ComputerVoltageSources

----- Original Message -----
From: "drmabuce" <drmabuce@...>
Subject: Re: Microprocessors in analog modules
[snip]
>
> i think it's worthwhile to ask how many folks would prefer graphic
> development to low-level MBASIC or C or Forth coding.***
> The number might justify the effort of a (ie) graphic-to-MBASIC
> compiler .... to someone!
> ...
> ***and then just to be a smartass we should ask how many people would
> prefer to develop direcly in assembler .... or.... OR THE PROCESSOR
> CODE.... WOW!!!!!! that stuff's REALLY FAST!!!!!
> uh....
> MBASIC still gets my vote BTW
> ;'>


As one wag put it, lower level languages give you the answer quicker, but
later. ;-)

MBASIC on the Atom Pro is fast enough for most of our purposes here. If a
need arises for particular routines to written in a lower level language,
I'd be willing to give it a go. Coding "to the bare metal" can be fun in
limited amounts.

Forth was brought up on the Synth-DIY list, as I recall. It's pretty obscure
to most folks but quite popular for embedded systems. A CVS* is an embedded
system, no? The cool thing about Forth is that hardcore programmers can
create a set of custom commands which can then be used by everyone else. So,
the pioneers have a steep slope to climb, but they are able to build a lift
for everyone else -- in theory, anyway. (Note: I am not suggesting that
Forth be the language of choice, especially since I don't know it! Heh...
MBASIC works, and it's pretty darn fast on the Atom Pro.)

Not to get all off-topic and nostalgic, but... my first languages were the
Apple ][ BASICs (Integer and Applesoft) and 6502 machine code and assembler,
more or less at the same time, way back in 19mumblemumble...
--
john


* CVS = Computer Voltage Source

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "drmabuce" <drmabuce@...>
> Subject: Re: Microprocessors in analog modules
> [snip]
> >
> > i think it's worthwhile to ask how many folks would prefer

> > development to low-level MBASIC or C or Forth coding.***
> > The number might justify the effort of a (ie) graphic-to-MBASIC
> > compiler .... to someone!
> > ...
> > ***and then just to be a smartass we should ask how many people

> > prefer to develop direcly in assembler .... or.... OR THE

> > CODE.... WOW!!!!!! that stuff's REALLY FAST!!!!!
> > uh....
> > MBASIC still gets my vote BTW
> > ;'>
>
>
> As one wag put it, lower level languages give you the answer

> later. ;-)
>
> MBASIC on the Atom Pro is fast enough for most of our purposes

> need arises for particular routines to written in a lower level

> I'd be willing to give it a go. Coding "to the bare metal" can be

> limited amounts.
>
> Forth was brought up on the Synth-DIY list, as I recall. It's

> to most folks but quite popular for embedded systems. A CVS* is an

> system, no? The cool thing about Forth is that hardcore

> create a set of custom commands which can then be used by everyone

> the pioneers have a steep slope to climb, but they are able to

> for everyone else -- in theory, anyway. (Note: I am not suggesting

> Forth be the language of choice, especially since I don't know it!

> MBASIC works, and it's pretty darn fast on the Atom Pro.)
>
> Not to get all off-topic and nostalgic, but... my first languages

> Apple ][ BASICs (Integer and Applesoft) and 6502 machine code and

> more or less at the same time, way back in 19mumblemumble...
> --
> john
>
>
> * CVS = Computer Voltage Source
>

>
> ummm, forth... hadn't thot about it for a while,

> a whole different
> universe than what we're talking about here. but those frog peak
> guys did some nice stuff.
>
> but not to stray... MBasic, just the ticket, yass yass... onward!
>

>
> As one wag put it, lower level languages give you the answer

> later. ;-)
>

> Forth be the language of choice, especially since I don't know it!

>
> Ah, Forth, the write-only language :p I once wrote a drum machine in
> Forth on a VIC-20 (still have it) but went back to add triplets a
> couple of months later and couldn't read my own code!

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "drmabuce" <drmabuce@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Mike
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Marsh"
> <michaelmarsh@> wrote:
> >
> > Ah, Forth, the write-only language :p I once wrote a drum machine in
> > Forth on a VIC-20 (still have it) but went back to add triplets a
> > couple of months later and couldn't read my own code!
>
> (uff da! YA!*)
>
> me too
>
> but without going TOO far OT...(i hope)....
> in all fairness to the few and the proud....
> i have seen some 'miracles of rare device' written in Forth ... i
> guess it all comes down the compatibility of the tool and the hand
> that must wield it....
>
> but here and now....
>
> i ain't a gonna worry about it until BasicMicro migrates the whole
> BasicAtomPro product line to it!!!!!
> ;'>
>
> -doc
>
> (* just got off the phone with Digi-Key.... youuuuuu betcha!)
>

>
> There are two versions of the Basic Micro development software. One

> about a C compiler. Anybody know what is up with that?
>
> If we can use both MBasic and C together, then bonus.

>
> Ah, Forth, the write-only language :p I once wrote a drum machine in
> Forth on a VIC-20 (still have it) but went back to add triplets a
> couple of months later and couldn't read my own code!
>
> Mike
>
> > Forth be the language of choice, especially since I don't know it!
> Heh...

> Just spent some time on the phone with John Loffink discussing ...

> I'm waiting for someone to suggest FOCAL. Anyone here that old?
> Probably could still write it.

> I like the way this is shaping up:
> Input attenuators, yes!

> A SpeakJet option would be fabulous

> Dave, I assume that you mean MOTM horizontal units when you refer to

> > Just spent some time on the phone with John Loffink discussing ...
> What's a "phone"? ;-)

> > I'm waiting for someone to suggest FOCAL. Anyone here that old?
> > Probably could still write it.
> Don't know that one. We had a FOCUS programmer in our department
> once, but I assume that it's something else.

