ComputerVoltageSources

Hello all,

I've been following the list for a while now and must admit that my
own work is in a rather divergent area right now (analog analog
analog), so I don't have much to contribute to your discussions.
However, I am teaching digital electronics in the Music Technology
program at CalArts (BFA and MFA students). Some of my very sharp
students might be interested in your work.
Do I have your blessing to share your project with them and tell
them to inquire with you if they are interested in building or working
on your designs? At CalArts we have 2 wonderful Serge synths and
completely lack a "digital interface" - I think that would be an
excellent project for some of my students and your work would be a
good starting point for them.
Let me know what you think.

Regards,

Lorin

First, let me compliment you on your insanium project. I have done a
bit with the speakjet but nowhere near your effort.

I doubt that your request will get much of a response which is an
indication that this project is dead. I think that it is a great
concept but that the potential user community is too small for a
project to emerge. There just aren't enough experienced volunteers
with time and energy.

John and I did a display board which is currently useful only to PSIM
users since the CVS does not exist. I have learned that early
expressed interest really means "maybe and ask me again later when you
have it" and later turns into "not right now I'm too busy / broke /
whatever".

I think this project is too complex and too costly for the DIY
community. Obviously the project could be simplified, but with some of
the ideas that were proposed about 0 to +10V and +/-5V inputs with
offsets, two banks of potentiometers, etc. it translates into well
over 50 wires to a front panel and a BOM well over $400 in cost. The
only practical implementation for the DIY community would be to do
multiple PCBs - one for the processor and another for front panel
mounted jacks, switches, leds, and controls. This represents a
significant investment in both time and prototype costs.

There are also multiple formats so there will never be enough volume
to justify the cost of develping the PCB and panel. There are just
too many formats for anyone to do a design with enough resulting
volume to make it worthwhile.

This forum has really turned into a support group for the few PSIM
owners that are active with their modules and general questions about
using processors for voltage control.

Anyone care to disagree?

Dave


--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Lorin Edwin Parker"
<lparker@...> wrote:

> Do I have your blessing to share your project with them and tell
> them to inquire with you if they are interested in building or
> working on your designs? At CalArts we have 2 wonderful Serge
> synths and completely lack a "digital interface" - I think that
> would be an excellent project for some of my students and your
> work would be a good starting point for them. Let me know what
> you think.

Hi
I volunteer to assist in anyway possible.
If this project is indeed dead I will do it myself.
My only reservation with that is that I am not really
a software geek-ah-er- ahem. I mean I don't do software
development. I am a hardware person(Linacs)
Jeri


-----Original Message-----
From: davebr@...
To: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 8:16 PM
Subject: [ComputerVoltageSources] Re: Lurking contributions


First, let me compliment you on your insanium project. I have done a
bit with the speakjet but nowhere near your effort.

I doubt that your request will get much of a response which is an
indication that this project is dead. I think that it is a great
concept but that the potential user community is too small for a
project to emerge. There just aren't enough experienced volunteers
with time and energy.

John and I did a display board which is currently useful only to PSIM
users since the CVS does not exist. I have learned that early
expressed interest really means "maybe and ask me again later when you
have it" and later turns into "not right now I'm too busy / broke /
whatever".

I think this project is too complex and too costly for the DIY
community. Obviously the project could be simplified, but with some of
the ideas that were proposed about 0 to +10V and +/-5V inputs with
offsets, two banks of potentiometers, etc. it translates into well
over 50 wires to a front panel and a BOM well over $400 in cost. The
only practical implementation for the DIY community would be to do
multiple PCBs - one for the processor and another for front panel
mounted jacks, switches, leds, and controls. This represents a
significant investment in both time and prototype costs.

There are also multiple formats so there will never be enough volume
to justify the cost of develping the PCB and panel. There are just
too many formats for anyone to do a design with enough resulting
volume to make it worthwhile.

This forum has really turned into a support group for the few PSIM
owners that are active with their modules and general questions about
using processors for voltage control.

Anyone care to disagree?

Dave

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Lorin Edwin Parker"
<lparker@...> wrote:

> Do I have your blessing to share your project with them and tell
> them to inquire with you if they are interested in building or
> working on your designs? At CalArts we have 2 wonderful Serge
> synths and completely lack a "digital interface" - I think that
> would be an excellent project for some of my students and your
> work would be a good starting point for them. Let me know what
> you think.

