# Byzantium flanger no build docs?



## morgandorfer5150 (Mar 24, 2022)

Good morning y'all,
  I built up the byzantium flanger yesterday and everything is working except for the rate control. Well, the control may be working but they're just flat is no rate lol.  With the depth and manual controls I can make it manually flange as I twist the knobs.  I'm assuming I've either ended up with a fake MN3102 , or something else's stopping it from oscillating on its own.  Hard to say what though because there's no build docs 🤷🏼‍♂️.  Anyone else built this guy out yet?


----------



## Feral Feline (Mar 24, 2022)

There's at least one build thread on this 'n'.

I'll make the usual recommendations:

1. Clean your PCB of flux
2. Post clear photos of both sides of your board
3. Measure voltages and post those with the pics

If you suspect a fake 3102, a known good one to compare with would be a quick easy way to figure that out if there are no other problems with the build. 

I'm not an expert debugger, hopefully they chime in soon, but better for them to work their magic if they have your pics and voltages.


----------



## Betty Wont (Mar 24, 2022)

Have you biased it yet?


----------



## bobbass4k (Mar 25, 2022)

I'm having the same problem, it's working but there's no sweep. I've biased the output on the 3207 and I've used a known good 3102/3207 pair. 

I only finished it late last night so I only did quick checks but everything looked fine. Gonna take the scope to the LFO section tonight so I'll see what shakes out. I am using an lm358 rather than a tl022 but I'm assuming that's not the issue. I'll post some voltages tonight and we can compare


----------



## Bio77 (Mar 25, 2022)

bobbass4k said:


> I'm having the same problem, it's working but there's no sweep. I've biased the output on the 3207 and I've used a known good 3102/3207 pair.
> 
> I only finished it late last night so I only did quick checks but everything looked fine. Gonna take the scope to the LFO section tonight so I'll see what shakes out. I am using an lm358 rather than a tl022 but I'm assuming that's not the issue. I'll post some voltages tonight and we can compare


This is the correct approach, no rate = LFO problem.  Here is the build doc from the project TWS mentioned designed by m-Kresol.  The LFO section should be similar. 

As a side note, BBD builds are kind of my jam and I think I have only ever had one bad clock chip.  I know fakes exist, but I haven't seen a lot of them, just saying.


----------



## Bio77 (Mar 25, 2022)

I meant the BBDs too, I've yet to have a fake one of those and I mostly use NOS or picked MN chips. I use UTSource for those.


----------



## morgandorfer5150 (Mar 29, 2022)

Update, it's in the trash bin now.  Did find an error though, C103 is silkscreened as 10uF but the build docs sat 47uf.  Yep, pulled a barrel trying to extract it.  No telling if that would have fixed it but without schematics, who knows.  Not devoting anymore time to it, snapped the board to prevent me from obsessing over it.  Time to move on.  That will be the last time I ever attempt a board without good documents.  Wish I could get back the 20 bucks for the board and 15 for parts though 😒


----------



## blackhatboojum (Mar 30, 2022)

morgandorfer5150 said:


> Update, it's in the trash bin now.  Did find an error though, C103 is silkscreened as 10uF but the build docs sat 47uf.  Yep, pulled a barrel trying to extract it.  No talking if that would have fixed it but without schematics, who knows.  Not devoting anymore time to it, snapped the board to prevent me from obsessing over it.  Time to move on.  That will be the last time I ever attempt a board without good documents.  Wish I could get back the 20 bucks for the board and 15 for parts though 😒


Sorry to hear you had such a rough time with it and had to scrap it.  C103 is actually just a filter cap and so, you probably could have left it at that value.  This info is no good to you now though so, I’m sorry 😕.


----------



## morgandorfer5150 (Mar 30, 2022)

blackhatboojum said:


> Sorry to hear you had such a rough time with it and had to scrap it.  C103 is actually just a filter cap and so, you probably could have left it at that value.  This info is no good to you now though so, I’m sorry 😕.