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "djbrow54" <davebr@...> wrote:
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "john mahoney"
> <jmahoney@> wrote:
> > I like the way this is shaping up:
> > Input attenuators, yes!
>
> Mine are not input attenuators. They are 0 - 10 volt controls sourced
> from a regulator and normalled to the inputs. With no input plug the
> controls provide 0 to 10 volts. With an input plug, the controls are
> disconnected and there is no attenuation
>
> > A SpeakJet option would be fabulous
>
> I haven't really done much with my SpeakJet. I did just buy the
> TTS256 to play with. I do use a general pin to interface to the
> SpeakJet. Interrupts have to be disabled to send data using the
> serial commands. I also used the buffer half full flag instead of
> speaking flag to speed things up by using the buffer. However, you
> can't effectively put pauses in with program delays since you don't
> know when the chip is speaking. You have to program in the pauses. In
> retrospect I might have used the speaking flag but this all changes
> when using the TTS256.
>
> > Dave, I assume that you mean MOTM horizontal units when you refer to
> 1U and 2U. (BTW, the 0.5U MOTM format was recently born on the MOTM
> list.
>
> Yes
>
> > > Just spent some time on the phone with John Loffink discussing ...
> > What's a "phone"? ;-)
>
> It took me a bit to remember how to dial long distance :)
>
> > > I'm waiting for someone to suggest FOCAL. Anyone here that old?
> > > Probably could still write it.
> > Don't know that one. We had a FOCUS programmer in our department
> > once, but I assume that it's something else.
>
> Focal was a PDP-8 high level programming language where commands were
> single character. Pretty efficient. ALso did PL/M for any old-timers
> out there. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOCAL
>
> Dave
>

>
> Since we are spinning a new board, I think it would be useful to

> inputs. That is algebraic summing with offset and span for each

> voltage inputs, so you can compute in real floating point voltages

> octave keyboards.
>

>>> drmabuce@... 03/10/06 9:55 AM >>>

On Mar 10, 2006, at 12:30 AM, djbrow54 wrote:

> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "john mahoney"
> <jmahoney@...> wrote:
> > I like the way this is shaping up:
> > Input attenuators, yes!
>
> Mine are not input attenuators. They are 0 - 10 volt controls sourced
> from a regulator and normalled to the inputs. With no input plug the
> controls provide 0 to 10 volts. With an input plug, the controls are
> disconnected and there is no attenuation
>
> > A SpeakJet option would be fabulous
>
> I haven't really done much with my SpeakJet. I did just buy the
> TTS256 to play with. I do use a general pin to interface to the
> SpeakJet. Interrupts have to be disabled to send data using the
> serial commands. I also used the buffer half full flag instead of
> speaking flag to speed things up by using the buffer. However, you
> can't effectively put pauses in with program delays since you don't
> know when the chip is speaking. You have to program in the pauses. In
> retrospect I might have used the speaking flag but this all changes
> when using the TTS256.
>
> > Dave, I assume that you mean MOTM horizontal units when you refer to
> 1U and 2U. (BTW, the 0.5U MOTM format was recently born on the MOTM
> list.
>
> Yes
>
> > > Just spent some time on the phone with John Loffink discussing ...
> > What's a "phone"? ;-)
>
> It took me a bit to remember how to dial long distance :)
>
> > > I'm waiting for someone to suggest FOCAL. Anyone here that old?
> > > Probably could still write it.
> > Don't know that one. We had a FOCUS programmer in our department
> > once, but I assume that it's something else.
>
> Focal was a PDP-8 high level programming language where commands were
> single character. Pretty efficient. ALso did PL/M for any old-timers
> out there. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOCAL
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Music instrument stores Electronic Instruments
> Module
>
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
> Visit your group "ComputerVoltageSources" on the web.
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> ComputerVoltageSources-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>

>
> This may be drifting a little OT,

> but I'm wondering why you couldn't
> just wire the 10V source to the normalling lug of the input jack, and
> then wire the tip lug to the attenuating pot, so that it would act as
> an attenuator for the 10V source or any signal you plugged in...
>
> Am I missing something? It would be far from the first time :)

> Since we are spinning a new board, I think it would be useful to

> inputs. That is algebraic summing with offset and span for each

> voltage inputs, so you can compute in real floating point voltages

> octave keyboards.
>

>
> I probably spent a day trying to get the C environment working. I
> don't remember all the issues but I got nothing working. I posted a
> note on the BasicMicro forum asking if anyone had success with C and
> never got a reply. Months later someone else posted the same question
> and didn't get any replies either. Haven't checked lately but I doubt
> it. Assembly should also be a possibility but there is no
> documentation on this nor passing variables.
>
> Dave
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter"
> <grichter@> wrote:
> >
> > There are two versions of the Basic Micro development software. One
> says something
> > about a C compiler. Anybody know what is up with that?
> >
> > If we can use both MBasic and C together, then bonus.
>

>

> in fact, one of the reaons i'm riding these threads so hard is that
> NOW is the time to brainstorm these issues , and get on with it
> so.... fire away!
>

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Chang" <gchang@...> wrote:
>
> "drmabuce" <drmabuce@> wrote:
> >
>
> > in fact, one of the reaons i'm riding these threads so hard is that
> > NOW is the time to brainstorm these issues , and get on with it
> > so.... fire away!
> >
>
> Well, then, I am constantly patching a SLEW to smooth the output of
> the PSIM - I get a faint zippering when it is an LFO, controlling
> JAG-VCAs for location...
>
> gary
>

>
> I think we can use the Metalbox style 1900H knobs and Alpha pots
> for Frac-Rac.
> The jack spacing should accept either Switchcraft (Blacet) or
> 16PJ135 (Wiard) jacks.
> The 16PJ135 jacks wire up very neatly because of the ground tangs
> being in-line.
> The knurled nuts are designed to be assembled with fingernails, so
> that is one less tool
> you need.

>
> I guess we could add the option of a slew limiter for each ouput.

