audio recording on IC -help wanted

[legg]

forged

 

[legg]

forged

 

[robb]

"Spehro Pefhany" <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote in message
news:2o68e35lnkbtk2vd7drahskslncnf1cnub@4ax.com...

On Sun, 9 Sep 2007 10:01:00 -0400, the renowned "robb"
some@where.on.net> wrote:

hello,

i am trying to repair a fault with an user interface circuit (UIC) board
and
control board out of an old 1987's computerized programmable Pfaff
sewing
machine (made in Western Germany).

a for fun project for me , a challenge


What else is on the display board (part numbers)? Ca. 1987, it's
probably not a dedicated micro, but there's something else active
there to keep the number of wires down. I'm guessing it's probably a
mechanical issue on the display/key PCB (broken trace, broken wire in
the flat cable). I'd pay particular attention to the flat cable wires
(test them) and the traces going to the switches.

PCB technology isn't/wasn't always 100% reliable, especially back
then, and it's also possible that a via has cracked and is
electrically open.

Thanks for help,

that is what i was hoping for as well but it is not easy for this amateur to
find.

i noticed alot of the larger traces have bukkled up or wrinkled if that
makes sense. i am now wondering if those may lead to the problem ?

i guess i will just plod through it all

thanks again for your advice and ideas,
rob

 

Ken Clarke (1), April 1997

Certainty level: 30%

The first of two video segments from the same program, this shows
Jon Snow interviewing Ken Clarke in April 1997, during the general
election campaign. The following exchange is heard;

Jon Snow: "You say we are booming in your posters, the bust's around the corner"

Ken Clarke: "You took that from three years ago, when I was being
advised to do all kinds of mad things to stimulate the economy,
and being told that I had to take desperate measures to get it going"

At this time I was watching television almost continuously at home,
with a video recorder whirring away, trying to obtain from the
newscasters a reaction which would give them away. I think this is an
instance where it happened. Ken Clarke first darts a glance straight at
the video camera (and perhaps at a monitor next to it showing my living
room), then comes out with "all kinds of mad things", while engaging in a
facial display involving raising of eyebrows and lowering of eyelids.
To me at the time, and also now, it looked as if he was selecting a
context into which he could drop the word "mad" as a directed insult against me.

1575


--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

 

[legg]

forgery

 

[legg]

forgery

 

Eeyore wrote:

DJ Delorie wrote:

Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> writes:
Similar kind of thing. Except I only need a handful !

Next time someone tells me I'm wasting my time making my own boards,
I'm going to point them at this thread

Last time this came up, it got me thinking. I can etch on 8 mil FR4,
and double-stick tape that to an unetched copper clad board, to get
what I think you're asking for. But, not being an RF expert, I have
no idea how well it would "work". I think it would be worth the
effort to find out if this is a viable RF prototyping platform, just
to satisfy my curiosity, if you can send me a PDF of a SS layout (no
vias . Contact me off-list if you're interested.

I only wish I could send you a Wainwright 'Mini-Mount' catalogue. I bet I
have one somewhere here in the archive.

It's just such a breeze to use. It could be a useful side income for
anyone.

Graham

" I only wish I could send you a Wainwright 'Mini-Mount' catalogue. I
bet I
have one somewhere here in the archive."

Do these things still exist? I've heard about them from several
different souces now,

http://electronicdesign.com/Articles/Index.cfm?AD=1&ArticleID=6105

You can get double sided pcb's cheap, and I've always wanted surface
mount "jumpers" for prototyping.
George

 

On Mar 10, 10:59 am, John Fields <jfie...@austininstruments.com>
wrote:

On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 16:57:49 -0700 (PDT), bill.slo...@ieee.org wrote:
On Mar 9, 5:51 pm, legg <l...@nospam.magma.ca> wrote:
On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 08:39:58 -0700 (PDT), bill.slo...@ieee.org wrote:
LOL, hook, line, and sinker! :

http://www.vcomp.co.uk/tech_tips/reform_caps/reform_caps.htm

If you weren't another uninformed idiot, you'd realise that the
proposition is at least potentionaly rational, even though Michael
Terrell is the source. It would be a daft thing to do, but could work,
after a fashion.

