[sdiy] Demios and Phobos [was: letting Hubble die]

[Harry Bissell Jr]

Of course the day that "Demios and Phobos go to Mars"
will be a bad day on Mars... indeed.

I don't remember this song so i can't comment
directly...

One way to generate complex rhythms in a self-running
mode is to use several oscillators or one oscillator
with subdivision.

My oscillator has /2, /3, /4, /6 outputs... by mixing
them and triggering a very resonant filter I can get
a lot of varied percussive sounds. You can send the
mix to the filter center frequency at the same time.
Varying the pulse width can give 'off beat' rhythms

but like i said... what do i know ???

H^) harry

--- "Cornutt, David K" <david.k.cornutt at boeing.com>
wrote:
> Hey, look, a chance to bring this back on topic!
> 
> From: harrybissell [mailto:harrybissell at prodigy.net]
> > 
> > H^) harry    (Demios, Phobos... rah rah RAH !!!)
> 
> So, this suddenly reminded me of something: the
> Synergy song "Demios and Phobos Go To Mars".
> One thing I've always been curious about is how 
> that percussion track was generated.  In Larry
> Fast's web pages he mentions in passing that it
> was a noodle, a self-running patch.  Now, I could
> sort of see how one would do a thing like that in
> the MIDI world, where you can have a drum machine
> or a sampler or something with drum sounds mapped
> to key numbers, and something generating some form
> of random key numbers (actually it sounds like maybe
> a random-walk algorithm, or something else more
> complex than just uniform distribution).  I could
> even see driving this with an analog control voltage
> via a CV->MIDI converter.  
> 
> But how might this have been done in 1975?  Of 
> course there was no such thing as MIDI then, and
> no such thing as multitimbral machines with sounds
> mapped to keys.  The only thing I can think of 
> would be maybe something involving one of those
> PAiA KIM-1 processors, with maybe a whole bunch
> of trigger outputs connected to it and going to
> different groupings of modules for the different
> sounds.  But Larry sort of implies that it was all 
> analog.  Any thoughts?
>