simple LFO question

[KA4HJH]

>I still think everyone has missed the boat on this issue.
>
>The problem is not the shape of the LFO; it's the response of the delay
>line. We all know that frequency-based devices like VCOs and VCFs need to
>be have an exponential response to CV in order to sound "right", simply
>because of the way our brains interpret signals. It stands to reason that a
>flanger (for example), being a complex filter, should have an exponential
>response to control voltages as well. Why don't the designers of these
>things put exponential front ends on the clock VCO's, instead of playing
>games with the CV generators?

I've been wondering the same thing for years. Any time-delay-based 
effect would benefit. Anybody?

---

Thomas Henry had a phaser in Polyphony with one of these hyper-mod 
schemes (not expo response). I'll have to go look it up now because I 
can't remember exactly what he did.

While searching for that article I discovered that Craig Anderton got 
the idea for his FM scheme from an earlier article that appeared in 
the March/April '82 issue of Polyphony entitled "Analog Delay 
Clock/Modulation", which has everything mentioned so far, from 
triangle LFO to waveshaper to HF VCO.

Preparing now for scan requests as I continue searching...


-- 
Terry Bowman, KA4HJH
"The Mac Doctor"