder the wires on myself – a bit of a tricky job, to make sure they attached firmly, but without damaging the delicate central area of the disc with the crystals in it.  When I had done the soldering and checked the strength of the joint, I superglued the wires to the outer edge of the discs to make sure there would be no stress on the soldered joints which might cause the wires to become detached while in use.

In the case of the 50mm discs, where there was more space, I stuck a small lead weight on the edge of one disc in each pair before putting them together.  This, I hoped, would make them more stable in the water.  Once again, I used the same principle of putting the sealant round the edges of the discs only, and then putting them together like a sandwich.

I connected the wires to a twin XLR cable as before, and gave the discs two coats of Plasti-Dip.

*

In yet another place I had read that underwater signals might require up to 100 times amplification, so I put together a TL072-based buffer amp somewhat similar to the preamp I had used for the piezo-based percussion instruments, but with two major differences:

Firstly, it was designed to amplify the input signal by a factor of 100, with a volume control to reduce the output if necessary; secondly, it was in the form of a ‘differential’ amplifier, so that the signals on the left and right leads of each channel were amplified and added together, producing a simple two-channel stereo output from the four inputs.

Each channel looked like this:

After checking the prototype (pictured above) was working satisfactorily, I improved the connections with 2 core shielded cable and put the circuit into a small box.  I changed the output from the 3.5mm socket shown to a 5 pin XLR socket because this matched the professionally made apparatus I use for field recording with conventional microphones.  There was no room for a battery in the box, so I used the 3.5mm socket for a power socket.

For absolute minimal noise, the closer the preamp is to the piezos the better, and I have seen designs where the circuit was contained in a waterproof housing in the water.  However, mine is designed so the preamp box is well away from the water, and the output volume control can be used while it’s in operation, as well as the input volume control on the recorder.

*

The first problem when it came to testing the hydrophones was how to ensure that they floated in the correct place; and the second was how to maintain a consistent stereo image.

Clearly, the hydrophones would require some sort of framework to which they could be attached, and from which their depth underwater could be adjusted.  The framework would need to be buoyant and, as I discovered, potentially very wide.  The speed of sound in air is about 750mph or 350 metres per second, and a distance between the microphones of about 9-12 inches or 25-30cm is usually enough to get a satisfactory stereo image.  However, underwater, the speed of sound is more like 1,500 metres a second, getting on for four and a half times as fast!

This meant that the hydrophones would need to be spaced up to four and a half times the distance apart to get the same stereo effect as two conventional microphones recording in the open air.

I thought about different methods of creating a frame 3 – 4 feet or 1 – 1.5 meters long, and easily foldable for transportation, and came up with the idea of using a folding wooden ruler.  I found one which was a metre long, about the minimum necessary length, which folded on brass hinges into 5 sections of 20cm each.  This would easily fit into a bag and could be carried to the recording site before being opened out and placed in the water.  It cost about £2 (although postage was £3!).

The first thing I did with the ruler was cut a number of slots in it:

The purpose of these slots was so that the hydrophone leads could be threaded through them, stay in position, and allow the piezo elements to stay at the right depth in the water beneath the framework.

I tested that the slots were suitable for this purpose:

and then – since I had the tin in the workroom – gave the framework a coating of Plasti-Dip.  I’m sure it would have been fine without it, but the Plasti-Dip will hopefully give the wood a little extra protection, make it easier to dry and increase its life.

Later, because of using a wider construction with two piezos sandwiched together, I cut narrower channels to connect the slots to the edge of the framework, so the wires could fit in and the piezos wouldn’t need to pass through the slots.

*

The yellow balls in the above picture need an explanation!  Although the wood would be quite buoyant, the framework would need to be supported in the water.  I looked to see what anglers might use, and came across these small ‘bubble floats’:

These are hollow plastic and have a small bung in them so they can be partly filled with water.  This gives them a little weight so they can be cast into an ideal position in the water, but will still float.  I thought these would ensure the wooden framework would remain on the surface and the hydrophones could be positioned at an appropriate depth beneath.

In the end, I used them without any water in them; empty, they were able to support the framework slightly under the surface.  As can be seen in the picture, in a restricted space such as a bath or small pond, the end sections of the framework can be folded in.

*

Having fitted the floats, it was time to test the device, for which purpose I filled my bath, floated the framework with the piezos attached, and ran the tap.  The sound was pretty good, and the noise minimal:

I’ll post again when I’ve had a chance to try it out in the field!