> board and wire you jacks to a differnt set of ouputs. That will add

> possibly 4 more jacks if you want both.
>
> At this point we are up to 12 knobs, 19 jacks, 6 LEDs, three 5 pin

> DB9 connector.
>
> With 1/4" connectors, that is like half a 19 "rack. Same with Frac-

> Then if you add a LCD display somewhere...
>
> Any more stuff and the faceplate will be so expensive it will be

> and beginning hobbiests.
>
> For those who want to begin laying out faceplates, the faceplate

>
> Jacks:
> 1 v/oct in 1-4
> Variable CV in 1-4
> CV out 1-4
> Run Pulse in
> Stop Pulse in
> Speech out jack
> Gate out jack
> Trig out jack
> Gate in jack
> Trig in jack = 19
>
> Pushbuttons:
>
> Run / Stop = 2
>
> Knobs:
>
> CV offset 1-4
> CV attenuator 1-4
> Ouput slew 1-4 = 12
>
> 5 pin DIN:
> MIDI in
> MIDI out
> DIN in or out = 3
>
> DB9 for programing interface
>
> LEDs:
>
> CV indicators 1-4
> Run / Stop LEDs = 6 total
>
> Who is going to volunteer to do layouts in .fpd fromat?
>
> One for MOTM and one for Frac-Rac. That will give us some idea of

> to work with.
>
> I think we can use the Metalbox style 1900H knobs and Alpha pots

> The jack spacing should accept either Switchcraft (Blacet) or

> The 16PJ135 jacks wire up very neatly because of the ground tangs

> The knurled nuts are designed to be assembled with fingernails, so

> you need.
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Chang"

> >
> > "drmabuce" <drmabuce@> wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > in fact, one of the reaons i'm riding these threads so hard is

> > > NOW is the time to brainstorm these issues , and get on with it
> > > so.... fire away!
> > >
> >
> > Well, then, I am constantly patching a SLEW to smooth the output

> > the PSIM - I get a faint zippering when it is an LFO, controlling
> > JAG-VCAs for location...
> >
> > gary
> >
>

On Mar 10, 2006, at 3:10 PM, xamboldt wrote:

> Can of worms warning!
>
> Should the PCB be laid out so as to allow PCB-mounted pots for
> perhaps 4 or 6 of the controls? Different front panel formats could
> be allowed for by simply doing point-to-point wiring instead of PCB
> mounting the pots. The difficulty comes in deciding which format
> would be used to dictate the spacing of holes for the PCB-mounted
> pots. Both Blacet and MOTM have standards we could appropriate for
> PCB-mounted pots. The CVS' pots (as spelled out by Grant) are grouped
> in functional units of 4, and that is the typical max vertical
> allowance of pots on an MOTM panel. Blacet has up to 6 maximum, but
> plenty of designs have fewer pots.
>
> I guess someone had to bring it up.... :)
>
> -Chris
>
>
> >
> > I think we can use the Metalbox style 1900H knobs and Alpha pots
> > for Frac-Rac.
> > The jack spacing should accept either Switchcraft (Blacet) or
> > 16PJ135 (Wiard) jacks.
> > The 16PJ135 jacks wire up very neatly because of the ground tangs
> > being in-line.
> > The knurled nuts are designed to be assembled with fingernails, so
> > that is one less tool
> > you need.
>

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, xamboldt <xamboldt@...> wrote:
>
> Or... if pots aren't PCB-mounted, what panel components should be?
> MIDI Jacks? DIN? LEDs? We've already heard that DIN might not be
> something everyone would want...
>
> Would there be room for 4 pots and MIDI I/O?
>
> -Chris
>
> On Mar 10, 2006, at 3:10 PM, xamboldt wrote:
>
> > Can of worms warning!
> >
> > Should the PCB be laid out so as to allow PCB-mounted pots for
> > perhaps 4 or 6 of the controls? Different front panel formats could
> > be allowed for by simply doing point-to-point wiring instead of PCB
> > mounting the pots. The difficulty comes in deciding which format
> > would be used to dictate the spacing of holes for the PCB-mounted
> > pots. Both Blacet and MOTM have standards we could appropriate for
> > PCB-mounted pots. The CVS' pots (as spelled out by Grant) are grouped
> > in functional units of 4, and that is the typical max vertical
> > allowance of pots on an MOTM panel. Blacet has up to 6 maximum, but
> > plenty of designs have fewer pots.
> >
> > I guess someone had to bring it up.... :)
> >
> > -Chris
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I think we can use the Metalbox style 1900H knobs and Alpha pots
> > > for Frac-Rac.
> > > The jack spacing should accept either Switchcraft (Blacet) or
> > > 16PJ135 (Wiard) jacks.
> > > The 16PJ135 jacks wire up very neatly because of the ground tangs
> > > being in-line.
> > > The knurled nuts are designed to be assembled with fingernails, so
> > > that is one less tool
> > > you need.
> >
>

On 3/10/06 1:49 PM, "Grant Richter" <grichter@...> wrote:

> First, no offense to Chris for an excellent question.
>
> Don't talk to me about "no screw holes in the faceplate" that is why you don't
> see Wiard
> modules in MOTM format. That idea is insulting to any designer.
>
> Spend your time thinking about MUSIC, forget the g*dd*mn screwholes, get some
> therapy
> for your out of control OCD behavior, how many times do you wash your hands a
> day?????????????????? (loud hissing of steam escaping from ears).
>
> I apologize for the rant, silly limitations really annoy me.
>
> There is no advantage to ANY panel mounted components being in hard copper on
> the PC
> board.
>
> What if someone wants to use it for controlling dimmer packs for a hobby
> theater?
> Then the board would be bench top mounted horizontally and the pots would be
> slide
> pots. It could support both 0-10 volt packs and the MIDI controlled ones.
>
> What about using it to control servo laser scanners for a laserium light show?
> (those are
> voltage outputs to current drivers)
>
> What if all the pots are force sensing resistors built into a dancers suit?
>
> What about if it is used for squib control to light the "Burning Man" on fire
> when
> Interstellar Overdrive reaches the climax?
>
> OK, those are meant to be humorous examples, but also practical applications.
>
> I don't see an anvantage favoring any mounting position or potentiometer type,
> spacing or
> placement. I would just use the Wiard pigtail pot assembly method. That is
> each pot,
> switch or whatever has a dedicated 0.100 KK connector. You can always solder
> directly to
> the PC pads and skip the connectors.
>
> I would use the extra space for as much perf board area as possible for
> hanging more
> experimenters chips, sensors, high current servo drivers etc.
>
> We will have holes in the right spots for that MOTM metal bracket thingy. Can
> sombody
> tell me what that spacing and hole size is?
>
> A 4 x 6 board will fit in a Frac-Rac. Is 6-7 inches too deep for MOTM and
> Doepfer racks?
>
>
>
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, xamboldt <xamboldt@...> wrote:
>> >
>> > Or... if pots aren't PCB-mounted, what panel components should be?
>> > MIDI Jacks? DIN? LEDs? We've already heard that DIN might not be
>> > something everyone would want...
>> >
>> > Would there be room for 4 pots and MIDI I/O?
>> >
>> > -Chris
>> >
>> > On Mar 10, 2006, at 3:10 PM, xamboldt wrote:
>> >
>>> > > Can of worms warning!
>>> > >
>>> > > Should the PCB be laid out so as to allow PCB-mounted pots for
>>> > > perhaps 4 or 6 of the controls? Different front panel formats could
>>> > > be allowed for by simply doing point-to-point wiring instead of PCB
>>> > > mounting the pots. The difficulty comes in deciding which format
>>> > > would be used to dictate the spacing of holes for the PCB-mounted
>>> > > pots. Both Blacet and MOTM have standards we could appropriate for
>>> > > PCB-mounted pots. The CVS' pots (as spelled out by Grant) are grouped
>>> > > in functional units of 4, and that is the typical max vertical
>>> > > allowance of pots on an MOTM panel. Blacet has up to 6 maximum, but
>>> > > plenty of designs have fewer pots.
>>> > >
>>> > > I guess someone had to bring it up.... :)
>>> > >
>>> > > -Chris
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > I think we can use the Metalbox style 1900H knobs and Alpha pots
>>>> > > > for Frac-Rac.
>>>> > > > The jack spacing should accept either Switchcraft (Blacet) or
>>>> > > > 16PJ135 (Wiard) jacks.
>>>> > > > The 16PJ135 jacks wire up very neatly because of the ground tangs
>>>> > > > being in-line.
>>>> > > > The knurled nuts are designed to be assembled with fingernails, so
>>>> > > > that is one less tool
>>>> > > > you need.
>>> > >
>> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
>
> Music instrument stores
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Music+instrument+stores&w1=Music+instrume
> nt+stores&w2=Electronic&w3=Instruments&w4=Module&c=4&s=74&.sig=sl1GY0kdfizgobJ
> LyCnG4g> Electronic
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Electronic&w1=Music+instrument+stores&w2=
> Electronic&w3=Instruments&w4=Module&c=4&s=74&.sig=lQYNIdCzB9Es_s-ln81AvQ>
> Instruments
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Instruments&w1=Music+instrument+stores&w2
> =Electronic&w3=Instruments&w4=Module&c=4&s=74&.sig=e6Jlo4KGQihWioYCcIZjjQ>
> Module
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Module&w1=Music+instrument+stores&w2=Elec
> tronic&w3=Instruments&w4=Module&c=4&s=74&.sig=sPALVFXECM0JfHcmogn8UA>
>
>
>
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
> * Visit your group "ComputerVoltageSources
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ComputerVoltageSources> " on the web.
> *
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> * ComputerVoltageSources-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:ComputerVoltageSources-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe
> >
> *
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
>
>
>
>




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

>
> First, no offense to Chris for an excellent question.
>
> Don't talk to me about "no screw holes in the faceplate" that is why

> modules in MOTM format. That idea is insulting to any designer.
>
> Spend your time thinking about MUSIC, forget the g*dd*mn screwholes,

> for your out of control OCD behavior, how many times do you wash

> day?????????????????? (loud hissing of steam escaping from ears).
>
> I apologize for the rant, silly limitations really annoy me.
>
> There is no advantage to ANY panel mounted components being in hard

> board.
>
> What if someone wants to use it for controlling dimmer packs for a

> Then the board would be bench top mounted horizontally and the pots

> pots. It could support both 0-10 volt packs and the MIDI controlled

>
> What about using it to control servo laser scanners for a laserium

> voltage outputs to current drivers)
>
> What if all the pots are force sensing resistors built into a

>
> What about if it is used for squib control to light the "Burning

> Interstellar Overdrive reaches the climax?
>
> OK, those are meant to be humorous examples, but also practical

>
> I don't see an anvantage favoring any mounting position or

> placement. I would just use the Wiard pigtail pot assembly method.

> switch or whatever has a dedicated 0.100 KK connector. You can

> the PC pads and skip the connectors.
>
> I would use the extra space for as much perf board area as possible

> experimenters chips, sensors, high current servo drivers etc.
>
> We will have holes in the right spots for that MOTM metal bracket

> tell me what that spacing and hole size is?
>
> A 4 x 6 board will fit in a Frac-Rac. Is 6-7 inches too deep for

>
>
>
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, xamboldt <xamboldt@>

> >
> > Or... if pots aren't PCB-mounted, what panel components should be?
> > MIDI Jacks? DIN? LEDs? We've already heard that DIN might not be
> > something everyone would want...
> >
> > Would there be room for 4 pots and MIDI I/O?
> >
> > -Chris
> >
> > On Mar 10, 2006, at 3:10 PM, xamboldt wrote:
> >
> > > Can of worms warning!
> > >
> > > Should the PCB be laid out so as to allow PCB-mounted pots for
> > > perhaps 4 or 6 of the controls? Different front panel formats could
> > > be allowed for by simply doing point-to-point wiring instead of PCB
> > > mounting the pots. The difficulty comes in deciding which format
> > > would be used to dictate the spacing of holes for the PCB-mounted
> > > pots. Both Blacet and MOTM have standards we could appropriate for
> > > PCB-mounted pots. The CVS' pots (as spelled out by Grant) are

