VU-dial indicator

Give it up now. The author wanted to make a "dangle" and he did. He is satisfied with the action, and that's what counts. Everything could be done better, but from what he wrote, he has no intention of doing a recording studio or broadcasting music over the air so fine scaling is not needed. This is my opinion and I agree with it completely.

bratHanki wrote:

Give it up now. The author wanted to make a "dangle" and he did. He is satisfied with the action, and that's what counts. Everything could be done better, but from what he wrote, he has no intention of doing a recording studio or broadcasting music over the air so fine scaling is not needed. This is my opinion and I agree with it completely.

And that's it

The LM358 is a dual operational amplifier. Why are there two tiles? Are these layouts based on the diagram from the first post? Unless I missed something and did not read what the other half of each bone is doing, I'm sorry.

zulusj23 wrote:

I missed something

Well, rather ...

Gizmoń wrote:

You had to make full use of one LM358 chip instead of two, only half of each. How can amplifiers be wasted like this? Everything would then fit nicely on one PCB.

Hello

I think that popular and cheap J-Fet amplifiers, for example from the TL08x series, could be used in this design.

I am interested in the frequency response of the amplifier of these indicators. Make the popular audio sweep test 0 - 20kHz.
The LM358 is rather poorly suited as an amplifier for drive indicators.

Sanjose wrote:

I am interested in the frequency response of the amplifier of these indicators. Make the popular audio sweep test 0 - 20kHz.
The LM358 is rather poorly suited as an amplifier for drive indicators.

I did this audio sweep test 0 - 20kHz, but what is the result of it? the hands swing up to a certain point at some frequency.

elektronik.b wrote:

I did this audio sweep test 0 - 20kHz, but what is the result of it?

It is supposed to indicate whether the indications of the indicator are the same for the frequencies of 20Hz and 20kHz and are the same in this frequency range.

They are the same. I checked.

First you write

elektronik.b wrote:

the hands swing up to a certain point at some frequency.

Which suggests that the indications differ, and then you answer your colleague's question

elektronik.b wrote:

They are the same.

After all how?

As I wrote before, at 20Hz and 20kHz the indications are the same. Only at frequencies below 20Hz do they swing out to the maximum.

elektronik.b wrote:

Only at frequencies below 20Hz do they swing out to the maximum.

This is at least strange ... not to say suspicious.
And if this is the case, your indicators show what they want and do not serve anything else than lighting (instead of a night light).

It should work like this:

Link


Sometimes at 20kHz some circuits can slightly raise the indications up, but the difference is usually 0.5 VU not more.

Quote:

This is at least strange ... not to say suspicious.
And if this is the case, your indicators show what they want and do not serve anything else than lighting (instead of a night light).

They really indicate that, and you are actually right in showing what they want.
So what should he do to make them point like on the test shown by my colleague Sanjose?

elektronik.b wrote:

what should I do to make them indicate the same as on the test shown by my colleague Sanjose?

Use a PROVEN control system. There are plenty of them on the web.

Electronics, b do not worry about the comments because you do not create a world-class recording studio, but a gadget that is supposed to swing to the beat of the music and only serve this purpose. For decades, simple control systems were used in the tape recorders manufactured by us, and not only, and somehow no one was picking on, because they were sufficient for amateur needs. For example, the control meter from the M2405 conveyor belt.



If you showed something like this, you would probably be eaten in the second, at most in the fourth post.

Quote:

There are plenty of them on the web.

I was looking and the only simple system I found was the one from the first post, the rest did not work for me.
And if you are so smart, find it yourself.

Added after 45 [seconds]:

bratHanki wrote:

Electronics, b do not worry about the comments because you do not create a world-class recording studio, but a gadget that is supposed to swing to the beat of the music and only serve this purpose. For decades, simple control systems were used in the tape recorders manufactured by us, and not only, and somehow no one was picking on, because they were sufficient for amateur needs. For example, the control meter from the M2405 conveyor belt.



If you showed something like this, you would probably be eaten in the second, at most in the fourth post.

HOLY right.