________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dave

I certainly hope you are wrong! The PISM was a great idea, but unless
Brice decides to release the next batch as PCB + Programmed CPU +
Parts List, this list is the only chance I have of getting anything
like it. Brice may be a nice guy, but at this point I would not order
a complete module from him.

I'm sure that those working on the designs are still working (right?)
on them, but it is a labor of love and time with no actual payback
except for a "Thanks for a job well done" from the DIY community.

If I can get 2 or 3 PCB's to build the full module, and either an MOTM
or Synthesizers.com panel from the re-starting Stooge's or
Bridechamber, then I'll find the money to order the pcb's and panel,
and then start getting the parts to populate the system. If it takes
a year or so to get everything and build it, so be it.

Larry T.

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "djbrow54" <davebr@...>
wrote:

>
> First, let me compliment you on your insanium project. I have done a
> bit with the speakjet but nowhere near your effort.
>
> I doubt that your request will get much of a response which is an
> indication that this project is dead. I think that it is a great
> concept but that the potential user community is too small for a
> project to emerge. There just aren't enough experienced volunteers
> with time and energy.
>
> John and I did a display board which is currently useful only to PSIM
> users since the CVS does not exist. I have learned that early
> expressed interest really means "maybe and ask me again later when you
> have it" and later turns into "not right now I'm too busy / broke /
> whatever".
>
> I think this project is too complex and too costly for the DIY
> community. Obviously the project could be simplified, but with some of
> the ideas that were proposed about 0 to +10V and +/-5V inputs with
> offsets, two banks of potentiometers, etc. it translates into well
> over 50 wires to a front panel and a BOM well over $400 in cost. The
> only practical implementation for the DIY community would be to do
> multiple PCBs - one for the processor and another for front panel
> mounted jacks, switches, leds, and controls. This represents a
> significant investment in both time and prototype costs.
>
> There are also multiple formats so there will never be enough volume
> to justify the cost of develping the PCB and panel. There are just
> too many formats for anyone to do a design with enough resulting
> volume to make it worthwhile.
>
> This forum has really turned into a support group for the few PSIM
> owners that are active with their modules and general questions about
> using processors for voltage control.
>
> Anyone care to disagree?
>
> Dave

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "djbrow54" <davebr@...>
wrote:

> I have learned that early
> expressed interest really means "maybe and ask me again later when you
> have it" and later turns into "not right now I'm too busy / broke /
> whatever".
>

well put! this is also a succinct expression of the difference between
a cottage-industry's WEB-SITE and their actual BUSINESS. My
observation is that brisk traffic on web-list is....
ummmm....'independent' of brisk business. In many cases i'd be tempted
to say the relationships is an INverse one!
;'>

> only practical implementation for the DIY community would be to do
> multiple PCBs - one for the processor and another for front panel
> mounted jacks, switches, leds, and controls.

i strongly agree with you here, Dave. Speaking only for myself, i have
no interest in anything but a processor board. i have a very
idiosyncratic interface in mind that would be of no interest to anyone
but me. i'm not even concerned with the circuits for I/O because i
will probably have to re-scale the ADCs/DACs anyway If an interface
configuration were built-in , i'd be more reluctant to invest because
it would all go to waste in my application

> This represents a
> significant investment in both time and prototype costs.
>

and again, i strongly agree that the design of two PCB's (one for the
processor, one for the interface) makes this very expensive for an
'experimenters' project.
i also think that the market has proven time & time again (going
back to the Buchla 500) that this kind of gadget is just too
'in-between' to be commercial.
As a result i've always harbored the suspicion that this idea could
end up as a doodle on a drawing board....Like Da Vinci's auger-shaped
helicopter, for a very long time , but not necessarily forever...
But my personal take is that, for the time being, it makes a better
yahoo group than a product!

FWIW,
-doc

> and then start getting the parts to populate the system. If it takes
> a year or so to get everything and build it, so be it.
>

i'm with you there. this is the only way i see getting a psim

just wish i had something to offer to move it all along...

At 09:16 PM 1/29/2007, djbrow54 wrote:

>[snip]
>Anyone care to disagree?

