[sdiy] They aren't sawtooths, they're ramps

[cheater cheater]

>   > http://www.eng.cam.ac.uk/DesignOffice/mdp/electric_web/Exper/05263.png
>
> This drawing is not correct.

Hmm.. hadn't looked at the drawing earlier. It is indeed incorrect,
the 'ramp' part of the wave is logarithmic, not exponential. Seconded,
that drawing is definitely wrong.

> "Ramp" refers to the ramping part of the sawtooth wave, but could also
> refer to waveforms where the ramp is an important part of a waveform
> that's not really a sawtooth wave.  For example; a wave that starts
> low, ramps up, holds there for a bit, and then resets.

Such as a ramp generator, which is like a simplified attack-hold
envelope generator. Sometimes has delay before the attack begins. One
classical example where it's used is delayed vibrato.

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 18:49, Donald Tillman <don at till.com> wrote:
>   > From: Electronic Battle <electronicbattle at googlemail.com>
>   > Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 17:22:07 -0000
>   >
>   > Please can someone talk about the difference between sawtooth and
>   > ramp waveforms and whether they sound different?
>
> You should introduce yourself.  I haven't seen posts from you before,
> and your email header is cryptic.
>
>   > However, original relaxation oscillators generated exponential
>   > rises and falls - these are the true sawtooths.
>   >
>   > Have a look here:
>   > http://www.eng.cam.ac.uk/DesignOffice/mdp/electric_web/Exper/05263.png
>
> This drawing is not correct.
>
> The "Sawtooth Wave" really is a linear ramp and reset.  Check out the
> Wikipedia page.  Check out other references.  Check out an actual saw.
>
> "Ramp" refers to the ramping part of the sawtooth wave, but could also
> refer to waveforms where the ramp is an important part of a waveform
> that's not really a sawtooth wave.  For example; a wave that starts
> low, ramps up, holds there for a bit, and then resets.
>
> Relaxation oscillators are what they are, they don't define the
> sawtooth wave.
>
>  -- Don
>
> --
> Don Tillman
> Palo Alto, California
> don at till.com
> http://www.till.com
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>

Amos..

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 14:19, Amos <controlvoltage at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 7:59 AM, cheater cheater <cheater00 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Linear stages in synths are [IMO] boring.
>
> fixed.  Come on, this is such a sweeping generality... "linear stages" (and
> that covers a lot of territory) can be used in infinitely non-boring ways by
> non-boring synthesists... boredom is experienced subjectively in any case,
> it's not an intrinsic property of any synth circuit. :-)
>

I'm sure nobody felt brain-washed or imposed upon by that one,
half-joking, statement. Please keep nonconstructive philosophy off
list. Who else's opinion would I be expressing if not my own? Do we
really have to prefix everything with 'in my opinion' when something
is clearly a matter of opinion? Do you need your hand held so that you
can notice which statements are opinions and which are mathematically
provable laws of nature?

D.