Have you not been paying attention to what is happening here recently?

Michael Terrell was *not* the source!

Ouch. I had noticed that someone was producing posts that purported to
come from him, but they were fairly obviously false. I should have
paid more attention to the signature.

I plead jet-lag. I got off the plane from Australia on Tuesday, so
I've been thinking that I ought to be okay by now, but I'm obviously
not thinking straight yet.

Never mind.

I believe the reforming process is intended to restore voltage
handling capability of the part. It won't alter the part's
capacitance.

The process is also covered by the old MIL-HDBK-1131.

Since "restoring voltage handling capability" means thickening up the
oxide layer, it probably will decrease the part's capacitance,
bringing it back towards the as-new value. The tolerance on most
electrolytic capacitors is pretty high, so it might be hard to prove.

---
You certainly don't seem to be thinking straight since, regardless
of the tolerance, measuring the capacitance before, and then after
reforming would certainly indicate if the process had changed the
capacitance.

Sure it would, but how many people have a capacitor handy that needs
reforming?

If you could measure the capacitance before and after reforming - at
much the same temperature - you might be in with a chance, but
electrolytic capacitors are cranky beasts at the best of times.

Checking the capacitance of a capacitor that you reformed a couple of
years ago isn't going to tell you much.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

 

[N8N]

On May 31, 12:08 am, David Nebenzahl <nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:

On 5/30/2008 6:00 PM N8N spake thus:





On May 30, 7:29 pm, "hall...@aol.com" <hall...@aol.com> wrote:

ww grainger is no better, were a small business that bought a lot of a
few select items, if you dont buy 6 or 10K a year theres never a
quantity discount.

so they didnt want our business, we buy elsewhere........

now some tiny start up may be discouraged by such idiot policies, and
be the next microsoft.

grainger by bean counting will discourage small customers who one day
may be large customers, but never spend a dime at grainger........

Grainger isn't interested in non-corporate customers, either. Makes
you feel guilty buying anything from them for personal use due to the
attitude. I've had nothing but good experiences with McM-C and I hope
that that does not change. I especially like the quick shipping,
faster than any other company I've ever done business with. I do wish
they'd post brand names on their web site though.

Hmmm, now I have to say that that doesn't jibe at all with my
experience. I have a tiny, tiny account with Grainger, and I've had
nothing but good experiences dealing with them. They're always helpful
and don't seem to mind at all that they're not getting rich off of me.

That's just it, you have an account with them. If you're just walking
in off the street they simply won't sell to you, unless you know the
name of a purchasing guy at a company that has an account with them.
Fortunately I *do* work for a company that has an account, but since
ordering from McMaster-Carr online is actually *faster* than going to
a brick and mortar Grainger store, unless Grainger has the part in
stock, McM-C gets most of my business.

nate

 

Ken Clarke (2), April 1997

Certainty level: 30%

The second of two video segments from the same programme, this shows
Ken Clarke during the election campaign. He makes the following statement;

"we have a party, and we have a Cabinet which has produced a manifesto
consistent with our policy of the last five years;
people are challenging us on the basis there's been some monstrous
conspiracy between all the politicians to guide us we know not where,
we know where we're going, we wish to be a leading influence in the European Union"

It should be fairly obvious what I read into in the above sentences.
The "monstrous conspiracy between all the politicians" could of course
apply to the public perception of closer European integration, but
I took it as referring to the conspiracy of politicians and
media people against me. Again, facial expression comes into it; as Clarke
speaks of the "monstrous conspiracy" his eyebrows twitch and it is clear
that something or somebody is being made fun of.

2798


--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

 

[Pieter]

Hi,

I am building a device that can measure noise from resistors and
semiconductors. The source resistance ranges 0.2 Ohm to 20 MOhm.

But mostly semiconductors have to measured, and the range that is most
important is 500 Ohm to 2500 Ohm. That is the basic resistance of
those devices.

