Hello and welcome!
I agree that some sort of wavetable oscillator might be very interesting, I
imagine that Paul has given this some though already. One thing I've found
with MOTM is the development time can take a while, due to the fact that Paul
will propose a perfectly good module, then three guys (let's call them Moe,
Larry and Curly -- and occasionally Shemp) will start adding all sorts of
frivolous crap: "Add some blinking LEDs!" or "Add a reversing attenuator!" or
"How many ft/lbs of torque will those new switches take?" After which, Paul
goes away in disgust for a while and redesigns the module. Then, after a few
intelligent suggestions by TH, JS, or one of the hundred Daves on the list,
the module is ready for production.
The point being, get comfortable. But in the meantime...
In a message dated 12/10/99 4:20:35 PM,
PaulBr@... writes:
>2) The somewhat-less expensive (more traditional wavetable?) route. Have
>between 2 and n (16?) voltages and cycle through them rapidly. For each
>"step", you could select the voltage level. Globally you might select
>the
>ramp between steps (linear, hard-step, exponential), and the time between
>steps. Perhaps a setting to select how long a voltage is held for a step--
>between immediately go to next step and hold for some short number of
>microseconds. To get really fancy, the hold times and ramp selection might
>be adjustable per descrete step. Perhaps the number of steps could be
>variable?
>
If I'm not completely missing the point, I think you can accomplish much
(though not all) of what you suggest by merely using a sequencer CV out as an
audio output, and driving it by a 1V/oct VCO (like the MOTM 300). If you add
the soon to be released VC Lag Processor (did I mention a reversing
attenuator yet?) to the output you could get even closer.
John (very occasionally known as Curly either due to the 2' of curly hair I
had removed from my head last summer, leaving much short curly hair, or due
to my short curly temper) Barlow