> > > in functional units of 4, and that is the typical max vertical
> > > allowance of pots on an MOTM panel. Blacet has up to 6 maximum, but
> > > plenty of designs have fewer pots.
> > >
> > > I guess someone had to bring it up.... :)
> > >
> > > -Chris
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I think we can use the Metalbox style 1900H knobs and Alpha pots
> > > > for Frac-Rac.
> > > > The jack spacing should accept either Switchcraft (Blacet) or
> > > > 16PJ135 (Wiard) jacks.
> > > > The 16PJ135 jacks wire up very neatly because of the ground tangs
> > > > being in-line.
> > > > The knurled nuts are designed to be assembled with fingernails, so
> > > > that is one less tool
> > > > you need.
> > >
> >
>

>
> First, no offense to Chris for an excellent question.
>

>
> I would use the extra space for as much perf board area as possible

> experimenters chips, sensors, high current servo drivers etc.
>

>
> If I could just chime in here, it¹s crazy to mount anything to the PCB
> except for wires. A few good twists (as in knobs) or push-pulls (as in
> plugs) and they¹re history. For lack of a better expression, they

> out² (an old surfing term). This is why e.g. Whirlwind stage boxes

> which I have too much familiarity) tend to fall apart quickly ­ all the
> connectors are PCB mounted. DAVID
>
>
> On 3/10/06 1:49 PM, "Grant Richter" <grichter@...> wrote:
>
> > First, no offense to Chris for an excellent question.
> >
> > Don't talk to me about "no screw holes in the faceplate" that is

> > see Wiard
> > modules in MOTM format. That idea is insulting to any designer.
> >
> > Spend your time thinking about MUSIC, forget the g*dd*mn

> > therapy
> > for your out of control OCD behavior, how many times do you wash

> > day?????????????????? (loud hissing of steam escaping from ears).
> >
> > I apologize for the rant, silly limitations really annoy me.
> >
> > There is no advantage to ANY panel mounted components being in

> > the PC
> > board.
> >
> > What if someone wants to use it for controlling dimmer packs for a

> > theater?
> > Then the board would be bench top mounted horizontally and the

> > slide
> > pots. It could support both 0-10 volt packs and the MIDI

> >
> > What about using it to control servo laser scanners for a laserium

> > (those are
> > voltage outputs to current drivers)
> >
> > What if all the pots are force sensing resistors built into a

> >
> > What about if it is used for squib control to light the "Burning

> > when
> > Interstellar Overdrive reaches the climax?
> >
> > OK, those are meant to be humorous examples, but also practical

> >
> > I don't see an anvantage favoring any mounting position or

> > spacing or
> > placement. I would just use the Wiard pigtail pot assembly method.

> > each pot,
> > switch or whatever has a dedicated 0.100 KK connector. You can

> > directly to
> > the PC pads and skip the connectors.
> >
> > I would use the extra space for as much perf board area as

> > hanging more
> > experimenters chips, sensors, high current servo drivers etc.
> >
> > We will have holes in the right spots for that MOTM metal bracket

> > sombody
> > tell me what that spacing and hole size is?
> >
> > A 4 x 6 board will fit in a Frac-Rac. Is 6-7 inches too deep for

> > Doepfer racks?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, xamboldt

> >> >
> >> > Or... if pots aren't PCB-mounted, what panel components should be?
> >> > MIDI Jacks? DIN? LEDs? We've already heard that DIN might not be
> >> > something everyone would want...
> >> >
> >> > Would there be room for 4 pots and MIDI I/O?
> >> >
> >> > -Chris
> >> >
> >> > On Mar 10, 2006, at 3:10 PM, xamboldt wrote:
> >> >
> >>> > > Can of worms warning!
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Should the PCB be laid out so as to allow PCB-mounted pots for
> >>> > > perhaps 4 or 6 of the controls? Different front panel

> >>> > > be allowed for by simply doing point-to-point wiring instead

> >>> > > mounting the pots. The difficulty comes in deciding which format
> >>> > > would be used to dictate the spacing of holes for the

> >>> > > pots. Both Blacet and MOTM have standards we could

> >>> > > PCB-mounted pots. The CVS' pots (as spelled out by Grant)

> >>> > > in functional units of 4, and that is the typical max vertical
> >>> > > allowance of pots on an MOTM panel. Blacet has up to 6

> >>> > > plenty of designs have fewer pots.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > I guess someone had to bring it up.... :)
> >>> > >
> >>> > > -Chris
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>>> > > >
> >>>> > > > I think we can use the Metalbox style 1900H knobs and

> >>>> > > > for Frac-Rac.
> >>>> > > > The jack spacing should accept either Switchcraft (Blacet) or
> >>>> > > > 16PJ135 (Wiard) jacks.
> >>>> > > > The 16PJ135 jacks wire up very neatly because of the

> >>>> > > > being in-line.
> >>>> > > > The knurled nuts are designed to be assembled with

> >>>> > > > that is one less tool
> >>>> > > > you need.
> >>> > >
> >> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > SPONSORED LINKS
> >
> > Music instrument stores
> >

> >

> > LyCnG4g> Electronic
> >

> >

> > Instruments
> >

> >

> > Module
> >

> > tronic&w3=Instruments&w4=Module&c=4&s=74&.sig=sPALVFXECM0JfHcmogn8UA>
> >
> >
> >
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> > * Visit your group "ComputerVoltageSources
> > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ComputerVoltageSources> " on the web.
> > *
> > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > * ComputerVoltageSources-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >

> > >
> > *
> > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
> > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

> out² (an old surfing term). This is why e.g. Whirlwind stage boxes

> which I have too much familiarity) tend to fall apart quickly ­ all the
> connectors are PCB mounted.
>