The frequency ranges to be measured are 0-10 Hz and 0-1 MHz. And the
noise is low, maximum of the semiconductor devices is 10 dB (compared
to the resistance 500 to 2500 Ohm), probably less.

For this project, I am searching a low noise N-JFET for the input
stage. This will be followed by a very low noise opamp like the AD797
or LT1028. The drain current will probably be something like 10 mA.

My questions:
What N-FETs (BFxxx? 2Nxxxx?) are really low-noise? Searching
datasheets is hopeless.
Does anyone here have advice about the input stage? Do you think a FET
input with opamp following it will do? Or can you think of better ones
that have lower noise, and lower input capacitance?

Any help or comment is welcome.

Thanks in advance,
Pieter

 

[William Miller]

Sharp Microwave Control Panel CPWBFB075MRU0 R140X, R15XX (minus
display)

For spare parts use for models such as R-1405 R-1406 R-1500 R-1501
R-1502LK R-1505 R-1506 R-1510 R-1512

Photo at http://207.234.249.73/mwd/r1500_cpwbfb075mru0_surplus.jpg

Bid at http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=190165740732

Only the lower circuit board with the following parts are included in
this assembly:

(use Ctrl-F to search this listing)
REF. NO. PART NO. DESCRIPTION QTY
C1 RC-KZA087DRE0 Capacitor 0.1uF 50V 1
C2 VCEAB31VW108M Capacitor 1000uF 35V 1
C21 VCEAB31VW106M Capacitor 10uF 35V 1
C100 RC-QZB014MRE0 Capacitor 7uF 230V 1
D1-4 RH-DZA006PRE0 Diode (1N4002) 4
D20-26 VHD1SS270A/-1 Diode (1SS270A) 7
D40 VHD1SS270A/-1 Diode (1SS270A) 1
Q21 VSKRC243M//-3 Transistor (KRC243M) 1
R1-2 VRS-B13AA751J Resistor 750 ohm 1W 2
R30 VRD-B12EF332J Resistor 3.3k ohm 1/4W 1
RY1-2 RRLY-A113DRE0 Relay (DU24D1-1PR(M)) 2
RY3 RRLY-A123DRZZ Relay (G5S-1 24V) 1
RY4-6 RRLY-B004MRE0 Relay (FTR-F3AA024E) 3
SP1 RALM-A014DRE0 Buzzer (PKM22EPT) 1
T1 RTRNPB017MRE0 Transformer 1 *
VRS1 RH-VZA032DRE0 Varistor (10G471K) 1

* new part number is RTRNPB018MRE0 and they are interchangeable

Packed wieght appx. 12 ounces.

Questons: e-mail prototech@usa.net

Additional key words:
R1405 R1406 R1500 R1501 R1502LK R1505 R1506 R1510 R1512 formerly part
number CPWBFB060MRU0 CPWBFB075MRU0

 

some sites>>> http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=cheap+cigarette&first=11&FORM=PORE
it's very light today, I'll waste wickedly or Grover will kick the ulcers
It's very dull today, I'll attempt lovingly or Tim will scold the
weavers. Robette dines, then Oscar globally jumps a weird tree
against Merl's market. Where doesn't Michael wander rigidly?

Don't move the hens steadily, cover them daily. Her counter was
short, hot, and shouts alongside the sign. Will you kill in the
signal, if Oliver familiarly nibbles the fig? I was attacking to
lift you some of my shallow carpenters. I clean happily, unless
Robert irrigates butchers towards Amber's dog. She will grasp
usably if Estefana's walnut isn't difficult. Otherwise the plate in
Penny's bowl might irritate some sick spoons. For Vincent the
pear's sad, at me it's sticky, whereas with you it's creeping
glad.

She might solve once, climb neatly, then waste to the card in back of the
evening. Who rejects mercilessly, when Tim kicks the filthy
can about the arena?

