[sdiy] Alltime best ring modulator circuit... ever?

[anthony]

You know it's funny: the diode ring modulator I built I was going to put in 
a box with a Wien-bridge light-bulb compensated sinewave gen. I was going to 
make it voltage controlled by using two Vactrol (or one, center-tapped?).

If the voltage controlled part of it compromised it, I'd make it manual, but 
I think voltage control of a Wien-bridge oscillator should be easy.

I wanted two identical sinwave oscillators and an input that could either be 
a carrier or a modulator and one sinewave could frequency modulate the 
other. I thought that'd make a pretty sweet modulator. But maybe I'll save 
the pristine Wien-bridge oscillator for an AD633 modulator and use an XR2206 
or 2 for my diode-ring modulator.

And I'd rather fiddle and tweak a Wien-bridge oscillator than use a digital 
sine source.

AA

> The Blacet Klangwerk is the best Ringmod I have at the moment.
>
> It is based on the AD633.
>
> The internal 8038 local oscillator has a THD of ~5%, which is the 
> weakness of the module.
>
> To really appreciate the clarity, use an digital external sine source  of 
> the lowest possible THD (24 bits will get you 0.001% THD).
>
> You end up with a Ringmod useable for the finest "musique concrete".
>
> Acoustic piano is especially beautiful when processed by an ultra- 
> fidelity Ringmod.
>
> Ham radio sites have free "function generator" software which can  turn 
> your laptop into a high quality sine source.
>
> On Feb 18, 2008, at 10:58 AM, anthony wrote:
>
>> I was wondering what people think is the best ring modulator  circuit, 
>> both for use in a modular synth and maybe as an effect for  other 
>> instruments like guitar.
>>
>> I suppose different circuits have their merits, but I was wondering 
>> things like: are the circuits with MC1495 or MC1496 or even the  MC1595, 
>> MC1596 better than something built from an OTA? And is  there a big 
>> difference in results between the MC1495 & MC1496? I  think the latter is 
>> more readilly available and they seem like  nearly interchangeable parts, 
>> but the former seems to be more  sought after. And I wonder if this is 
>> just because there were some  classic early circuits that used the early 
>> chip and people haven't  thought to use the latter chip?
>>
>> And how about AD633 ring modulator circuits?
>>
>> And since I'm using the old term for what is generally called a 
>> four-quadrant multiplier, I should ask about the grandaddy of them  all: 
>> the simple Ge (or schottky?) diode ring/2-phase-splitter  transformer 
>> combo. Ken Stone makes a case for this and even sells a  popular 
>> ready-built circuit (that is always on my Christmas list  but I never 
>> get...). He speaks of the raw, gritty power of these  units that just 
>> don't seem to obtain with other ring modulator  units. I personally like 
>> this circuit. I have built one using  classic Hewlett Packard Ge diodes 
>> that I matched and 2 transformers  (600Ohm:600Ohm CT roughly) that I got 
>> from 2 identical telephones  (crude tests on my scope showed a relatively 
>> high impedence on both  sides), but I have yet to test it. I had wanted 
>> it to work like a  tremolo sometimes, but responses from an earlier post 
>> said that  that wouldn't really be possible because I couldn't get a 
>> really  low LFO frequency through that transformers.
>>
>> OK! So I think the general answer to which circuit is best would  be: it 
>> depends on your application. But I do want to know the  relative merits 
>> of the MC1495, MC1496 & the AD633 and others I've  forgotten or just 
>> didn't bother to think of.
>> And THEN I would like some opinions on the alltime best ring  modulator 
>> circuit ever. (Hence the subject of this message...)
>>
>>
>> cheers,
>> Anthony
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Synth-diy mailing list
>> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
>> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
>