You can try something like this. https://ep.com.pl/projekty/miniprojekty/11975-sterownik-wkietanika-wychylowego-do-wzmociągacza

All this can be summarized briefly: the first cats behind the fences. You will do the next DIY on one PCB, you will add the possibility of calibration there, and if such a PCB fits dimensionally with the "back" of the indicator, it will be too much luck. Krakow wasn't built in a day. It is important that you are doing something.

elektronik.b wrote:

And if you are so smart, find it yourself.

I? I do not have to. I don't make useless devices that do nothing but wag directions - quite pointless after all.

yogi009 wrote:

the first cats behind the fences. You will do the next DIY on one PCB, you will add the possibility of calibration there, and if such a PCB fits dimensionally with the "back" of the indicator, it will be too much luck.

Well, unfortunately, it is not so. A colleague has already placed a few constructions in DiY and somehow he did not draw any conclusions from the suggested changes. Yes, this "Krakow" is a bit neglected ...

elektronik.b wrote:

I was looking and the only simple system I found was the one from the first post, the rest did not work for me.

Interesting, isn't it? And what other systems (those that did not want to work) did you make? Maybe it would be enough to think why they don't work, ask someone ... wiser ...?

bratHanki wrote:

For decades, simple control systems have been used in tape recorders (conveyor belts) produced by us and not only, and somehow no one was picking on,

Because they worked as they should. Small difference...
I wrote earlier:

398216 Usunięty wrote:

CodeBoy wrote:

I don't like something about the scaling of the excursions, they work too much on the positive half of the scale, they should start more around -20 and move around 0dB

In general, the time from the occurrence of a signal of a given level to its indication, as well as the time in which the indication falls after the signal ceases, is quite strictly defined for this type of indicators. Here it is just something that fans the clues to the beat of the music. There is no practical benefit from this.

398216 Usunięty wrote:

Well, unfortunately, it is not so. A colleague has already placed a few constructions in DiY and somehow he did not draw any conclusions from the suggested changes. Yes, this "Krakow" is a bit neglected ...

elektronik.b wrote:

I don't follow the author's construction history, I don't have that much time On the one hand, I believe that everyone should be given a chance, and on the other hand, the constructor should learn and improve his projects.

You don't have to follow - just click on the links to his topics under each of his posts.

Quote:

Maybe it would be enough to think why they don't work, ask someone ... wiser ...?

What do you think I'm stupid ????

Added after 14 [minutes]:

bratHanki wrote:

You can try something like this. https://ep.com.pl/projekty/miniprojekty/11975-sterownik-wkietanika-wychylowego-do-wzmociągacza

This is good, I would also need a mosaic pattern of paths.

elektronik.b wrote:

What do you think I'm stupid ????

I didn't say anything like that. Once someone much smarter than us said, "I know I know nothing" and this is the best example of how to approach your knowledge. I have at least several dozen years of practice, several years of study (anyway, electronics have it that if you do not keep training, you stay behind), And what can you be proud of? Of course, apart from an exaggerated ego?

elektronik.b wrote:

This is good, I would also need a mosaic pattern of paths.

And did you read the entire article from the link or just the beginning? An example pattern of paths is - and even if it wasn't, what's the problem to draw (e.g. in the free EAGLE) of your version? I've seen bigger beginners than you in the DiY section and they've had no problem with that.

elektronik.b wrote:

This is good, I would also need a mosaic pattern of paths.

And here, I will constructively suggest two programs (to choose from): Eagle or KiCad. The latter is completely free and unlimited. You will draw a diagram, arrange the elements manually, lead paths and, as a result, you will become a better person And certainly a little better electronics. Independent investigation of the truth and learning about methods frees a person, makes him independent from the help of others. It's worth learning.

elektronik.b wrote:

Quote:

Maybe it would be enough to think why they don't work, ask someone ... wiser ...?

What do you think I'm stupid ????

"Stupid" is too thick a word, but if "they don't work", it means that you are either doing something wrong but don't know what, or you are not able to diagnose that the pattern is wrong and correct it. In both cases, they will find themselves smarter than you ... Nobody is omniscient, Alpha and Omega, these are just religious stories. Normal people have to be able to admit their ignorance, but that doesn't mean they are "stupid". Only a truly stupid will think so ...

But the fact that you haven't been trying to improve your constructions for a while, but you are wading into the same dead end with maniacal stubbornness.