Some powders converse, look, and pull. Others firmly order. Just
judging for a teacher between the lane is too elder for Pearl to
burn it. Other smart full yogis will promise halfheartedly alongside
envelopes. Just now, Karl never walks until Jeff changes the
humble painter monthly. It will measure strong games between the
fresh clean island, whilst Oscar deeply cares them too. Darin! You'll
depart exits. Sometimes, I'll fear the twig. She wants to laugh
ugly carrots before Jason's light. When does Jimmy cook so bimonthly, whenever
Quincy explains the dirty sauce very wanly? Almost no pretty
handsome stickers will wickedly improve the lemons.

They are receiving against the castle now, won't behave shoes later.
How did Aloysius pour the farmer beside the closed film? It
believed, you sowed, yet Maggie never finally talked beside the
night. The thin printer rarely dreams Mary, it arrives Sherry instead.

 

[Don Bowey]

On 3/10/08 12:36 PM, in article 1n0o47.v7c.17.1@news.alt.net, "Meat Plow"
<meat@petitmorte.net> wrote:

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 09:45:17 -0700, Don Bowey wrote:

On 3/10/08 9:39 AM, in article 1n0doc.iar.17.4@news.alt.net, "Meat Plow"
meat@petitmorte.net> wrote:

On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 21:39:05 -0800, Don Bowey wrote:

Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 21:39:05 -0800
From: "Don Bowey" <dbowey@comcast.net
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <fr2hhr$mda$1@aioe.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: UM0DbvcjL+QMbUOlXSkpow.user.aioe.org
Newsgroups:
sci.electronics.components,sci.electronics.design,sci.electronics.repair
Organization: http://www.newsgroup.comcast.net
Path:
news.ecp.fr!news.newsland.it!aioe.org!not-for-mail
Subject: Is Michael A. Terrell Insane?
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-Priority: 3
Xref: news sci.electronics.components:150297
sci.electronics.design:851530 sci.electronics.repair:484198
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

Look at his million posts!!! Cheeze with!

I would say without too much doubt that you're responsible for the
forgeries.


I would say with no doubt at all, that you are an idiot.

Says the obsessed fuckhead who follows his master Mike Terrell around
Usenet

You're an ass.

 

[Meat Plow]

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:28:27 -0700, Don Bowey wrote:

On 3/10/08 12:36 PM, in article 1n0o47.v7c.17.1@news.alt.net, "Meat Plow"
meat@petitmorte.net> wrote:

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 09:45:17 -0700, Don Bowey wrote:

On 3/10/08 9:39 AM, in article 1n0doc.iar.17.4@news.alt.net, "Meat Plow"
meat@petitmorte.net> wrote:

On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 21:39:05 -0800, Don Bowey wrote:

Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 21:39:05 -0800
From: "Don Bowey" <dbowey@comcast.net
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <fr2hhr$mda$1@aioe.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: UM0DbvcjL+QMbUOlXSkpow.user.aioe.org
Newsgroups:
sci.electronics.components,sci.electronics.design,sci.electronics.repair
Organization: http://www.newsgroup.comcast.net
Path:
news.ecp.fr!news.newsland.it!aioe.org!not-for-mail
Subject: Is Michael A. Terrell Insane?
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-Priority: 3
Xref: news sci.electronics.components:150297
sci.electronics.design:851530 sci.electronics.repair:484198
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

Look at his million posts!!! Cheeze with!

I would say without too much doubt that you're responsible for the
forgeries.


I would say with no doubt at all, that you are an idiot.

Says the obsessed fuckhead who follows his master Mike Terrell around
Usenet



You're an ass.