Sadly, you'll get no disagreement here, Dave.

The complexity of this effort is one reason that I mentioned the MAKE
Controller a month or few ago.
(http://www.makezine.com/controller/) Seems like it could make a
nice basis for a CVS. John Loffink suggested that it's a lot like a
bunch of other products. I'm not well-informed on that stuff so I
don't know; it just seemed like there was a good DIY community
developing around this one.
--
john

Contrarian that I am,
i guess calling it a dead deal has brought some people out of the
woodwork. I'm building up a PSIM and want to give it further
functionality but also just want to get 'good' at this sort of thing.
So I will join in the selfish hope that it isn't dead - the more
people making this kind of noise the happier I'll be with the world.
Paul

Hi John

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, John Mahoney
<jmahoney@...> wrote:

>
> At 09:16 PM 1/29/2007, djbrow54 wrote:
> >[snip]
> >Anyone care to disagree?
>
> Sadly, you'll get no disagreement here, Dave.
>
> The complexity of this effort is one reason that I mentioned the MAKE
> Controller a month or few ago.
> (http://www.makezine.com/controller/) Seems like it could make a
> nice basis for a CVS. John Loffink suggested that it's a lot like a
> bunch of other products. I'm not well-informed on that stuff so I
> don't know; it just seemed like there was a good DIY community
> developing around this one.

i used to mess around with hobbyist robotics (even had a C64 rolling
around my lving room until 'the cat incident')....
;'>
There are quite a few low-cost PIC implementations around right now.
The controller kit that MAKE sells is pretty well-appointed on the
INPUT side with 8 10-bit analog ins....
But, the 8 DIGITAL outs translate to one 8-bit analog out and that's
where the MAKE gadget falls short of this app.
As Aaron Lanterman has pointed out programmable multichannel analog
I/O boards with dazzling resolution are pretty common but pretty
expensive too, and they require a PC not only to program but also to run.
So once again this app. lands in the 'liminal entity'* region,
neither fish nor fowl nor beast! Too complex and hi-res to be a
worthwhile hobbyist product but too lightweight for the pro lab-i/o
companies to mess with. That's why i believe such a conceptually
simple design is just not produced commercially for analog instruments.

best
-doc

* if you never heard of 'liminal entity' ....check out Pinch &
Trocco's beautiful, flawed, masterpiece, "Analog Days" ... it's a
great read!
=)

--- drmabuce <drmabuce@...> wrote:

> There are quite a few low-cost PIC implementations
> around right now.
> The controller kit that MAKE sells is pretty
> well-appointed on the
> INPUT side with 8 10-bit analog ins....
> But, the 8 DIGITAL outs translate to one 8-bit
> analog out and that's
> where the MAKE gadget falls short of this app.
> As Aaron Lanterman has pointed out programmable
> multichannel analog
> I/O boards with dazzling resolution are pretty
> common but pretty
> expensive too, and they require a PC not only to
> program but also to run.
> So once again this app. lands in the 'liminal
> entity'* region,
> neither fish nor fowl nor beast! Too complex and
> hi-res to be a
> worthwhile hobbyist product but too lightweight for
> the pro lab-i/o
> companies to mess with. That's why i believe such a
> conceptually
> simple design is just not produced commercially for
> analog instruments.
>

Hmm. If we're once again veering away from the AtomPro
(as previous references to Atmel & PIC processors
would suggest), I might suggest the ADI ADuC70XX
series processors which contain:

* 62k Flash
* 8k SRAM
* 45MHz 32-bit ARM7TDMI CPU
* Good 12-bit DACs (up to 4) & multi-channel 12-bit
ADC
* RS-232 compatible serial bootloader
* SPI, I2S, UART, GPIO
* Clock PLL

Olimex makes a nice 40-pin DIP header board for the
ADuC7020, available from Spark-Fun for a reasonable
price:

http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/product_info.php?products_id=471

Development tools are free from IAR

http://supp.iar.com/Download/SW/?item=EWARM-KS32

I'm using some of these right now and they're quite
nice. I think the integrated ADC/DACs make them a
really good fit for CVS applications.

Eric





____________________________________________________________________________________
Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate
in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367

Just one clarification. The processor is just a standard AtomPro24.
It can be purchased directly from BasicMicro. It is the PCB that is
unique. All other parts can be purchased via Mouser or Digikey.

