Maker Pro
Maker Pro

converting line level audio to resistance?

D

Don Bowey

Jan 1, 1970
0
On 9/20/05 8:36 AM, in article
[email protected], "Mad Scientist
Jr"
That sounds easy, I will need to multimeter it.

2 dangers:

1) blowing up the stereo if the output resistance is not 8 ohms (or
whatever the output expects for headphones) - that's why I originally
said Line Level, this would be a single standard as opposed to
different stereos which need different resistance speakers.

2) blowing up the video game - it sends 5v out and measures how much of
that comes back. I assume the signal from the stereo sends voltage as
well. So what happens when you have the 5V from the game, plus the
volts from the stereo? What if the game can only handle at most the 5v
it is sending out? Therefore, I would rather make a circuit that 1)
controls resistance 2) provides some attenuation so the stereo doesn't
blow up


I basically want to control a video game (Atari 2600 paddle controls
are 1 MOhm pots connected to 5V DC) with my stereo.


Now that's a cool idea. Let your stereo do the playing for you while you get
on with your life...

The way your pots are connected suggests that your game is already
voltage
driven, so you would only have to amplify your audio to cover the 0-5V
range. For starters try connecting your audio output directly to the
paddle
pin (and gnd to gnd) and see what happens.


Foo,D
If you are going to connect the line level voltage to replace the
paddle ,
then you will not use the 5V connection. The voltage reference will
be the
audio ground. Just in case it hasn't been mentioned, it would be a
good
idea to put a diode in the circuit path to assure that only a positive
voltage is applied. You can protect the input further, by putting a
250k or
1 Meg resistor in series with the audio - Atari connection. For
protection,
start with the high R and reduce to a lower value if more current is
needed.

Don
 
R

Rich Grise

Jan 1, 1970
0
snip
even tougher than that is
having to cut and paste and repost or retype and repost earlier
replies because a querying poster (you) didn't crosspost to all the
groups where the question was presented.

It's not entirely clear to me why a responder would want or need
to cut and paste, but with modern software it's arguably easier
than having to dig for a post that mysteriously disappeared because
you marked it "read" in some other newsgroup. Which is why some
folks prefer multiposting to crossposting.
But if it's marked "read", doesn't that mean that you've already
read it? Why do you want to read the same post five different times
in five different places? Maybe the third or fourth time you read
the same old thing over and over again, you'll have thought of
an answer?

Then shouldn't the people in the other NGs benefit from your answer
too?

Crosspost.

Cheers!
Rich
 
R

Rich Grise

Jan 1, 1970
0
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 10:24:36 -0500, John Fields wrote
On 20 Sep 2005 05:36:23 -0700, "Mad Scientist Jr
[email protected]> wrote

That's an interesting idea - how would you get the circuit to ma ou
at 1 MOhm and at a minimum, go to as close to 0 ohms as possible
I think we should just ignore googlegroupies as a matter of policy

Thanks
Ric
 
R

Rich Grise

Jan 1, 1970
0
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 14:36:32 +0200, Deefoo wrote
I basically want to control a video game (Atari 2600 paddle control
are 1 MOhm pots connected to 5V DC) with my stereo

Now that's a cool idea. Let your stereo do the playing for you whil you ge
on with your life..

The way your pots are connected suggests that your game is alread voltag
driven, so you would only have to amplify your audio to cover th 0-5
range. For starters try connecting your audio output directly to th paddl
pin (and gnd to gnd) and see what happens

Do you have a schematic? In the IBM joystick input, the pots ar
wired as rheostats and go to +5 on one end and are the timing
resistors for one-shots - i.e., their other end just goes t
the timing cap - a DC voltage won't work and could damage you
game port

It's not clear at all from that little chart what's really going o
inside the atari thing

And what would it do anyway? Louder goes to the right, softer t
the left? ??:-

Thanks
Ric
 
M

Mad Scientist Jr

Jan 1, 1970
0
That doesn't make any sort of sense. Don't just throw out technical
words, try to learn.
Fair enough, I have to digest all this and I have some reading to do.