Says the illiterate stalking imbecile that posts shit like this:

Look at his million posts!!! Cheeze with!

heh

 

[Meat Plow]

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:02:34 -0700, Don Bowey wrote:

On 3/10/08 2:33 PM, in article 1n0v0l.ot0.17.2@news.alt.net, "Meat Plow"
meat@petitmorte.net> wrote:

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:28:27 -0700, Don Bowey wrote:

On 3/10/08 12:36 PM, in article 1n0o47.v7c.17.1@news.alt.net, "Meat Plow"
meat@petitmorte.net> wrote:

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 09:45:17 -0700, Don Bowey wrote:

On 3/10/08 9:39 AM, in article 1n0doc.iar.17.4@news.alt.net, "Meat Plow"
meat@petitmorte.net> wrote:

On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 21:39:05 -0800, Don Bowey wrote:

Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 21:39:05 -0800
From: "Don Bowey" <dbowey@comcast.net
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <fr2hhr$mda$1@aioe.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: UM0DbvcjL+QMbUOlXSkpow.user.aioe.org
Newsgroups:
sci.electronics.components,sci.electronics.design,sci.electronics.repair
Organization: http://www.newsgroup.comcast.net
Path:
news.ecp.fr!news.newsland.it!aioe.org!not-for-mail
Subject: Is Michael A. Terrell Insane?
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-Priority: 3
Xref: news sci.electronics.components:150297
sci.electronics.design:851530 sci.electronics.repair:484198
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

Look at his million posts!!! Cheeze with!

I would say without too much doubt that you're responsible for the
forgeries.


I would say with no doubt at all, that you are an idiot.

Says the obsessed fuckhead who follows his master Mike Terrell around
Usenet



You're an ass.

Says the illiterate stalking imbecile that posts shit like this:

Look at his million posts!!! Cheeze with!

heh




You're still an ass, you haven't changed anything with your dumb post.

Auto Flame grade A+
--
#1 Offishul Ruiner of Usenet, March 2007
#1 Usenet Asshole, March 2007
#1 Bartlo Pset, March 13-24 2007
#10 Most hated Usenetizen of all time
Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, June 2004
COOSN-266-06-25794

 

JAN1N4962CUS datasheet and PDF download :
http://www.chinaicmart.com/series-JAN/JAN1N4962CUS.html

JAN1N4962CUS description

This Zener Voltage Regulator series is military qualified to MIL-
PRF-19500/356 and is ideal for high-reliability applications where a
failure cannot be tolerated. These industry-recognized 5 Watt Zener
Voltage Regulators are hermetically sealed with voidless-glass
construction using an internal metallurgical bond. It includes Zener
selections from 3.3 to 390 volts in standard 5% tolerances as well as
tighter tolerances identified by different suffix letters on the part
number. They are also available in surface-mount packages (see
separate data sheet for 1N4954US thru 1N4996US, 1N5968US thru
1N5969US, and 1N6632US thru 1N6637US). Microsemi also offers numerous
other Zener products to meet higher and lower power ratings in both
thru-hole and surface mount packages

 

[Bob Monsen]

<mad.scientist.jr@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9c27d683-95c3-4c38-b4b7-fd8b46ca2660@n36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

I would like to build a drum machine/metronome
using a BASIC Stamp 2 (maybe later on PICAXE)
which would allow the user to control
the beats per minute (bpm) with a dial/potentiometer.
They could select a value from 1-255
(later I might add a module to display the current value).

I would like the timing to be as accurate enough
to a real clock to be comparable to a real metronome
or drum machine.

A pic has an internal oscillator which is tunable using an internal
register, giving you about 5% accuracy on the absolute clock speed, which is
suitable for many applications. It changes with temperature, however. You
can also use an external crystal, which will get you to better than 1%,
independent of temperature (at room temp += 10C). Using an external crystal
uses up two pins, but may be what you need. You can also use an external
crystal oscillator, which may have comparable accuracy, but only needs a
single pin input. You can get them in packages where you input 5V and GND,
and get a TTL signal out with the clock.

These will be much cheaper than an RTC chip, most of which's features you
won't need. If you use a dial pot, you won't be able to tune the thing much
more accurately than 5% anyway, I think, so the internal PIC oscillator will
probably be fine.

Regards,
Bob Monsen

 

[John Fields]

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:10:53 -0700 (PDT), mad.scientist.jr@gmail.com
wrote:

I would like to build a drum machine/metronome
using a BASIC Stamp 2 (maybe later on PICAXE)
which would allow the user to control
the beats per minute (bpm) with a dial/potentiometer.
They could select a value from 1-255
(later I might add a module to display the current value).

I would like the timing to be as accurate enough
to a real clock to be comparable to a real metronome
or drum machine.

This is the main problem, since the BASIC Stamp 2
(and PICAXE models I am considering)
don't have a real time clock (see link/citation below).
Would I need to connect the microcontroller to a
Dallas real time clock to accurately control the timing
or would it be possible to make my own with a
555 timer or other component for less money?

For my purpose the 555 or similar would have to be
accurate enough to measure actual seconds
(or milliseconds? how granular should it be?)
to get real beats per minute.
I have found numerous "555 calculator" pages
(some listed below) which let you enter different
resistor/capacitor values and see what the
time high / time low would be (you can reverse
the math to figure out what R/C values to measure
milliseconds, or 1/100 of a second, or whatever
would be accurate enough).

You can get gold resistors with +/- 5% tolerance,
would this variance throw off the timing?
Furthermore I read that capacitors of the type needed
for the 555 are a lot less tolerant (+/- 20%)
than gold resistors. If this is true, would this
totally throw off the timing? I picture myself having to
buy 100 capacitors and test each one with a meter until
I find the exact value, and even then its capactiance might
change as it ages, making the device not accurate.

Any advice or links to a similar project or good solution would be
most appreciated... The simpler the better : )

---
Sorry, but you're completely off base.

What you want to do is program your basic stamp to be an astable
multivibrator with a period which varies according to the user
input.

For example, if your basic stamp has a 1MHz resonator generating the
clock and you want to output 60 beats per minute, then you need to
count up the equivalent of 1 million clocks and generate an output
at that time. Also, if your output's pulsewidth isn't being
generated by an independent internal interrupt driven timer, you'll
need to subtract the width of the output pulse and the times
required for the instructions to generate it from the one million
clocks so that things come out right.

--
JF

 

[John Fields]

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:00:24 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:10:53 -0700 (PDT), mad.scientist.jr@gmail.com
wrote:

I would like to build a drum machine/metronome
using a BASIC Stamp 2 (maybe later on PICAXE)
which would allow the user to control
the beats per minute (bpm) with a dial/potentiometer.
They could select a value from 1-255
(later I might add a module to display the current value).

I would like the timing to be as accurate enough
to a real clock to be comparable to a real metronome
or drum machine.

This is the main problem, since the BASIC Stamp 2
(and PICAXE models I am considering)
don't have a real time clock (see link/citation below).
Would I need to connect the microcontroller to a
Dallas real time clock to accurately control the timing
or would it be possible to make my own with a
555 timer or other component for less money?

For my purpose the 555 or similar would have to be
accurate enough to measure actual seconds
(or milliseconds? how granular should it be?)
to get real beats per minute.
I have found numerous "555 calculator" pages
(some listed below) which let you enter different
resistor/capacitor values and see what the
time high / time low would be (you can reverse
the math to figure out what R/C values to measure
milliseconds, or 1/100 of a second, or whatever
would be accurate enough).

You can get gold resistors with +/- 5% tolerance,
would this variance throw off the timing?
Furthermore I read that capacitors of the type needed
for the 555 are a lot less tolerant (+/- 20%)
than gold resistors. If this is true, would this
totally throw off the timing? I picture myself having to
buy 100 capacitors and test each one with a meter until
I find the exact value, and even then its capactiance might
change as it ages, making the device not accurate.

Any advice or links to a similar project or good solution would be
most appreciated... The simpler the better : )

---
Sorry, but you're completely off base.

What you want to do is program your basic stamp to be an astable
multivibrator with a period which varies according to the user
input.

For example, if your basic stamp has a 1MHz resonator generating the
clock and you want to output 60 beats per minute, then you need to
count up the equivalent of 1 million clocks and generate an output
at that time. Also, if your output's pulsewidth isn't being
generated by an independent internal interrupt driven timer, you'll
need to subtract the width of the output pulse and the times
required for the instructions to generate it from the one million
clocks so that things come out right.

---
Oops...

I misread your post, blow mine off.

--
JF