Dave

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Larry T." <larry@...>
wrote:

>
> Dave
>
> I certainly hope you are wrong! The PISM was a great idea, but
> unless Brice decides to release the next batch as PCB +
> Programmed CPU + Parts List

Is it really dead? Aren't we just waiting for the PCB layout to be
completed?

Kevin


--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "djbrow54" <davebr@...>
wrote:

> I doubt that your request will get much of a response which is an
> indication that this project is dead. I think that it is a great
> concept but that the potential user community is too small for a
> project to emerge. There just aren't enough experienced volunteers
> with time and energy.

Hi
Yeah I think it is,pity really. If a concisous on a set of specs
and a schematic could be reached, I would do the pcb layout.
I don't think that is gonna happen.
Jeri


-----Original Message-----
From: son_of_zoggs@...
To: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 3:44 PM
Subject: [ComputerVoltageSources] Re: Lurking contributions


Is it really dead? Aren't we just waiting for the PCB layout to be
completed?

Kevin

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "djbrow54" <davebr@...>
wrote:

> I doubt that your request will get much of a response which is an
> indication that this project is dead. I think that it is a great
> concept but that the potential user community is too small for a
> project to emerge. There just aren't enough experienced volunteers
> with time and energy.

________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Prehaps there could be a posting of some schematics. I could devote an
hour a two a night to doing some layout.
P

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, laxt57@... wrote:
>
> Hi
> Yeah I think it is,pity really. If a concisous on a set of specs
> and a schematic could be reached, I would do the pcb layout.
> I don't think that is gonna happen.
> Jeri
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: son_of_zoggs@...
> To: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 3:44 PM
> Subject: [ComputerVoltageSources] Re: Lurking contributions
>
>
> Is it really dead? Aren't we just waiting for the PCB layout to be
> completed?
>
> Kevin
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "djbrow54" <davebr@>
> wrote:
>
> > I doubt that your request will get much of a response which is an
> > indication that this project is dead. I think that it is a great
> > concept but that the potential user community is too small for a
> > project to emerge. There just aren't enough experienced volunteers
> > with time and energy.
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

So here is my summary of the situation. There have been only 8
individuals responding to my original email. Two agreed with me, and
two suggested different options / configurations so we'll have a total
of 6 user who want different configurations. I'll predict that half
will drop out later due to the high cost and complexity. The 100%
software compatibility with the PSIM was a neat goal, but there really
isn't even a developer community for it.

The issue is that this is a pretty complex module and everyone wants
something slightly different. The 'power' in a module like this is
sufficiently large user community all supporting the development of
usable software. That isn't going to happen. There just aren't
enough people interested. The schematics aren't the issue; it's
arriving at a common set of features to attract enough people for
critical mass for software development and economic feasibility.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. As to the labor of love comment,
I know. I have 1188 lines of source programmed into 20 processors for
a really neat display processor sitting on my desk next to me. Now
I'll withdraw for something more productive ...

Dave

Maybe schematic files could be posted for those who wirewrap or perfboard assemble?

As long as the work has been expeneded, why not derive SOME benefit.

BTW, the MAX4051/2/3 is amazingly better than the CD4051/2/3. It has a CV limit of 16
volts, so watch out for spikes on a 15 volt rail.

>
> Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. As to the labor of love comment,
> I know. I have 1188 lines of source programmed into 20 processors for
> a really neat display processor sitting on my desk next to me. Now
> I'll withdraw for something more productive ...

Dave et al,

I'm sure there are others out there who would be interested in putting together a CVS,
either laying it out on vectorboard, or making their own board. I agree with Grant that we
should put together a simple schematic for the main MCU board based on the
original specification that Grant & Harry were going to be working from using the AtomPro
in a PSIM-like configuration.

I'm not sure what exactly is accomplished by making a statement on whether or not this
project is dead. I also think it is a mistake trying to gauge interest just based upon list
activity during thread. I am very interested in eventually putting together a CVS based
around an AtomPro, and was waiting to hear from the people on this list who said they
were going to be laying out a board for the project. It seems like that isn't happening for
now, but it would be great for the people without any design experience if some of the
people who have dealt with PSIMs or AtomPro CVS designs could put together a schematic.