Eh, it's alright.  I've only ever had 3 boards really kick my butt and out of those 3 (3 including this one), I've managed to build the other two with success.  Maybe someday I'll revisit it when this build docs are up.  But I have a bad habit of letting them consume me when there's an issue so with this one I just had to call it.  I've got a few others to build up anyway so this frees me up for that.  Thanks for the help everyone.


----------



## morgandorfer5150 (Mar 30, 2022)

Does beg the question though, has anyone got the PedalPCB version to work? Maybe there's a legitimate trace issue 🤷🏼‍♂️


----------



## morgandorfer5150 (Mar 30, 2022)

thewintersoldier said:


> If you bought this and thought you'd get a schematic knowing damn well you were gonna have issues and be able to troubleshoot it well...
> View attachment 24650



Hey thanks for being a productive member of the conversation bud! Hope you filled your "I feel big" quota for the day 👍🏻


----------



## fig (Mar 30, 2022)

morgandorfer5150 said:


> Did find an error though, C103 is silkscreened as 10uF but the build docs sat 47uf.


There is currently no build documentation for PPCB's release so it couldn't possibly have an error. You must be referring to the Quantum Effects documentation, and I wouldn't consider it an error just because a few values don't match another board-maker's layout. It's a bummer that the build did not work out for you.


----------



## morgandorfer5150 (Mar 30, 2022)

fig said:


> There is currently no build documentation for PPCB's release so it couldn't possibly have an error. You must be referring to the Quantum Effects documentation, and I wouldn't consider it an error just because a few values don't match another board-maker's layout. It's a bummer that the build did not work out for you.



My apologies I was referring to the parts list. The parts list said c103 was supposed to be 47 uf but the board images on the website and the silk screen on the physical board called for a different value.  Knowing now it was just a filter cap thanks to some of the folks on here I suppose that one really didn't matter.  Or less I'm just wondering if anybody has built this board to success. I probably made an error somewhere or maybe I overheated the board soldering but I'm not exactly a new solder tech so I'd like to think my skills are up to snuff but then again, we all make mistakes! Yeah I wish it had worked out too, seemed like a really neat effect.


----------



## Diynot (Mar 30, 2022)

I have successfully built the Byzantium, as well as other folks around here. The subject of the cap value/screen print mismatch had been brought up and I built mine with the 10uf w/o issue. I haven’t had any huge issues building w/o the documentation, I have done a few that way. The conventional wisdom is to trust the screen print. I will say that the Byzantium is a little tricky to bias and I had to lean on others in the forum (and purchase a new DMM) to get it right. It sucks when your build doesn’t fire up first try, but instead of trashing the board and throwing away money, just set it aside and come back to it at a later time. For what it’s worth, the one project I can’t troubleshoot has relatively excellent documentation.


----------



## morgandorfer5150 (Mar 30, 2022)

thewintersoldier said:


> I'm not the one having issues, learned my lesson long ago. Hope you figure it out though. I guess what I'm trying to say is that when something like this project comes out don't build it till either the schematic comes out or other people have done it and you can learn from their trials and tribulations. Hope you learn to take a joke, these issues are frustrating and we've all been there.



You know what you're right brother, my apologies, rough morning and I took it the wrong way.  Sorry about that man.


----------



## fig (Mar 30, 2022)

morgandorfer5150 said:


> My apologies I was referring to the parts list. The parts list said c103 was supposed to be 47 uf but the board images on the website and the silk screen on the physical board called for a different value.  Knowing now it was just a filter cap thanks to some of the folks on here I suppose that one really didn't matter.  Or less I'm just wondering if anybody has built this board to success. I probably made an error somewhere or maybe I overheated the board soldering but I'm not exactly a new solder tech so I'd like to think my skills are up to snuff but then again, we all make mistakes! Yeah I wish it had worked out too, seemed like a really neat effect.



 Remind me when the build docs land and your next one is on me.


