[sdiy] My new M110 Sequential Switch module (Moog 962 clone)

Mike Bryant mbryant at futurehorizons.com
Mon Jul 5 21:56:17 CEST 2021

I used my first PAL in 1979 and then used FPGAs all the time through about about 2010.  But since then they just never seem cost effective, first against DSPs and now against MCUs.  The power you get for $1-2, at least until the recent shortages, is unmatchable.

As for discrete logic, I'm afraid once you take into account the extra PCB area, the extra volume, the usually higher cost and most importantly the reduced MTBF, there's few commercial applications where they're the right solution other than for filling in odd situations, which is why the single gate packages have become so popular.

-----Original Message-----
From: Synth-diy [mailto:synth-diy-bounces at synth-diy.org] On Behalf Of Brian Willoughby
Sent: 05 July 2021 20:03
Subject: Re: [sdiy] My new M110 Sequential Switch module (Moog 962 clone)

The nice thing about a logic-based design is that it works as soon as you apply power.

I love designing with microprocessors when I know that they're needed (MIDI support, as just one example), but I hate having to design in extra connectors for programming the Flash with firmware, and I hate having to wait when new boards arrive to connect a programmer and download firmware. Not only that, but if you work on a design and then return to it a decade later, you'll spend days trying to get your computer set up with the firmware tools, find your old firmware projects, install the programmer tools again, etc.

I've also compared the price of FPGA designs to discrete logic chip designs. Sure, if you're designing something that needs 10,000 gates then the FPGA will win. But I've had quite a few designs where a handful of standard logic chips cost way less than a single FPGA or CPLD, and so logic wins in quite a few designs.


On Jul 5, 2021, at 05:41, Roman Sowa <modular at go2.pl> wrote:
> This is closed design with functionality defined 50 years ago, can't imagine why would anybody like to reprogram it in any way.
> Price of the PIC used is probably higher than few logic chips needed.
> The PIC (let alone alternatively used logic ICs) was actually none of the expensive parts of the BOM. Think $7 for one unit of moogy-style pushbutton, but that one is actually well justified.
> Roman
> W dniu 2021-07-05 o 13:37, Mike Bryant pisze:
>> PICs (and ATTinys) are usually cheaper than logic solutions :-) And 
>> you can often reprogram the board for other applications.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Synth-diy [mailto:synth-diy-bounces at synth-diy.org] On Behalf Of 
>> Roman Sowa
>> Sent: 05 July 2021 11:14
>> To: Jean-Pierre Desrochers; 'SDIY'
>> This is beutiful build!
>> As always from you...
>> I'm only wondering why you used PIC for this and not logic. That simple functionality begs for logic control.
>> Roman
>> W dniu 2021-07-02 o 23:24, Jean-Pierre Desrochers pisze:
>>> Hi All,
>>> A while ago, after completing my two Moog Sequencer 960 clones
>>> http://www.arcenson.com/projects/Modular/M109_Sequencer/
>>> I needed more than 8 steps sequences to be available
>>> So.. I decided to build its little brother.. the 962 Sequential 
>>> Switch I call it M110 to be part of my Moog clones family..
>>> I built three of them.
>>> http://www.arcenson.com/projects/Modular/M110_Sequential_Switch/
>>> Like in the late synth clones projects I made I replaced old 60’s 
>>> circuit technology with a small PIC micro.
>>> Today I had fun playing 48 steps sequences using my two M109 
>>> sequencers along with three of my new M110 Sequential Switches.
>>> Very happy with this bundle !!!
>>> Cheers !
>>> Jean-Pierre Desrochers

Synth-diy mailing list
Synth-diy at synth-diy.org
Selling or trading? Use marketplace at synth-diy.org

More information about the Synth-diy mailing list