-Henry

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter" <grichter@...> wrote:
>
> Maybe schematic files could be posted for those who wirewrap or perfboard assemble?
>
> As long as the work has been expeneded, why not derive SOME benefit.
>
> BTW, the MAX4051/2/3 is amazingly better than the CD4051/2/3. It has a CV limit of
16
> volts, so watch out for spikes on a 15 volt rail.
>
> >
> > Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. As to the labor of love comment,
> > I know. I have 1188 lines of source programmed into 20 processors for
> > a really neat display processor sitting on my desk next to me. Now
> > I'll withdraw for something more productive ...
>

Hi Dave
i've never been sanguine on the commercial prospects for this kind
of gadget, even on a small scale. So i don't blame you at all for
resolving to cut your losses. At the risk of seeming presumptuous ,
given your expertise and insight i'm sure that your interest in the
subject will abide, and will of course always be welcome here. For
myself, i'm grateful for your collegiality and your generosity in
sharing it.

-doc



--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "djbrow54" <davebr@...>
wrote:

>
> So here is my summary of the situation. There have been only 8
> individuals responding to my original email. Two agreed with me, and
> two suggested different options / configurations so we'll have a total
> of 6 user who want different configurations. I'll predict that half
> will drop out later due to the high cost and complexity. The 100%
> software compatibility with the PSIM was a neat goal, but there really
> isn't even a developer community for it.
>
> The issue is that this is a pretty complex module and everyone wants
> something slightly different. The 'power' in a module like this is
> sufficiently large user community all supporting the development of
> usable software. That isn't going to happen. There just aren't
> enough people interested. The schematics aren't the issue; it's
> arriving at a common set of features to attract enough people for
> critical mass for software development and economic feasibility.
>
> Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. As to the labor of love comment,
> I know. I have 1188 lines of source programmed into 20 processors for
> a really neat display processor sitting on my desk next to me. Now
> I'll withdraw for something more productive ...
>
> Dave
>

I don't think that the project is dead - but it was just bearly alive
in the first place.

The reason why guys like Dave became interested in the PSIM was
because the device actually EXISTED.

I don't know if one could have twisted so many able people's arms to
participate if it was just a discussion about 'what could exist.'


gc




"drmabuce" <drmabuce@...> wrote:

>
> Hi Dave
> i've never been sanguine on the commercial prospects for this kind
> of gadget, even on a small scale. So i don't blame you at all for
> resolving to cut your losses. At the risk of seeming presumptuous ,
> given your expertise and insight i'm sure that your interest in the
> subject will abide, and will of course always be welcome here. For
> myself, i'm grateful for your collegiality and your generosity in
> sharing it.
>
> -doc
>
>
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "djbrow54" <davebr@>
> wrote:
> >
> > So here is my summary of the situation. There have been only 8
> > individuals responding to my original email. Two agreed with me, and
> > two suggested different options / configurations so we'll have a

total

> > of 6 user who want different configurations. I'll predict that half
> > will drop out later due to the high cost and complexity. The 100%
> > software compatibility with the PSIM was a neat goal, but there

really

> > isn't even a developer community for it.
> >
> > The issue is that this is a pretty complex module and everyone wants
> > something slightly different. The 'power' in a module like this is
> > sufficiently large user community all supporting the development of
> > usable software. That isn't going to happen. There just aren't
> > enough people interested. The schematics aren't the issue; it's
> > arriving at a common set of features to attract enough people for
> > critical mass for software development and economic feasibility.
> >
> > Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. As to the labor of love comment,
> > I know. I have 1188 lines of source programmed into 20 processors

for

> > a really neat display processor sitting on my desk next to me. Now
> > I'll withdraw for something more productive ...
> >
> > Dave
> >
>

At 02:14 PM 2/2/2007, drmabuce wrote:

>Hi Dave
> i've never been sanguine on the commercial prospects for this kind
>of gadget, even on a small scale. So i don't blame you at all for
>resolving to cut your losses. At the risk of seeming presumptuous ,
>given your expertise and insight i'm sure that your interest in the
>subject will abide, and will of course always be welcome here. For
>myself, i'm grateful for your collegiality and your generosity in
>sharing it.
>
>-doc

I second that emotion. Thanks, Dave!
--
john