At 5:23 PM -0500 1/25/03, The Old Crow wrote:
>
>(I was very happy to learn that the times
>were not constant, as building my equivlant of the EG became much easier).
I'm happy too :) A fixed rate is a much better than a fixed time
with a VC attack level!!
> > If the CS-80 EG is analogue, wouldn't there would be a bit of a slope
> > as it drops from the sustain level to the initial level?? I also
> > wonder if Roland were looking at the CS-80 when they designed the VCF
> > EG for the TB-303.
>
> Well, yes, a slope defined by the release rate control.
Sorry, that was a badly written question. What I meant to ask,
is there a bit of a slope as the output drops from the sustain level to the
initial level when the gate first begins?? Then again, now that you
said that it's analog, it still might be a bad question :) My
understanding is that it idles at the sustain level until it receives
a gate.
> > While 30s is certainly long enough, I don't know if 3ms is punchy
> > enough for driving a VCA. Or is this being designed primarily as a
> > filter envelope??
>
> Well, my original spec. was to do 1ms to 10s (nominal) but it was
>suggested that the times/rates be made longer.
What kind of slow ass music are these people are making?? :)
>It is just changing the timing capacitor; perhaps the assembly instructions
>can suggest more than one value so a user can get what they want.
That's a good point. Imho, a manual gate pushbutton is not
necessary. The UEG has one because it can function as a sequencer,
but it seems a superfluous feature for an EG. So if it keeps
everyone happy, a toggle could offer three different timing ranges
instead.
> This is one of those things that I'll determine when tweaking PIC code.
>Originally I wanted to have separate gate and trigger inputs, but I can
>program the PIC to do an A/R function for a dropped gate, etc. I've also
>considered replacing the inverted output with a trigger input.
That is an extremely worthwhile consideration. An inverted output
could be produced in cooperation with other modules, but there is no
substitute for separate gate and trigger inputs.
> No, only the logic circuit to step through the cycle is digital. I
>decided to use a PIC part to allow for some flexibility in the way
>gates/triggers are handled, the level and rate analog switches are
>operated, the LED is handled and trigger outputs are handled. All the
>rest of the EG is analog.
That does seem the best way, as the logic functions are digital anyway.
At 2:50 PM -0700 1/25/03, Scott Juskiw wrote:
>
>This will be a FANTASTIC addition when it's released, I am pumped
>about this one.
Me too :) I was in process of designing an EG with CV attack level for myself
(I don't think you can buy from anyone), then Larry mentioned OC was
working on a new EG, and lo and behold, it has VC attack level!!
>The panel looks a bit crowded though, mostly from the
>Gate pushbutton and Gate LED. The LED can certainly be moved around,
>as you've indicated. Perhaps the -OUT could be eliminated so that a
>larger 0.5" pushbutton can be used (like the one Moe mentions on his
>website). I use this same 0.5" pushbutton on my Darkstar and OMS-820
>modules and I really like it.
Imho, it doesn't need a pushbutton or a negative out.
>The -OUT is convenient, but can easily
>be generated by a MultiMix or MOTM-830. Just my $0.02.
I agree, not to mention many inputs have reversing attenuators.