Advertisements
16
Apr
18

Piezos & Electrets Pt 5 – Finishing off and a very low-cost looper

In the previous post in this series, I added preamps and an echo/delay to a number of new and old percussion instruments.

I could have left it at that, but I decided before finishing the project that one more refinement would add something significant to the value of these devices.

I mentioned in an earlier post in the series that I had bought, for a few pence each, about a hundred voice recorders like this:

They were not guaranteed to work, but experiments showed that what mostly seemed to be wrong with them was that the batteries had run down – in fact, when I examined the box that I kept them in recently, quite a lot of them were leaking and spoiling the plastic cases.

However, there was no reason to think that the circuit boards inside were damaged.  In fact, a few years ago, shortly after I bought them,  I’d successfully used a couple of boards – without really looking into their function fully – in a circuit-bent instrument which I called the StyloSound.

*

I thought now would be a good time to sort them out properly and put more of them to use, so I began sorting through them, setting aside the old batteries for recycling, discarding damaged cases and keeping useful parts.  After a while the floor of my workroom looked like this:

Clockwise from the top can be seen: complete units in good condition (batteries apart); small 8ohm speakers; small 6.5mm electret elements; intact circuit boards; discharged AG13 coin batteries; key rings.

Some of these items would be of use in this project.  I have already described in the earlier post referred to above, using the electrets in constructing percussion instruments with plastic bottles; I was now hoping to use the circuit boards in all the instruments to give them a recording and looping function.

In the top picture below, the main chip can be seen – or, rather, can’t be seen, as it’s hidden under the black blob in the centre.

Above the chip are the two tracks which were beneath the record/play button; and in the top left the switch which selects between these two functions.  I didn’t intend to use the selector switch, but two buttons, one side connected to the ‘rec’ side of that switch in one case, and the ‘play’ side in the other, and the other side connected to the large track, should do the job.

In both pictures the LED is visible on the opposite side to the ‘Play’/’Rec’ switch.  This is connected to light up when the ‘Record’ button is pressed.

I also made sure to make notes of connections to the board before removing external components.

As it was under a protective blob, it was impossible to say which chip it was which was employed in this circuit.  However, it was quite possibly one of the ISD1800 series – in particular the ISD1820, about which there is quite a lot of information on the internet (for example here and here), and using which there are quite a number of modules available.

These are very reasonably priced at £1 or less – although not nearly as cheap as my voice recorder boards, as long as I could get them to work in the way I wanted.  Note in the picture above that, although the ISD1820 is usually shown as a 16-pin DIL chip, the modules on the right use a smaller, concealed version, so I thought at first this might be the one on the voice recorder boards I was proposing to use.

One of the features of the ISD1820 is that it has two methods of playback.  In one case it will play a recording as long as  the ‘Play’ button is pressed – in the same way as it will make a recording as long as the ‘Record’ button is pressed; but in the other, as soon as the ‘Play’ button is pressed, the recording will play through to the end, even if the button is immediately released.

Pressing ‘Play’ once on these devices I had was enough to cause the recording to play through to the end, which is what I had hoped.

*

However, this wasn’t everything I was looking for.  In the StyloSound, the ‘Play’ button needs to be pressed every time playback of the recorded sound is required.  Although this is suitable for the StyloSound, it isn’t proper looping, where the sound will be repeated indefinitely.  The ISD1820 has a method of triggering repeats, and I was hoping I would find a way of doing this in a similar way with the boards I had.

In the ISD1820 looping is achieved by linking the pin that lights up the LED to the ‘Play’ button.  I was hoping this would be the case with these boards.

First I connected the power, audio in and out sockets, and ‘Play’ and ‘Record’ buttons – one side to the points each side of the switch, the other side to the large track above the blob – to check that the board was functioning correctly.  The recording quality wasn’t that great, but it recorded and played back without problems.

I then connected the ‘Play’ button to the LED connection – but no luck, it didn’t cause the recording to repeat: so I  got out my multi-meter and connected one side to 0v pressing the ‘Play’ button and testing with the other side to try and find a point on the board which would be at a high voltage while the recording was playing and then went low as soon as it had finished – this high-to-low change being the thing which would trigger the recording to start playback again.  I found a spot, and connected this to the ‘Play’ button, made a new recording and pressed ‘Play’.  This time the recording played and repeated continuously.

*

I went round each of the 5 mono instruments and connected a voice recorder PCB.  The first example, the one for the ‘Snare’ instrument, looked like this:

1 is the ‘Record’/’Play’ switch.  To conserve space, I decided to use a special switch which I had a small bag of.  This was a 3-way SPDT toggle, one way for ‘Record’, the other way for ‘Play’, with a centre off position.

