[sdiy] Innovative Oscillator Design (or not ?)

mjbauer at iprimus.com.au mjbauer at iprimus.com.au
Thu Apr 11 04:52:23 CEST 2024


Thanks Brian for your response. Interrupt latency would not be an issue 
in this scheme. The MCU timer/counter hardware acts autonomously, either 
in input capture mode (to measure the wave period), or in output compare 
mode (to control the wave period).

MJB

On 11/04/2024 12:39 pm, brianw wrote:

> One deficiency that nobody has mentioned is the INT (interrupt) input 
> for your MCU. Interrupt latency may be large, compared to the 
> frequency, and there will surely be jitter in the interrupt response 
> time. Thus, the MCU may not be able to adjust until long after the 
> flip-flop has been set. This will be particularly bad for higher 
> frequencies. Measurements based on interrupts will not be very 
> accurate.
> 
> Brian
> 
> On Apr 10, 2024, at 6:13 PM, M J Bauer wrote:
> 
> Thanks, Roman. You and other correspondents have convinced me that my 
> initial approach was flawed and would most likely result in some sort 
> of unwanted audible artifact. (The initial approach was that the 
> firmware would adjust the PWM duty dynamically, cycle by cycle.)
> 
> René advised that some other DCO designs (also using an analog 
> integrator) achieve pitch accuracy using a precision timer/counter to 
> set the output wave period. The integrator charge/discharge rates are 
> set using a DAC controlled current source. The accuracy of the current 
> source is not as critical, but the error results in (minor) errors in 
> the output signal amplitude. The amplitude error is not problematic.
> 
> Hence, my revised approach is to use a 16-bit timer/counter in the MCU 
> to set the output wave period. The integrator charge/discharge rates 
> will still be set using the PWM scheme, but the integrator will be 
> reset at the end of each period. I have not yet done the calculations 
> to determine the range of frequency over which this scheme would give 
> adequate pitch accuracy for musical purposes, but my intuition tells me 
> it will be acceptable... perhaps 3 octaves.
> 
> I don't care if anyone has already patented this idea... I'm just 
> experimenting for my own amusement. To commercialize an idea, you need 
> to be very wealthy, very brave, very bold or very delusional... 
> preferably all of the above!
> 
> MJB
> 
> On 10/04/2024 6:48 pm, Roman Sowa wrote:
> 
> I agree that "not give enough detail" is the key here, although your 
> idea was clearly described in the document. It said even 40kHz PWM if 
> I'm not mistaken. But regardless of PWM frequency, there is also its 
> resolution. You wanted cheap micros with 8 bit PWM. You could even make 
> 10bit PWM above audio with small PIC. So assuming top frequency of 
> 10kHz, the lowest PWM = 1/1024 only gets as low as 9.77Hz. One PWM step 
> more and we have 2/1024, that is one octave higher. So that was my 
> concern about unusable resolution at low end.
> 
> Now you're telling that planned range is only 4 octaves. Then yes, this 
> might work with 10-bit PWM, but still it will not sound clean but FM 
> modulated at low end, because PWM has to be adjusted every few cycles.
> 
> You could add octave range resistors from Vref with a MUX in the 
> integrator, so each octave has better resolution of pitch.
> 
> And I dare to dissagree with your intuition - those steps will be 
> audible, and not as harmonic distortion, but as aliasing whistles. Not 
> very loud probably, but will be there. Like aliasing from short 
> wavetable DDS with no interpolation.
> 
> Of course I encourage you to build it, that concept is interesting and 
> I'm sure many people will enjoy seeing the results.
> 
> Roman
> 
> W dniu 2024-04-10 o 03:32:
> 
> Hello Roman,
> 
> Thanks for your thoughtful reply.
> 
> You may be correct with some of your criticisms, but I think perhaps I 
> did not give enough detail about the role of the MCU firmware, leading 
> you to some false assumptions. The firmware would not need to make 
> "huge corrections from cycle to cycle"... just very minor corrections. 
> The "steps" that you referred to are at the PWM carrier frequency 
> (16kHz minimum), so they would not be audible. Sure, there would be 
> some timing "jitter" in the output signal, but my intuition tells me it 
> would be negligible... like harmonic distortion. Anyhow, I guess 
> there's only one way to find out... I must build the thing and prove 
> the concept. Also I am not expecting to achieve a 10kHz range. I would 
> be happy if it worked over a 4 octave range with musical precision.
> 
> Thanks also for your suggestion about using a sigma-delta DAC. I will 
> look into this idea. There is also the possibility to use a 
> digital-to-resistance type DAC, but an objective was to minimize 
> external components.
> 
> Kind regards,
> MJB
> 
> On 9/04/2024 6:42 pm, Roman Sowa wrote:
> 
> This is not doable with simple PWM. You talk about closed loop control, 
> but then it will have to make huge corrections from cycle to cycle, 
> leading to blurry, modulated waveform. Assuming 10kHz range, the low 
> end using 8-bit PWM is like 40Hz, and next step is one octave higher. 
> To make it work you have to constantly measure the VCO output voltage 
> and not just the cycle period and adjust PWM multiple times during 
> single slope.
> The slopes of the triangle will not be smooth anyway, but steppy. The 
> steps will have the slope the same as the highest frequency triangle, 
> that is when PWM is at 100%.
> PWM frequency is independent of VCO frequency, so at some frequencies 
> you might expect intermodulation that will blend all over audio band.
> 
> Interesting idea and I don't hink I have ever seen it, although it 
> highly resembles switched capacitor filter. Who knows, maybe there is a 
> way to use commercially available switched cap filter ICs to work as 
> VCO. But IMHO there is a lot more other simpler options to make VCO.
> 
> How about using common $2 Sigma-Delta DAC to control the integrator 
> switch? It makes it so much easier. Wide range precise control of 24 
> bits, every note is kept stable with single write to the DAC. The MCU 
> only writes the DAC on pitch change, and possibly check tuning from 
> time to time but it will not drift at all if you use proper integrator 
> parts.
> 
> Roman
> 
> W dniu 2024-04-09 o 08:52, M J Bauer pisze:
> 
> Attn: Synth-DIY community...
> 
> A while back (2022), I had an idea for an oscillator design which could 
> be used in modular or hybrid synth's, but I have not yet tested the 
> concept. The oscillator may be digitally controlled or voltage 
> controlled, or both at once. I'm not sure if this technique has already 
> been tried and proven. I haven't seen any evidence of it, so I would be 
> grateful if anyone with a greater knowledge of the art can tell me if 
> this is a novel idea, or a concept that has appeared before. (See 
> attached summary.)
> 
> M.J. Bauer

________________________________________________________
This is the Synth-diy mailing list
Submit email to: Synth-diy at synth-diy.org
View archive at: https://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/
Check your settings at: https://synth-diy.org/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
Selling or trading? Use marketplace at synth-diy.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20240411/41abb4be/attachment.htm>


More information about the Synth-diy mailing list