You are confused, my son. Unfortunately, I must explain using a few
engineering terms.
> OK, I got that. That's the MOTM way CV is expo and VCA is linear (ie
> expects a expo CV to have a linear response). Right? So, I
> would call the
> input on the MOTM-110 expo.
>
MOTM-110 input is linear, not exp. Its transfer function (graph of output
over input) is a straight line. Therefore, if you input a linear voltage,
you get a linear change out. If you input an exponential voltage, you get an
exponential change out. Your ear wants an exponential response, which the
linear VCA input passes unchanged from the 800s exponential output.
> OK, so if your VCA was designed to have a expo curve (ie
> expecting a linear
> CV) and you fed it a expo CV from your EG you would get that quadratic
> response. That makes sense. So this is one good reason to have
> a "linear"
> input on a VCA. You could put expo voltage to it for this effect.
>
Neinsky, comrade. Linear input responding to expo voltage is already the
status quo when you hook an 800 to a 110. An input doesn't "expect"
anything, it just responds to what is fed into it, as determined by the
transfer function mentioned above. The EG has its own transfer function
also - if you graph the voltage change over time from point A to point B,
you get an exponential transfer function. If the VCA has an input that also
has an exponential transfer function, these two functions are multiplied to
achieve the overall transfer function that describes the total output over
input, which is this case is output gain over time.
Moe