2 is a 10 ohm resistor, connecting the output to +v.  I remembered that I’d had problems with the output of the board when I used it in the Stylosound, and this was the same – when I connected the board to the input of the TL072 mixer, there was no output.  I reasoned, in the light of further experience, that this could have been that the circuit required a load to compensate for the speaker which had been removed.  The speaker was 8 ohms, so I connected a 10 ohm resistor in its place.  Sure enough, the output came through loud and clear . . . even though the output of the board wasn’t even connected to the mixer!  I have no idea why this happened, but it did.  It worked, so I didn’t look into it any further.

3 is a 10k volume control I added to the output of the mixer.  Like most of the pots in this project, it was salvaged from the PCBs of some supposedly non-working mixers I had bought as a job lot from eBay (previously described here).  As with the voice recorders, some of them worked fine, or had minor faults, but a couple of them were good only for parts.

4 is the new connection point for the looping function.

5 are the connections for ‘Record’ and ‘Play’.

After these pictures were taken I also removed the LED from the board, and attached it with longer wires, so that it could be mounted beside the new ‘Record’/’Play’ switch.

*

Finally it was time to finish these instruments off.

I began with the piezo instruments, installing the switches, potentiometers and LED, tucking the electronics away underneath, and attaching feet to the base:

The electret instruments proved to be slightly more complicated.  Firstly. I had to add a TL072 mixer, as described in the previous post in this series, but also I needed to use the other half of the TL072 – which is a dual op amp – to double the output from the electret preamp.

The layout of this circuit was exactly the same as the mixer, except that it had a single input, from the output of the electret preamp, via a 100k resistor, and the resistance between the input and output was 200k, amplifying the input by 2.  To save space, I didn’t use pieces of strip board, I just added the appropriate resistors to 8-pin ic sockets for each of the instruments into which the TL072’s were plugged.

A 1M resistor was needed between the output of the PT2399 and the input of the mixer to balance the level with the output of the electret amplifier, which, as with the piezo circuits, used a resistance of 100k.

*

I took the opportunity at this point to make a suitable 4.5v power supply for the percussion units, using a spare wooden base.  Some time ago I had bought a hundred 3.5mm  sockets for 10-15p each, and I still had quite a few left, so I used a dozen of these for the outputs – more than enough for the modules I’d made so far, with a few spare for future additions.  I found a socket which matched an old mains adapter I had been given, and added a small, low-cost voltage regulator module, an LED scavenged from one of the defunct mini-mixer PCBs, and 4 plastic feet:

*

Here are some recordings I made with some of the finished instruments and the new power supply:

The echo seemed quite good, although by no means noise-free; the looper was less effective.  The straightforward amplified sound was excellent in each case; the degree to which the extra circuits were practical or useful varied from one instrument to another.

For a further use of piezo elements as a pickup – in this case a hydrophone for underwater recording – see Pt. 7 of this series.

19
Mar
18

Piezos & Electrets Pt 4 – Electronics and a very, very simple PT2399 echo/delay

In the previous post in the piezo series I had prepared 4 percussion instruments, all based on making sounds to be picked up by piezo discs.  In the picture below, the one on the left has 4 lengths of piano wire soldered to a large (50mm diameter) piezo; the second one has a snare from a snare drum attached to a large, shallow tin; the third one has an adjustable rubber-lined clip designed to hold a Latin American-style rainstick; and the right-hand one is a circle of sandpaper with a piezo disc firmly superglued to the back.

In the electret series I had made 2 new instruments in which sounds would be picked up by electret elements, and had identified 2 existing instruments, a xylophone and glockenspiel, which needed amplifying in a similar way.  Each of the instruments had its own appropriate preamp, either a piezo type or electret type, as described earlier in the series.

*

Next, one of the things I felt percussion instruments would benefit from was a reverb/delay circuit, and I had been looking around for a long time for something suitable.  In particular I was looking for a circuit that would be inexpensive, simple to put together, and easily repeatable in different units I might construct or circuit-bend.

Once I came across the PT2399 chip, I knew I’d found the answer.

According to the datasheet, the PT2399 is ‘an echo audio processor IC utilizing CMOS Technology which is equipped with ADC and DAC, high sampling frequency and an internal memory of 44K.  Digital processing is used to generate the delay time, it also features an internal VCO circuit in the system clock, thereby making the frequency easily adjustable.  PT2399 boast very low distortion (THD<0.5%) and very low noise (No<-90dBV), thus producing high quality audio output.  The pin assignments and application circuit are optimized for easy PCB layout and cost saving advantage.’