>
> [OT] Small rant of my own:
>
> I don't recall seeing ANY screwholes on any MOTM module, and I have a
> few. My Wiard Joystick on the other hand...I may have misread this
> post, and if I have I apologize. It is entirely possible to put Wiard
> modules behind an MOTM faceplate without screwholes, so the reason we
> don't see Wiard modules in MOTM format must be something else.
>
> Mike
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter"
> <grichter@> wrote:
> >
> > First, no offense to Chris for an excellent question.
> >
> > Don't talk to me about "no screw holes in the faceplate" that is why
> you don't see Wiard
> > modules in MOTM format. That idea is insulting to any designer.
> >
> > Spend your time thinking about MUSIC, forget the g*dd*mn screwholes,
> get some therapy
> > for your out of control OCD behavior, how many times do you wash
> your hands a
> > day?????????????????? (loud hissing of steam escaping from ears).
> >
> > I apologize for the rant, silly limitations really annoy me.
> >
> > There is no advantage to ANY panel mounted components being in hard
> copper on the PC
> > board.
> >
> > What if someone wants to use it for controlling dimmer packs for a
> hobby theater?
> > Then the board would be bench top mounted horizontally and the pots
> would be slide
> > pots. It could support both 0-10 volt packs and the MIDI controlled
> ones.
> >
> > What about using it to control servo laser scanners for a laserium
> light show? (those are
> > voltage outputs to current drivers)
> >
> > What if all the pots are force sensing resistors built into a
> dancers suit?
> >
> > What about if it is used for squib control to light the "Burning
> Man" on fire when
> > Interstellar Overdrive reaches the climax?
> >
> > OK, those are meant to be humorous examples, but also practical
> applications.
> >
> > I don't see an anvantage favoring any mounting position or
> potentiometer type, spacing or
> > placement. I would just use the Wiard pigtail pot assembly method.
> That is each pot,
> > switch or whatever has a dedicated 0.100 KK connector. You can
> always solder directly to
> > the PC pads and skip the connectors.
> >
> > I would use the extra space for as much perf board area as possible
> for hanging more
> > experimenters chips, sensors, high current servo drivers etc.
> >
> > We will have holes in the right spots for that MOTM metal bracket
> thingy. Can sombody
> > tell me what that spacing and hole size is?
> >
> > A 4 x 6 board will fit in a Frac-Rac. Is 6-7 inches too deep for
> MOTM and Doepfer racks?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, xamboldt <xamboldt@>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Or... if pots aren't PCB-mounted, what panel components should be?
> > > MIDI Jacks? DIN? LEDs? We've already heard that DIN might not be
> > > something everyone would want...
> > >
> > > Would there be room for 4 pots and MIDI I/O?
> > >
> > > -Chris
> > >
> > > On Mar 10, 2006, at 3:10 PM, xamboldt wrote:
> > >
> > > > Can of worms warning!
> > > >
> > > > Should the PCB be laid out so as to allow PCB-mounted pots for
> > > > perhaps 4 or 6 of the controls? Different front panel formats could
> > > > be allowed for by simply doing point-to-point wiring instead of PCB
> > > > mounting the pots. The difficulty comes in deciding which format
> > > > would be used to dictate the spacing of holes for the PCB-mounted
> > > > pots. Both Blacet and MOTM have standards we could appropriate for
> > > > PCB-mounted pots. The CVS' pots (as spelled out by Grant) are
> grouped
> > > > in functional units of 4, and that is the typical max vertical
> > > > allowance of pots on an MOTM panel. Blacet has up to 6 maximum, but
> > > > plenty of designs have fewer pots.
> > > >
> > > > I guess someone had to bring it up.... :)
> > > >
> > > > -Chris
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I think we can use the Metalbox style 1900H knobs and Alpha pots
> > > > > for Frac-Rac.
> > > > > The jack spacing should accept either Switchcraft (Blacet) or
> > > > > 16PJ135 (Wiard) jacks.
> > > > > The 16PJ135 jacks wire up very neatly because of the ground tangs
> > > > > being in-line.
> > > > > The knurled nuts are designed to be assembled with fingernails, so
> > > > > that is one less tool
> > > > > you need.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

>
> OK, I'll bite.
>
> I was told by Larry Hendry (RIP) that people would NOT buy a MOTM

> screws that went through the faceplate. Even though the mounting

> faceplate.
>
> That is why there are only 10 MOTMized Noise Rings.
>
> How do I attach a joystick to a MOTM faceplate without screws going

> faceplate? I don't trust glue and positioning would be a bitch, even

> enough.
>
> There is no way I can afford to have screw stubs spot welded to the

> like 100 times the price of 4 simple screws.
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Marsh"

> wrote:
> >
> > [OT] Small rant of my own:
> >
> > I don't recall seeing ANY screwholes on any MOTM module, and I have a
> > few. My Wiard Joystick on the other hand...I may have misread this
> > post, and if I have I apologize. It is entirely possible to put Wiard
> > modules behind an MOTM faceplate without screwholes, so the reason we
> > don't see Wiard modules in MOTM format must be something else.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter"
> > <grichter@> wrote:
> > >
> > > First, no offense to Chris for an excellent question.
> > >
> > > Don't talk to me about "no screw holes in the faceplate" that is why
> > you don't see Wiard
> > > modules in MOTM format. That idea is insulting to any designer.
> > >
> > > Spend your time thinking about MUSIC, forget the g*dd*mn screwholes,
> > get some therapy
> > > for your out of control OCD behavior, how many times do you wash
> > your hands a
> > > day?????????????????? (loud hissing of steam escaping from ears).
> > >
> > > I apologize for the rant, silly limitations really annoy me.
> > >
> > > There is no advantage to ANY panel mounted components being in hard
> > copper on the PC
> > > board.
> > >
> > > What if someone wants to use it for controlling dimmer packs for a
> > hobby theater?
> > > Then the board would be bench top mounted horizontally and the pots
> > would be slide
> > > pots. It could support both 0-10 volt packs and the MIDI controlled
> > ones.
> > >
> > > What about using it to control servo laser scanners for a laserium
> > light show? (those are
> > > voltage outputs to current drivers)
> > >
> > > What if all the pots are force sensing resistors built into a
> > dancers suit?
> > >
> > > What about if it is used for squib control to light the "Burning
> > Man" on fire when
> > > Interstellar Overdrive reaches the climax?
> > >
> > > OK, those are meant to be humorous examples, but also practical
> > applications.
> > >
> > > I don't see an anvantage favoring any mounting position or
> > potentiometer type, spacing or
> > > placement. I would just use the Wiard pigtail pot assembly method.
> > That is each pot,
> > > switch or whatever has a dedicated 0.100 KK connector. You can
> > always solder directly to
> > > the PC pads and skip the connectors.
> > >
> > > I would use the extra space for as much perf board area as possible
> > for hanging more
> > > experimenters chips, sensors, high current servo drivers etc.
> > >
> > > We will have holes in the right spots for that MOTM metal bracket
> > thingy. Can sombody
> > > tell me what that spacing and hole size is?
> > >
> > > A 4 x 6 board will fit in a Frac-Rac. Is 6-7 inches too deep for
> > MOTM and Doepfer racks?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, xamboldt <xamboldt@>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Or... if pots aren't PCB-mounted, what panel components should