Thanks to you and everyone for your replies.



18. John Woodgate Sep 20, 12:00 pm show options
 
R

Rich Grise

Jan 1, 1970
0
I read in sci.electronics.design that Rich Grise <[email protected]>


Would you just take a minute to think about that? What comes out of the
slider? a timing resistance or a voltage between 0 and 5 V? If it were a
timing resistance, it wouldn't need the 5 V supply.

The pot is the timing resistor in an ordinary one-shot, at least
in the PC game port. It needs the +5V supply to source the current
from that it charges the capacitor with.

Hmmm - I was just looking up the schematic for the PC game port,
and stumbled across this:
http://www.epanorama.net/documents/joystick/pc_circuits.html#atari_pc_converter
and it does look like the atari outputs DC... Wrong again. The Atari
joysticks are N.O. switch closures to ground!
http://www.atariage.com/2600/faq/?SystemID=2600#pinouts

So OP is looking for a couple of relays and an ADC of some kind -
what the heck is this guy expecting to accomplish?

Thanks,
Rich
 
O

Ol' Duffer

Jan 1, 1970
0
fred. said:
IOW, you're begging for some information and you think others have to suffer
the inconvenience you create just because you don't want to bother being
careful enough?

Why should others have to suffer the inconvenience you create
just because you don't want to bother posting separate messages?

The point is that there is no universal agreement whether
crossposting or multiposting is better. Some prefer one or the
other, but you are totally out of line berating anyone just
because they don't happen to agree with you.
 
O

Ol' Duffer

Jan 1, 1970
0
I'll just end this subtopic and say I was a dumbass and multiposted by
mistake - I posted and then had a 2nd thought "maybe it would be better
in .design instead of .misc" and posted there too. Sorry for the
inconvenience.

You didn't do anything wrong. Ignore the net nazis.
 
O

Ol' Duffer

Jan 1, 1970
0
But if it's marked "read", doesn't that mean that you've already
read it?

No, it just means I didn't want the header cluttering up the screen.
I may prefer to read and/or reply in a different group.
Then shouldn't the people in the other NGs benefit from your answer
too?

That decision is mine to make, not yours. Don't you always check
your destination groups before sending? That's a good time to add
or delete groups.

I'm not necessarily opposed to crossposting, I just *prefer* to see
multiposting in most cases. It is entirely up to the sender to
decide how he wants his messages to be handled, but I am strongly
opposed to anyone berating people for making the alternate choice.
 
O

Ol' Duffer

Jan 1, 1970
0
You seem to have missed the point, which is that If I respond to a
post in, say, seb and then, later, find that identical post in sed
(but not crossposted) I will either have to not respond, go back to
seb, locate and copy my earlier response, then go to sed, find the
OP's post, paste my response into it and, finally, send it, or
retype a separate response.

Okay, I get that, but it is not something you "have to" do, rather
it is something that you choose to do. For the benefit of the
original poster, there is probably no need to reply in more than
one group, and if you think it will benefit the general readership
of other groups, you can easily add them before sending.

You want someone else to make it easy for you to reply to mulutiple
groups at the same time, and while I recognize a certain value to
that, I am also offended by berating someone for not doing it.
As far as software goes, I think it's relatively easy to set up a
newsreader so it marks posts read but doesn't kill them.

It does that, but they are filtered out of the display, and if I
want to find them I have to turn off the filter, try to remember
what group they were in, scan through the clutter, etc.
 
R

Rich Grise

Jan 1, 1970
0
No, it just means I didn't want the header cluttering up the screen.
I may prefer to read and/or reply in a different group.


That decision is mine to make, not yours. Don't you always check
your destination groups before sending? That's a good time to add
or delete groups.