I managed to get a number of them at about 11p or 12p each, and researched the simplest circuits I could find to make a suitable delay unit.  I found one here: http://www.hqew.net/events/news-article/13932.html and put it together.

I simplified the circuit even more, and adjusted some of the capacitor values to lengthen the delay time and keep the noise to a minimum, and ended up with this first version:

I haven’t labelled it, but the volume pot is 10k.  Ideally, this should be a log pot, although lin pots are usually cheaper and easier to come by these days.  The component values are all very standardised, as I bought these values in bulk – using either resistors or capacitors in series or parallel, you can get close to other typical values.  These values worked fine for me in this context, however.  The value of 50k (lin) was chosen for the ‘Delay Time’ control as it gave a very wide range of delay times.

In this configuration, the repeat function is fully on, but when the ‘Delay’ control is turned fully anti-clockwise, there are no repeats.

*

One of the slight problems with the PT2399 is its very strict voltage requirements: below about 4.5v it’s unlikely to work; above 6v and it will probably be damaged.  I tested it with three 1.5v batteries, which was my original intended power supply for the percussion instruments, and it worked fine.

I first wanted to build a stand-alone circuit, however, and for this I used the usual 9v PP3 battery and a voltage regulator to reduce 9v to 5v, which is the PT2399’s preferred supply.

The voltage regulators were small DC-DC modules I bought for about 45p each, so didn’t increase the cost of the device too much.  These modules will accept an input voltage of up to 28v, and the output voltage can be adjusted from about 1v to 20v.

This view of the finished circuit shows how I put it together: there is no circuit board, but most of the components are soldered to the pins of the i.c. socket holding the PT2399.

Made in this way, the circuit would take up very little space in, for example, the restricted space of a circuit-bent keyboard or toy.  The 10uF DC-blocking capacitors and the volume control might also not be needed in some applications.  It might be somewhat lo-fi, but should be fine in the situations in which I plan to use it.

I decided to house this stand-alone circuit in one of the plastic jewel boxes I had used before for the Active Tone Control and Low-Pass Filter, as mentioned above, and the Touch-Radio.  Because of the minimal component count and no circuit board, even with the voltage regulator module, there was no problem fitting everything in the box:

The completed unit looked like this:

*

After trying the circuit out in this way, I decided to put one of these units into each of the percussion instruments, and in the case of the piezo-based ones, I made up the preamp circuit boards with the PT2399’s included.

I wanted to be able to adjust the number of repeats this time, so I experimented a bit and came up with the following development of the circuit above.  Since making the drawing and further experimenting with the percussion instruments, I changed the ‘REPEATS’ potentiometer to 50k; in some cases, depending on the sound from the instrument itself, I increased the added resistance here from 15k to 20k:

In this case I experienced problems connecting the preamp output directly to the input of the PT2399 circuit; so I added a 2k resistor (actually two 1k resistors in series) between the preamp output and PT2399 input – point ‘A’ in the above diagram.

It was at this point when I noticed that the output sound of the PT2399 didn’t include the sound at the input! . . . So, in order to hear the original as well as the delayed version, I used the other half of the TL072 as a simple mixer – it’s a dual op amp chip, and only one of them is used for the piezo preamp.

The circuit looked like this:

Although, in fact, the PT2399 output required 200k-500k, depending on the device, to balance the volume with the ‘dry’ signal.  The power connections – 4.5v to pin 8, 0v to pin 4, and 2.25v to pin 5 – were already in place for the half of the TL072 used for the piezo preamp).

*

I added one of these boards to each of the four piezo percussion units, plus a volume control between the mixer and the output socket – the odd one out being the one for the rainstick, which was designed to be a stereo device.  This meant doubling up each of the elements of the circuit: 2 preamps, 2 PT2399’s and 2 mixers; and using dual potentiometers for delay time, repeats and volume.  As the stereo preamp used both halves of the TL072, a second one was needed for the mixer left and right channels.

Here’s a sound file of the ‘Snare’ instrument, the Piano String instrument and the Sandpaper instrument.  Bear in mind that these are not being struck with any force: on the contrary, they’re being tapped very lightly with a thin disposable wooden coffee stirrer.

*

I wanted to do one more thing with the Sandpaper instrument before moving on.  The scratching sound covered a wide frequency range, and I thought it would be interesting to vary the sound by putting it through a low pass filter.

