<html><body>
<DIV>Something like this is probably happening. The last time I had my Juno-106 on a scope the waveforms looked a *lot* closer to true saw and pulse/square than these shots show.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Now, if only my Juno weren't 1000 miles away, I could hook it up and take some pictures. :)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-Jonathan</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR><BR>> Looks like a square wave that is being HP filtered... <BR>> in fact more like passed through a too-small DC <BR>> blocking cap <BR>> <BR>> H^) harry <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> --- Dave Magnuson <RESFREQ@HOOHAHRECORDS.COM>wrote: <BR>> <BR>> > At 11:51 AM 10/22/04, john mahoney wrote: <BR>> > <BR>> > > When developing MX4, I inspected the raw waves <BR>> > of a number of <BR>> > >synths. After the exchange this morning, I dug up <BR>> > the original waves <BR>> > >and with the magic of iPhoto, produced a web page <BR>> > that compares the <BR>> > >waves of a Prophet 5, Minimoog, Voyager, Juno 106 <BR>> > and Doepfer standard <BR>> > >osc. <BR>> > > Enjoy: <BR>> > > <BR>> > <BR>> http://www.stretta.com/~matthew/!
resources/analog_waves/ <BR>> > > <BR>> > >-- <BR>> > >john <BR>> > <BR>> > <BR>> > Here's a question: is the Juno-106 square wave <BR>> > really *THAT* <BR>> > poor? There's no holding of the peaks at all... <BR>> > it's more like <BR>> > alternating positive and negative saw peaks. <BR>> > <BR>> > Hopefully his Juno was defective! <BR>> > <BR>> > Dave <BR>> > <BR>> > Resonant Frequency: <BR>> > resfreq@hoohahrecords.com <BR>> > http://www.hoohahrecords.com/resfreq/index.html <BR>> > <BR>> </BLOCKQUOTE></body></html>