> > > > MIDI Jacks? DIN? LEDs? We've already heard that DIN might not be
> > > > something everyone would want...
> > > >
> > > > Would there be room for 4 pots and MIDI I/O?
> > > >
> > > > -Chris
> > > >
> > > > On Mar 10, 2006, at 3:10 PM, xamboldt wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Can of worms warning!
> > > > >
> > > > > Should the PCB be laid out so as to allow PCB-mounted pots for
> > > > > perhaps 4 or 6 of the controls? Different front panel

> > > > > be allowed for by simply doing point-to-point wiring instead

> > > > > mounting the pots. The difficulty comes in deciding which format
> > > > > would be used to dictate the spacing of holes for the

> > > > > pots. Both Blacet and MOTM have standards we could

> > > > > PCB-mounted pots. The CVS' pots (as spelled out by Grant) are
> > grouped
> > > > > in functional units of 4, and that is the typical max vertical
> > > > > allowance of pots on an MOTM panel. Blacet has up to 6

> > > > > plenty of designs have fewer pots.
> > > > >
> > > > > I guess someone had to bring it up.... :)
> > > > >
> > > > > -Chris
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think we can use the Metalbox style 1900H knobs and

> > > > > > for Frac-Rac.
> > > > > > The jack spacing should accept either Switchcraft (Blacet) or
> > > > > > 16PJ135 (Wiard) jacks.
> > > > > > The 16PJ135 jacks wire up very neatly because of the

> > > > > > being in-line.
> > > > > > The knurled nuts are designed to be assembled with

> > > > > > that is one less tool
> > > > > > you need.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

>
> OK, I'll bite.
>
> I was told by Larry Hendry (RIP) that people would NOT buy a MOTM
> module if there were screws that went through the faceplate. Even
> though the mounting screws go through the faceplate.

>
> OK, I'll bite.
>
> I was told by Larry Hendry (RIP) that people would NOT buy a MOTM

> screws that went through the faceplate. Even though the mounting

> faceplate.
>
> That is why there are only 10 MOTMized Noise Rings.
>
> How do I attach a joystick to a MOTM faceplate without screws going

> faceplate? I don't trust glue and positioning would be a bitch, even

> enough.
>
> There is no way I can afford to have screw stubs spot welded to the

> like 100 times the price of 4 simple screws.
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Marsh"

> wrote:
> >
> > [OT] Small rant of my own:
> >
> > I don't recall seeing ANY screwholes on any MOTM module, and I have a
> > few. My Wiard Joystick on the other hand...I may have misread this
> > post, and if I have I apologize. It is entirely possible to put Wiard
> > modules behind an MOTM faceplate without screwholes, so the reason we
> > don't see Wiard modules in MOTM format must be something else.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter"
> > <grichter@> wrote:
> > >
> > > First, no offense to Chris for an excellent question.
> > >
> > > Don't talk to me about "no screw holes in the faceplate" that is why
> > you don't see Wiard
> > > modules in MOTM format. That idea is insulting to any designer.
> > >
> > > Spend your time thinking about MUSIC, forget the g*dd*mn screwholes,
> > get some therapy
> > > for your out of control OCD behavior, how many times do you wash
> > your hands a
> > > day?????????????????? (loud hissing of steam escaping from ears).
> > >
> > > I apologize for the rant, silly limitations really annoy me.
> > >
> > > There is no advantage to ANY panel mounted components being in hard
> > copper on the PC
> > > board.
> > >
> > > What if someone wants to use it for controlling dimmer packs for a
> > hobby theater?
> > > Then the board would be bench top mounted horizontally and the pots
> > would be slide
> > > pots. It could support both 0-10 volt packs and the MIDI controlled
> > ones.
> > >
> > > What about using it to control servo laser scanners for a laserium
> > light show? (those are
> > > voltage outputs to current drivers)
> > >
> > > What if all the pots are force sensing resistors built into a
> > dancers suit?
> > >
> > > What about if it is used for squib control to light the "Burning
> > Man" on fire when
> > > Interstellar Overdrive reaches the climax?
> > >
> > > OK, those are meant to be humorous examples, but also practical
> > applications.
> > >
> > > I don't see an anvantage favoring any mounting position or
> > potentiometer type, spacing or
> > > placement. I would just use the Wiard pigtail pot assembly method.
> > That is each pot,
> > > switch or whatever has a dedicated 0.100 KK connector. You can
> > always solder directly to
> > > the PC pads and skip the connectors.
> > >
> > > I would use the extra space for as much perf board area as possible
> > for hanging more
> > > experimenters chips, sensors, high current servo drivers etc.
> > >
> > > We will have holes in the right spots for that MOTM metal bracket
> > thingy. Can sombody
> > > tell me what that spacing and hole size is?
> > >
> > > A 4 x 6 board will fit in a Frac-Rac. Is 6-7 inches too deep for
> > MOTM and Doepfer racks?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, xamboldt <xamboldt@>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Or... if pots aren't PCB-mounted, what panel components should

> > > > MIDI Jacks? DIN? LEDs? We've already heard that DIN might not be
> > > > something everyone would want...
> > > >
> > > > Would there be room for 4 pots and MIDI I/O?
> > > >
> > > > -Chris
> > > >
> > > > On Mar 10, 2006, at 3:10 PM, xamboldt wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Can of worms warning!
> > > > >
> > > > > Should the PCB be laid out so as to allow PCB-mounted pots for
> > > > > perhaps 4 or 6 of the controls? Different front panel