I had made a couple of these filters before, in the Optical Theremin, and as a stand-alone unit, using the 741-based filter from the Music From Outer Space website.  These were so simple and effective, I thought I’d use the same one again.  Here is the circuit:

This circuit was placed after the mixer stage described above.  I added a 1k resistor at the input, and at the output a 1M preset and a 10uF capacitor.  The only change I made to the circuit as shown was  to use a 500k potentiometer in place of the 1M potentiometer for the cut-off frequency, and didn’t include a ‘Fine’ control.

This picture shows how few components are needed to make an excellent filter.  There are two circuits on this small board:

This filter proved very effective, and sounded like this:

*

I then moved on to the instruments with the plastic bottles and the electrets.  I glued the electrets to the acrylic tubes, and the tubes to the wooden bases, then connected the electrets to the circuit boards I had prepared, each containing both a preamp and a PT2399 Echo circuit.

This is what they sounded like:

I was basically satisfied with the sounds I’d obtained.  The next article in the series describes how I finished the instruments off.

04
Mar
18

Electret microphones Pt 2 – Practical applications

After constructing some preamp circuits for electret microphones, as described in the first article in this series, I started to look at different uses for them.

First of all, I had some conventional instruments to amplify – a xylophone and a glockenspiel; secondly, I wanted to make percussion instruments from some plastic bottles.

*

I had a collection of plastic bottles, which would be suitable for tuned (or semi-tuned) percussion.  I sawed the ends off, leaving them at different lengths – and therefore sounding at different pitches – and prepared a framework to attach them to.  This consisted of small square trays which I bought, and 2x2cm wood, which I cut to length.

I then glued the bottles to each side of the central post:

Each bottle would have an electret microphone inside.  The electret elements were salvaged from part of a job lot of voice memo recorders which I bought in bulk on eBay.  These were said to be non-working, but their only problem seemed to be that the coin-type batteries had run down.  The electret element can be seen in position at the top of the right-hand picture below.

The electrets were to be mounted inside the plastic bottles on short lengths of rigid acrylic tubing.

The pictures below give an idea of how the electrets attach to the tubes, and the tubes attach to the instruments’ bases:

Following on from this post, I will describe the xylophone and glockenspiel which also needed an economical method of amplifying; and then installing the electronics for all the new percussion instruments.

25
Feb
18

Dismantling a hard drive

Note that in the following post I’m describing taking a hard drive apart in order to reuse some of the parts, but have no intention of putting it back together, or making it work again as a hard drive!

This the 3.5″ hard drive I took apart as my first experiment:

Front & Back IMG_1515

I’m sorry the PCB side is rather blurry, but I was less interested in that than what was inside.

The tools required for the job were a small screwdriver set, from which I mostly used a Torx or ‘star’, which I think was size 8, and a very small Philips or crosshead for a couple of screws inside:

Tools IMG_1525

I also needed a large flat-bladed screwdriver, which I used two or three times.  If you’re going to do the same, you may find a few differences in the details – type and positioning of screws, differently shaped fittings, and so forth, but the principles should be the same.

I first removed the circuit board, and put that aside.  Turning it over, you can clearly see in the first picture the 6 screws round the edge of the ‘lid’ which needed removing.

Having taken these out, it seemed that the top was glued in place as well as screwed, so I went round with the large screwdriver, prying it open.  This almost freed it, but it was only after still experiencing considerable difficulty in getting it completely open that I realised there must be another screw somewhere in the middle, under the label.  I scraped away the label until I found it and took it out.  The arrow shows where it was.

Top IMG_1527

I was then able to take the lid right off and expose the inner workings – of which there aren’t actually that many.

Top removed Captioned IMG_1528

The picture shows the disk or disks, one on top of the other, like a stack of pancakes – except there are gaps between them, and the arm is actually several arms, one for each disk; the arm itself with the delicate heads on the end which read the data from the disks, and with its other end moving between two magnets (not visible at the moment); and finally a flexible plastic multi-way ‘cable’ which joins the arm – and some small circuitry on the arm – to a connector.  This would have poked through a gap in the case to connect to the circuit board  on the other side.

Later on, connections will have to made to some very, very tiny points on the arm, and it’s going to be a lot easier to trace these points back to the connector, so its important not to damage the plastic cable.  The connector could be poked out from the other side, once it two fixing screws had been removed.