I'm not necessarily opposed to crossposting, I just *prefer* to see
multiposting in most cases. It is entirely up to the sender to
decide how he wants his messages to be handled, but I am strongly
opposed to anyone berating people for making the alternate choice.

But it's easier to pretend a crossposted message has been multiposted
than it is to pretend that a multiposted message has been crossposted.

So go easy on us lazy folk, OK?

Thanks,
Rich
 
D

Don Bowey

Jan 1, 1970
0
No, it just means I didn't want the header cluttering up the screen.
I may prefer to read and/or reply in a different group.


That decision is mine to make, not yours. Don't you always check
your destination groups before sending? That's a good time to add
or delete groups.

I'm not necessarily opposed to crossposting, I just *prefer* to see
multiposting in most cases. It is entirely up to the sender to
decide how he wants his messages to be handled, but I am strongly
opposed to anyone berating people for making the alternate choice.

I, on the other-hand, generally dislike cross-posting. In my opinion it
comes across as saying that what is being said so grandiose that *everyone
everywhere* should bask in its glory.
 
M

Mad Scientist Jr

Jan 1, 1970
0
You would think people would have better things to think about & post
on than complaining about whether someone cross posts
 
J

Jim Thompson

Jan 1, 1970
0
I need to take a line level audio signal and convert it to resistance
in the range between 0 Ohm and 1 MOhm. Is this difficult to do for a
beginner in electronics?

What are you trying to do, create an electronic equivalent to a carbon
microphone?

...Jim Thompson
 
J

John Fields

Jan 1, 1970
0
Okay, I get that, but it is not something you "have to" do, rather
it is something that you choose to do. For the benefit of the
original poster, there is probably no need to reply in more than
one group, and if you think it will benefit the general readership
of other groups, you can easily add them before sending.

---
I disagree. Suppose for a moment that an OP _wanted_ to post to
more than one group for the purpose of increasing his audience in
order to get a larger number of replies to his query.

I don't see where multiposting would have any advantages at all over
crossposting in that multiposting would:

A. Take longer to post.

B. Take longer for the respodents _and_ the OP to keep track of.

C. Confuse the respondents: "Hmm... I thought I just replied to that
but I don't see my reply here."

D. Result in a number of redundant answers by posters who wouldn't
know that the answer they posted had already been posted by
someone else.

E. Require the OP to have to keep track of and visit many groups,
instead of just one, in order to "round up" his answers.
---
You want someone else to make it easy for you to reply to mulutiple
groups at the same time, and while I recognize a certain value to
that, I am also offended by berating someone for not doing it.

---
What you take offense at is _your_ problem, and since I didn't
berate the OP, I don't understand why you chose to make that
comment.

Of course I want someone to make it easy for me. They are the ones
asking for information and making it difficult for me to get the
information to them in a way which benefits everyone.

Your way would force me (and everyone else, BTW) to, when I see a
question I'd like to answer:

A. Post the answer.

B. Check to see whether any of the other related newsgroups carry
The OP's article, and if they do, post to them all one at a time.

C. Check all the groups, one at a time, to follow the various
discussion and to contribute what I can.

D. Check to see which newsgroups are carrying the discussion and
crosspost my answer to them all. I've done that on occasion, but
it seems to just increase confusion. Mine, anyway. Besides, I
think it's bad netiquette to force the discussion into what's
essentially a new crossposted thread with the same subject line
as the old one.
---
 
J

John Fields

Jan 1, 1970
0
You would think people would have better things to think about & post
on than complaining about whether someone cross posts

---
You would think people would have better things to do (like paying
attention to what they've been told and taking on some
responsibility for themselves) than to complain about someone who
complains about someone crossposting.

So far everybody's been pretty nice to you and tried to help you out
with your stupid "project", but you really ought to take it to seb
where it belongs. Or better yet, to alt.electronics, where a lot of
maroons hang out.
 
M

Mad Scientist Jr

Jan 1, 1970
0
Whatever, man.
In any case thanks for your participation.
 
Top