[sdiy] presets on a modular

[harrybissell]

The matrix switch system of the ARP2500 could handle all routings...
this could be implemented on each individual module with analog switches.

Knob position and switch position of each module is the bigger headache, or
are we just automating the patch cords. I think 'not'.

The ARP2600 is an excellent example of a pre-patched modular. Normalize
the most common connections, and make them able to be overriden.

Soon you will invent the Matrix synths from Oberheim...  ;^P

H^) harry




>On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:02:02 -0500 "john mahoney" <jmahoney at gate.net>
wrote.
>> I think the interface is a side problem compared to the challenge of
>> designing a patching system that can route anything to anything and
>works
>> reliably and accurately.
>
>Well, there are sticky issues with the interface, too.
>
>Anyway, the "anything to anything" approach is not always needed.
>Nice, for sure! Don't get me wrong, it would be great.
>
>But you don't need anything-to-anything routing in real life, most of
>the time. For most of us, most patches are variations of  VCOs -->
>m

ixers --> VCFs --> VCAs. Others laugh at this notion. ;-)
>
>I reiterate that 16 or maybe 32 patches are enough to support the
>performance needs of most synthesists, given that those patches can
>have very different configurations.
>
>One thing about the fairly dumb system that I drew up is that it's
>expandable, so if you need more complex routing you can cascade the
>router modules. No need for a 50MHz bus, no need for any signal to be
>digitized, no need for new modules. It's "old school," for sure, but
>then, analog synths are old school to begin with!
>
>
>BTW, there's an interesting side effect to a complex system: The
>greater the degree of routing and control flexibility, the fewer
>modules are required.
>
>An extreme case in point would be a Serge system, which contains
>"unusual" modules that can serve a number of functions -- but those
>modules must be set up differently to support each function. That's
>not so great in a live setting. A sufficiently sophisticated preset
>storage & recall system would eliminate the patching issues, though,
>allowing one to get more features per square inch of front panel
>(compared with a larger number of simpler modules).
>
>A simpler, more obvious example: If you wanted LFOs to control PWM
>*or* FM, you need either (a) 2 LFOs, one for PWM and one for FM, or
>(b) 1 LFO plus a way to route it to either the PWM or FM inputs. Of
>course we have option "b" on almost every synth with an LFO, but you
>can see my point.
>
>A better example: Few systems have voltage-controlled envelope
>generators. Without VC EGs, you need at least a few different EGs set
>to some "standard" ADSR settings. On the other hand, using a VC EG
>(having what I called greater control flexibility) would reduce the
>module count.
>--
>john
>