----------



## morgandorfer5150 (Mar 30, 2022)

Diynot said:


> I have successfully built the Byzantium, as well as other folks around here. The subject of the cap value/screen print mismatch had been brought up and I built mine with the 10uf w/o issue. I haven’t had any huge issues building w/o the documentation, I have done a few that way. The conventional wisdom is to trust the screen print. I will say that the Byzantium is a little tricky to bias and I had to lean on others in the forum (and purchase a new DMM) to get it right. It sucks when your build doesn’t fire up first try, but instead of trashing the board and throwing away money, just set it aside and come back to it at a later time. For what it’s worth, the one project I can’t troubleshoot has relatively excellent documentation.



You are absolutely right and that would normally be my move but once I pulled a barrel/pad trying to replace the filter cap I just decided it was a done deal.


----------



## morgandorfer5150 (Mar 30, 2022)

fig said:


> Remind me when the build docs land and your next one is on me.



Haha thanks.  I think it's more frustrating when you've had a ton of good builds under your belt and that ooooone build just kicks your butt all over the place lol.  Definitely won't stop me from buying more PCBs lol


----------



## blackhatboojum (Mar 30, 2022)

morgandorfer5150 said:


> Haha thanks.  I think it's more frustrating when you've had a ton of good builds under your belt and that ooooone build just kicks your butt all over the place lol.  Definitely won't stop me from buying more PCBs lol


I feel your frustration and I think we’ve all been there at some point.  As was already pointed out, taking on a build without the documentation is a risk, and you have to be ready for the consequences.  I took on the phaser from here without the build docs and, I was pulling my hair out by the end of it.  I just couldn’t get it working.  I walked away for a day, came back to it, and eventually discovered a silkscreen error.  Flipped my 2n5952s 180 degrees and voila!  She phases.  Next thing I did was share that information on this here forum.  Subsequent changes were then made to the eventual build docs and the next run of boards.  The point of me telling that story is this… patience always pays off.  You’d be surprised how much clearer you see things if you just take a break and come back to a build after you clear your head.  Also, search through the forum for threads pertaining to the circuit you’re getting ready to tackle.  There’s a good chance that issues or problems have been discovered and discussed already.  I mean shit, that’s the whole point of this forum isn’t it?  When you have a troubleshooting issue, post clear pictures along with the description of the problem.  There’s nothing more frustrating for an experienced builder, who wants to help, and we can’t see what you see. There are a lot of good folks on here who want to help and share information.  You just have to do your part to get the help.


----------



## blackhatboojum (Mar 30, 2022)

thewintersoldier said:


> I think the schematic would be the key to most of these problems. It's hard to troubleshoot a more complex build without one. To add to the frustration a stacked board build like this requires you to work from a signal board and a power board and follow traces thru header. I'd just wait.


I definitely agree.


----------



## morgandorfer5150 (Mar 24, 2022)

Good morning y'all,
  I built up the byzantium flanger yesterday and everything is working except for the rate control. Well, the control may be working but they're just flat is no rate lol.  With the depth and manual controls I can make it manually flange as I twist the knobs.  I'm assuming I've either ended up with a fake MN3102 , or something else's stopping it from oscillating on its own.  Hard to say what though because there's no build docs 🤷🏼‍♂️.  Anyone else built this guy out yet?


----------



## pliolis (Jul 9, 2022)

morgandorfer5150 said:


> Does beg the question though, has anyone got the PedalPCB version to work? Maybe there's a legitimate trace issue 🤷🏼‍♂️


I built it and it works ,on the other hand I failed three times with the bf-2 pcb from a Polish company ,so yes this is verified ,what I did was I though of it as two easy to build pcbs that are joined with header pins ,tried not to stress and think it was complicated and it worked .Good luck


----------



## Robert (Jul 9, 2022)

This and the other two stacked projects are the next ones in line for me to tackle.     They're just a little more involved than the others.

Troubleshooting doesn't have to be terribly hard, you just need some jumper wires (like you use with a breadboard) so you can power the two boards side by side rather than stacked.   Then it's actually _easier_ than a single board in my opinion, because the circuit is functionally split in half.    (LFO on one board, Audio path on the other)


----------