The fitting obscuring the back end of the arm wasn’t – in this model of drive anyway – screwed in place, it was just slotted on some pins and just needed prising off.  I believe the magnets in hard drives are made of neodymium.  This is classed as a ‘rare earth’ (although it’s isn’t actually any rarer than, say, copper) and makes very strong magnets.  Just be a bit careful as you remove them, and think where you’re going to put them down as you can be surprised at how firmly they grab lighter metal objects.

This picture shows the top magnet fitting removed:

Top Magnet Out Captioned IMG_1529

Once the top magnet is off, it’s possible to move the arm out of the way and get the disks out.  This involves removing 6 screws around the centre (on top of the motor) and two screws at the side. the disks and the various fittings associated with them all come off in layers.  The disks – there were three of them in this drive, look very much like CD’s, with a large hole in the middle, except they’re made of metal.

I put the disks carefully to one side – I had an idea they might be good for chimes or cymbals – and focused on the arm.

With the top magnet out of the way, it was possible to see the so-called ‘voice’ coil’.  Two impossibly tiny wires connected the voice coil with the arm actuation circuitry, and to test that the arm was working I needed to attach a battery to these wires.

In the end these wires were just too small, so I traced them back through the plastic cable to the connector, where it was slightly easier to get at them.  Attaching the battery leads to the two points produced nothing at 4.5v, but at 9v there was a loud and satisfying clunk, which showed that the arm was working fine.

*

The procedure with the next disk I worked on, a smaller 2.5″ was exactly the same.  The top came off once I had removed the 6 visible screws and the 7th screw hidden under the label.  I needed a smaller Torx/star screwdriver – a size 5 or 6 – for this disk compared to the other one.

1_IMG_1555

This exposed the single disk and arm:

2_IMG_1557

A single screw in the middle of the motor housing allowed the disk to come out.

3_IMG_1558

Removing two screws freed the unit in the bottom right, which connected the arm with the circuit board on the other side.

4_IMG_1559

I prised off the top magnet (bottom left), just to make sure the construction was the same as the 3.5″ drive – which it was.

I replaced the magnet and tested the drive with a battery.  I’d already removed a plastic retainer on the right, by the heads at the end of the arm; I also had to remove the plastic piece which you can see on the left, which was restricting the arm’s movement.  However, once I had done this, applying 9v to the appropriate pins on the connector reliably operated the arm.

In fact, this smaller mechanism would also work with 4.5v, which was a useful discovery.  If parts of the circuitry which would operate it had to be quite low – say, 5v – it could be handy if the arm would also work at the same voltage.

*

So, I had verified that an arm from an inexpensive broken hard drive could operate as an electrically-operate striker, like a solenoid; that arms from both 3.5″ and 2.5″ drives would work; that the 3.5″ drive arm would operate at 9v; and the 2.5″ drive arm would operate at 4.5v.  It will be some time before I get round to the next part of this project, but the next thing will be to see how the arms could be set up to operate outside the hard drive housing.

21
Jan
18

Piezos Pt 3 – Amplifying and creating instruments

After preparing the discs and the buffer/amplifier in Part 2 of this series, I looked around for different instruments that could effectively be amplified and recorded with the use of piezo elements.

I also tried a few inexpensive commercial piezo contact mics, like these:

The top one (Cost: approx £1.50) has quite a large piezo disc inside a plastic cover and a sticky pad to fix it to the surface which is to be amplified; the bottom one (Cost: £1.25) is built into a (not-too-strong) plastic clip, with a foam pad to protect the disc.

*

The more solidly the piezo is connected to the sound-producing surface, the better the sound obtained.  In other words, it’s best if the disc can be glued to the surface.  I did this with some of the non-valuable items:

However, I wasn’t keen on making this permanent addition to my instruments, and  looked for different ways of making temporary connections.  Each of these could be useful in different circumstances:

This double-sided tape is described as ‘removable’, and is less likely to damage either the piezo element or the instrument it’s stuck to, so is a good choice – although, at about £7.00, was rather expensive.   I hope to make use of it elsewhere in the house!  It’s also more suitable for a one-off performance or recording.  I’ve also read that Blu-Tac works in a similar way, although my experience is that it can leave marks; elsewhere I’ve read that insulating tape can be used – that might also be less sticky than conventional sellotape, but unlike the double sided tape, would have to go over the top of the piezo disc.

I also bought some clamps of different sorts:

The spring clips were very strong, so I would guess I’d have to be careful using them so as not to damage the piezos.  I have read of people using soft pads – made of felt or foam rubber, for  example – to put over the piezos when using them with strong clips.

