Re: long analog delay

["James Winger" <jdwinger@hotmail.com>]

DOD had one (FX96) at about 500ms.  It used a single 3005.

Funny thing, I had one and would run it on this really poorly regulated 
supply...it must have altered the clock as it would pump out delays of 
well 
over a second
Note : what came out was very weird, it was an echo -- but it was very 
distorted (not overdrive / clipping distorted or simply low-frequency from 
the slow clock)

you've got a couple of options I guess - chain 2 BBD's together (you'll 
get 
some loss from twice the buckets)

lower the clock speed (changes sampling rate and will restrict the 
frequency 
response, it might also start sounding "grainy")





From: "mr.monk" <monk@fuse.net>
Reply-To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
Subject: long analog delay
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:43:59 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v543)
Received: from mc7-f10.law1.hotmail.com ([65.54.253.17]) by 
mc7-s14.law1.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 22 
Jan 
2003 12:44:30 -0800
Received: from hemlock.violacea.com ([207.228.238.9]) by 
mc7-f10.law1.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 22 
Jan 
2003 12:44:29 -0800
Received: (from looper@localhost)by hemlock.violacea.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id 
PAA31711;Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:43:59 -0500
Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:43:59 -0500
Old-Return-Path: <monk@fuse.net>
In-Reply-To: <00b301c2c257$f50f5040$69894682@lance>
Message-Id: <3BB51D2C-2E4A-11D7-AC4B-000393073870@fuse.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.543)
Resent-Message-ID: <88HQbC.A.ZvH.PKwL-@hemlock.violacea.com>
Resent-From: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
X-Mailing-List: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com> archive/latest/29008
X-Loop: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: Loopers-Delight-request@loopers-delight.com
Return-Path: Loopers-Delight-request@loopers-delight.com
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Jan 2003 20:44:29.0984 (UTC) 
FILETIME=[0F9F5A00:01C2C257]

does anyone know of a longish (850 ms +) analog delay?  i'm thinking about 
trying to have the memory modified to go twice as long.. just curious. i'm 
of course leaving out the highly regarded but insanely priced EH 16sec 
delay. 1 second would be enough for me. i have the ubiquitous DL4 and 
although i do like it, the memory man is the least realistic of all the 
delays IMHO...


thanks


_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus