Comments on trimmers and circuit design

[Dave Halliday]

>     Kevin has an excellent point here - if you want the machine to behave 
>     in a repeatable manner then you need to bury the trimpots. For 
>     compositional purposes, externalized trimmers would be great, 
>     especially if you were after atonal effects and atmosphere. But if you 
>     need to keep things in tune, the things that are most commonly 
>     assigned to trimpots should probably be left inside the machine.
>     I'm thinking here about the example of an analog synthesizer used as a 
>     lead instrument in a live setting, on the road. In this case, not only 
>     should the trimpots be kept away from the panel, but they should also 
>     be religiously tweaked to their "ideal" settings (hopefully on a 
>     periodic basis!).


>     ----------
>> From: Synthfool at aol.com
>> To: synth-diy at horus.sara.nl
>> Subject: Re: Comments on trimmers and circuit design
>> Date: Wednesday, July 09, 1997 11:48 PM
>> 
>> Personally, I like modulars to be as precise as possible. 
>> 
>> I CAN see your point , but many of us approach synthesis from the theory
>     and
>> scientific aspect though. For a modular programmer, the understanding of
>     each
>> module's theoretical purpose is a strength in knowing how to achieve the
>> sounds one wants. 
>> 
>> For example- If I was to tweek, say an envelope generator's DC offset
>     trimmer


Ya know, another way to go would be to have a pot with a switch right 
next to it ( or a dual concentric rotary switch / pot combo? $$$ )

This way, you could tweak but quickly return to the internal trimpot
setting.


--- Via Silver Xpress V4.4 [Reg]