In this way I had a variety of different methods of attaching the piezos to items I wanted to amplify or record.  The items themselves could be either acoustic instruments that just needed appropriately amplifying; or items that were not musical instruments, but which could be amplified – perhaps changing their sound, or revealing a hidden sound in the process – by attaching a piezo.

*

As they are used to pick up sounds from vibrations in solid surfaces, the best acoustic instruments to work on would be those with sounding boards, such as guitars, zithers or other stringed instruments, several of which I had in my collection; as for non-musical instruments, this would be a matter of experimentation!  The advantage of using a piezo contact mic in these examples would be that, unlike a conventional microphone which picks up airborne sounds, the contact mic wouldn’t easily be affected by the nearby sounds of the player, other instruments, or external noises in the recording environment – e.g. traffic or the people next door.

First of all, the more conventional instruments.  These are just a few of the various things I tried the piezo mics with.  At the top are bells and a rainstick; at the bottom are a rattle (not perhaps, strictly speaking, an instrument!) and a zither.

The following sound file illustrates how these sounded:

In these experiments only the zither was recorded in stereo by using two piezos, but a stereo effect would certainly bring something to some of the others – for example the rainstick.

*

Next, some uses of the piezos that created new instruments in themselves.  Both of these made sounds that, when picked up by the piezos were very different from the way they sounded in the room.

The first one uses a small snare – normally used for a snare drum.  This was purchased very cheaply (about £1.30) and attached to a wide, flat tin.  A 50mm piezo disc was superglued to the middle of the tin.

The second one is just a 50mm piezo disc with 4 lengths of piano wire soldered to it.  I’m not 100% certain of the diameter of the wire: it said ‘G0’  (i.e. ‘G zero’) on it, and was bought from a (classical) music shop about 30 years ago.  If it means Music Wire gauge 0, this would make it about 9mm, something like a thin top E guitar string, which is about what it seems to be.  The 4 lengths are approximately 6″, 9″, 12″ and 18″.

This sound file illustrates first the ‘snare’ instrument, then the ‘string’ instrument:

It’s surprising how different the sound through the piezo is, compared to the natural sound, especially the one with the soldered strings, which makes hardly any noise at all.  The small preamp also plays a part in preserving the lower frequency sounds.

The picture below shows, on the left, the three – I don’t know what to call them – strikers or activators, which I used to make the sounds from the snare instrument: the one on the left is a home made beater or mallet, made from a length of dowel and a wooden bead; the middle one is a wooden coffee stirrer, much more delicate; and the one on the right is a small cleaning brush.

Activators IMG_1281

It’s a good idea to make a collection of these if you’re going to make piezo instruments, as the way you interact with the instrument can make a big difference to how it sounds.  The picture on the right shows some more things I use, as well as pipe cleaners, fire-lighting spills and small emery boards.  This writer has a very impressive collection: https://skoglosa.wordpress.com/2015/05/06/contact-mic-guidelines/!

*

The instruments required quite a bit of physical construction, since a framework was needed to support the sounding parts.  I bought some small square trays to serve as the bases, and cut lengths of 2x2cm wood for the uprights.

After glueing and screwing these together, I was able to attach the sounding parts:

The two on the right are the ones described earlier; the one on the left is simply a sandpaper disc with a 35mm piezo glued to the back.  The narrow space underneath the base can be seen in this picture.  The batteries and electronics would have to fit in this space.

*

After the physical construction, it was time to add the electronics.  I’ll describe this in the next part of the series.

20
Jan
18

Electret microphones Pt 1- General

After starting my recent piezo project, I decided to look into electret microphones – there are many situations in which a piezo-type contact mic is less suitable than a mic which detects sounds in the air.

Electret capsules are very cheap, and need just a few additional components to get them to work.  I bought a number of these for about 10p – 11p each:

It’s possible to get them without any wires – long or short – attached, but I preferred these.  The smaller ones, illustrated at the top, were very small – 4mm in diameter; the larger ones were 10mm.  I also bought a few that were in between, at 6.5mm.

Most people working in electronic music will be aware of the importance of microphones, and  I have some quite expensive ones for different amplifying and recording purposes; but there are various situations in which a very low-cost method of picking up and amplifying sometimes quite small sounds can be all that’s needed.

One renowned electronic music composer for whom the microphone became extremely important for a time was Karlheinz Stockhausen.

