| Author |
Topic: Battery eliminator chip for Profex 2, maybe!! |
Ken Fox
From:
Nashville GA USA
|
Posted 7 Jan 2005 12:14 pm |
|
Been checking this out and posed the quetion about using the Timm Batts chips in the Profex 2, here is the reply:
"I can not say that the Tim Batts part will work in a Profex II (we do not have any to check out here), but I really see no problem with it. The Profex runs slower than the Tubefex.....120ns access time is ok for the Profex. The original Tubefex units also used this slower RAM...we went to the 70ns later just to make sure things would not get "confused" due to differing DSP's and other component tolerances. The Eprom in the Tubefex should be 80ns or faster.....the Profex II can use a 250ns part and work fine.
If there is a compatability issue, you will find out quickly as either machine will come up with a DSP error or just lock up for no reason."
I will be trying it very soon and post my findings!!!!
|
|
|
|
Larry Dahl
From:
Melbourne, FL USA
|
Posted 7 Jan 2005 11:44 pm
|
|
Ken,
I recently asked you this question in another similiar thread, but maybe you stopped reading that one.
Why couldn't the battery be removed, wire leads soldered in, and the battery moved to a different location?
|
|
|
|
Ken Fox
From:
Nashville GA USA
|
Posted 8 Jan 2005 7:56 am
|
|
It could be done, I suppose. It would have to be stablized so as not to move about so much. The leads on the battery are fairly fragile as well and the battery plus/minus terminals are exposed on each end of the battery. There is still no place to move it where there is not on the circuit board. An externally mounted battery might be an option.
I am in hope the chip will work, I can do them for the same price as a battery and that ends it, no more battery needed!
|
|
|
|
Ken Fox
From:
Nashville GA USA
|
Posted 12 Jan 2005 6:58 pm
|
|
| I am hoping to have a unit to test the chip on in a week or so. I will post results ASAP. |
|
|
|
Darvin Willhoite
From:
Roxton, Tx. USA
|
Posted 13 Jan 2005 7:54 am
|
|
Effects units are not the only Peavey products that use these batteries. I have a MIDI Bass sound module on its way to Peavey now that has some battery leakage damage. So, if you have any Peavey device that saves settings, CHECK THOSE BATTERIES.
------------------
Darvin Willhoite
Riva Ridge Recording
|
|
|
|
Bill Crook
From:
Goodlettsville, TN , Spending my kid's inheritance
|
Posted 14 Jan 2005 3:34 pm
|
|
I may be out of my league here but I don't see how (after looking over the prints) one can replace the ROM's and RAM's in the "Profex II" with EEPROM's ........
The circuitry has no means to program EEPROM's as a 12 to 24 volt source is required to burn in the source-code. An E-prom burner is not a device that is easely found. And, They are Expensive !!! I know that some later "Peavey" products do utilize E-Eprom's but they were designed for such. Trying to retro-fit a "Profex II" is (IMHO) a waste of money along with distroying a perfectly good unit.
(I'm open for sugesstions on this matter)
Bill 
------------------
http://home.comcast.net/~crookwf/
http://f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/crookwf/my_photos |
|
|
|
Ken Fox
From:
Nashville GA USA
|
Posted 15 Jan 2005 5:26 am
|
|
It is a static ram and that is what I will be replacing it with. The only difference is no battery for the newer model chip. I have 10 more chips on the way and I purchased a Bassfex and Profex 2 as well for testing. Peavey sees no reason it will not work as it works in the Tubefex and Transtubefex. The only difference is the Profex 2 chip had a slower access time. Again, I found the same chipused in a Profex 2 in an early Tubefex! I replaced it with the new chip and it worked great. This is not a "hack" mod, just plug in a new chip in the socket and get rid of the battery. I have been doing these mods for about a year now for all Tubefex and Transtubefex units I get in.
The Profex 2 does in fact program the chip with factory settings upon initialization, no external burner is used. The user settings are in this chip and can be altered via front panel controls or loaded in via midi.[This message was edited by Ken Fox on 15 January 2005 at 05:29 AM.] |
|
|
|