In summer 1964, Stockhausen said, ‘I searched for ways to compose – flexibly – also the process of microphone recording. The microphone, used until now as a rigid, passive recording device to reproduce sounds as faithfully as possible, would have to become a musical instrument and, on the other hand, through its manipulation, influence ALL the characteristics of the sounds . . .’

At the same time, he had been experimenting with a large tam-tam (a percussion instrument very similar to a gong), ‘using a great variety of implements – of glass, cardboard, metal, wood, rubber, plastic – which I had collected from around the house.’

‘One day’, he continues, ‘I took some equipment from the WDR Studio for Electronic Music home with me. My collaborator Jaap Spek helped me. I played on the tam-tam with every possible utensil and during this, moved the microphone above the surface of the tam-tam. The microphone was connected to an electrical filter whose output was connected to a volume control (potentiometer), and this in turn, was connected to amplifier and loudspeaker. During this, Jaap Spek changed the filter settings and dynamic levels, improvising. At the same time, we recorded the result on tape.

‘The tape recording of this first microphony experiment constitutes for me a discovery of utmost importance . . . Actually, this moment was the genesis of a live electronic music with unconventional music instruments. On the basis of this experiment I then wrote the score of Mikrophonie I. Two players excite the tam-tam using a great variety of implements, two further players scan the tam-tam with microphones . . . Two further players – seated in the auditorium at the left and right of the middle – each operate an electrical filter and two potentiometers. They, in turn, reshape the timbre and pitch . . . dynamic level and spatial effect . . . and the rhythm of the structures . . .’

The score includes instructions for the placing and movement of the microphones, just as it includes instructions for the tam-tam players and the filter operators, so the microphones can be regarded as essential instruments in the performance of the piece.

One of the interesting features of the use of microphones in the piece is, as Stockhausen wrote: ‘normally inaudible vibrations (of a tam-tam) are made audible by an active process of listening into [them with a microphone].’ The reviewer Albrecht Moritz (http://home.earthlink.net/~almoritz/mikrophonie1.htm) states: ‘There are several passages in Mikrophonie I where this process is exclusively employed, foregoing stronger excitement of the tam-tam which would produce the commonly heard sounds. A result is that, if you would play back these passages to persons whom you would leave in the dark about the source of the sounds, probably most or even all of those listeners – including musicians – would not be able to guess it.’

Elsewhere Moritz says that ‘the audibility of most sounds that are created on the tam-tam in Mikrophonie I appears to strictly depend on the microphonic amplification. Among these are scratching noises, produced by treating the surface with not only metallic, but also other kinds of objects. Strangely “rolling” sounds can be generated on the surface, sounds evocative of rustling of silver paper, and many other astounding sounds . . . Quite frequently there are dark, roaring, sometimes growling, yet in volume often rather soft, undercurrents of sound that appear to stem from only local resonances of the tam-tam plate, generated by gentle use of a beater or as a result of other treatment, a sound phenomenon most likely audible only because of microphonic amplification as well.’

*

These electret capsules won’t work, however, just by connecting them to a mixer or amplifier – they have a small built-in preamp inside them which needs power to operate it.  This means the positive lead to the capsule must have a few volts of power running to it – 3v to 9v, typically – for the capsule to work.   An interesting article on this topic can be found at http://www.epanorama.net/circuits/microphone_powering.html.

The minimum circuitry required to get a sound from the capsule is this:

Using a prototype of this circuit with the Taurus amplifier, the level of the signal was perfectly good enough without any additional circuitry.

Sometimes, however, more output is needed, and I found a suitable circuit which was simple but effective at http://www.instructables.com/id/Pre-amp-to-electret-mic/.  It was based on a single transistor, a 2N3904, obtainable at less than 5p each by buying a bag of 50, plus 3 resistors and 2 capacitors.   The circuit for one channel looked like this:

I made up a batch of them all at the same time on a spare piece of veroboard.  These 12 circuits cost no more than about £2 – £2.50 altogether.

I took some of these and made up some stereo circuits, adding an output socket, 9v battery clip and volume control pot to each one:

With this I was able to experiment with different microphone combinations. No other components were needed, except the electret capsules themselves.  In some cases I connected the two wires from the capsule directly to input and ground on the board, at other times I attached input sockets.

In all cases I was surprised at the quality of the sound I was able to get for such a low cost.  The circuit also worked with the piezo mics/pickups I had made earlier, although the output didn’t seem to have as much lower frequency content.

In the next article in the series I’ll describe some of the practical applications for which I used these electrets.

 

 




andymurkin

July 2018
M T W T F S S
« Jun    
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Advertisements