> > > > > be allowed for by simply doing point-to-point wiring instead

> > > > > mounting the pots. The difficulty comes in deciding which format
> > > > > would be used to dictate the spacing of holes for the

> > > > > pots. Both Blacet and MOTM have standards we could

> > > > > PCB-mounted pots. The CVS' pots (as spelled out by Grant) are
> > grouped
> > > > > in functional units of 4, and that is the typical max vertical
> > > > > allowance of pots on an MOTM panel. Blacet has up to 6

> > > > > plenty of designs have fewer pots.
> > > > >
> > > > > I guess someone had to bring it up.... :)
> > > > >
> > > > > -Chris
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think we can use the Metalbox style 1900H knobs and

> > > > > > for Frac-Rac.
> > > > > > The jack spacing should accept either Switchcraft (Blacet) or
> > > > > > 16PJ135 (Wiard) jacks.
> > > > > > The 16PJ135 jacks wire up very neatly because of the

> > > > > > being in-line.
> > > > > > The knurled nuts are designed to be assembled with

> > > > > > that is one less tool
> > > > > > you need.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Grant Richter
>
> I guess we could add the option of a slew limiter for each ouput. If you
> want, populate the
> board and wire you jacks to a differnt set of ouputs. That will add 4 more
> pots and
> possibly 4 more jacks if you want both.
>
> At this point we are up to 12 knobs, 19 jacks, 6 LEDs, three 5 pin DIN
> connectors and a
> DB9 connector.
>
> With 1/4" connectors, that is like half a 19 "rack. Same with Frac-Rac, a
> very big faceplate.
> Then if you add a LCD display somewhere...
>
> Any more stuff and the faceplate will be so expensive it will be too
> expensive for students
> and beginning hobbiests.
>
> For those who want to begin laying out faceplates, the faceplate component
> list is:
>
> Jacks:
> 1 v/oct in 1-4
> Variable CV in 1-4
> CV out 1-4
> Run Pulse in
> Stop Pulse in
> Speech out jack
> Gate out jack
> Trig out jack
> Gate in jack
> Trig in jack = 19
>
> Pushbuttons:
>
> Run / Stop = 2
>
> Knobs:
>
> CV offset 1-4
> CV attenuator 1-4
> Ouput slew 1-4 = 12
>
> 5 pin DIN:
> MIDI in
> MIDI out
> DIN in or out = 3
>
> DB9 for programing interface
>
> LEDs:
>
> CV indicators 1-4
> Run / Stop LEDs = 6 total
>

> I'm not much of a midi guy, so i might want one without DIN; someone
> else might want to use the PCB to implement a dedicated quantizer or
> arpegiattor, they might sacrafice almost everthing, even the serial
> port...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Grant Richter
>
> I guess we could add the option of a slew limiter for each ouput. If you
> want, populate the
> board and wire you jacks to a differnt set of ouputs. That will add 4 more
> pots and
> possibly 4 more jacks if you want both.
>
> At this point we are up to 12 knobs, 19 jacks, 6 LEDs, three 5 pin DIN
> connectors and a
> DB9 connector.
>
> With 1/4" connectors, that is like half a 19 "rack. Same with Frac-Rac, a
> very big faceplate.
> Then if you add a LCD display somewhere...
>
> Any more stuff and the faceplate will be so expensive it will be too
> expensive for students
> and beginning hobbiests.
>
> For those who want to begin laying out faceplates, the faceplate component
> list is:
>
> Jacks:
> 1 v/oct in 1-4
> Variable CV in 1-4
> CV out 1-4
> Run Pulse in
> Stop Pulse in
> Speech out jack
> Gate out jack
> Trig out jack
> Gate in jack
> Trig in jack = 19
>
> Pushbuttons:
>
> Run / Stop = 2
>
> Knobs:
>
> CV offset 1-4
> CV attenuator 1-4
> Ouput slew 1-4 = 12
>
> 5 pin DIN:
> MIDI in
> MIDI out
> DIN in or out = 3
>
> DB9 for programing interface
>
> LEDs:
>
> CV indicators 1-4
> Run / Stop LEDs = 6 total
>
> Who is going to volunteer to do layouts in .fpd fromat?
>
> One for MOTM and one for Frac-Rac. That will give us some idea of PC board
> dimensions
> to work with.
>
> I think we can use the Metalbox style 1900H knobs and Alpha pots for Frac-
> Rac.
> The jack spacing should accept either Switchcraft (Blacet) or 16PJ135
> (Wiard) jacks.
> The 16PJ135 jacks wire up very neatly because of the ground tangs being
> in-line.
> The knurled nuts are designed to be assembled with fingernails, so that is
> one less tool
> you need.
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Chang" <gchang@...>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of djbrow54
>
> Here's my point for MIDI. Consider it to be a simple serial
> communciations for expansion. The programming overhead is nil and
> there is lots of flexibility.
>
> You need more D/A's? Connect it to a PAiA MIDI2CV. Eight more 7 bit
> DAC's instantly available. In running status mode, it only takes 2
> bytes for each DAC. You can send an update to all 8 DACs in less than
> 200 uS of program execution time. The actual serial transmission
> will take ~5 mS. Don't think 7 bits is enough? Consider them digital
> outputs. I have one program that drives twelve digital and one analog
> outputs.
>
> Have two ComputerVoltageSources? MIDI sysex would allow expansion and
> intermodule communication. Want to control some external SDI devices?
> A $3 Atmel processor can easily convert MIDI sysex messages to SPI.
> How about some external relays? My favorite is vactrols to interface
> external signal processors. I have a neat Ibanez digital delay that
> is only ~4 vactrols away from being interfaced to my PSIM. I can
> daisy chain my two displays together via MIDI sysex to have a 2x20 and
> a 2x8 display simultaneous. Delays do add up but are in the order of
> ~1 mS.
>
> Consider the possibilities of MIDI as a future expandability
> mechanism.
>

>
> Dave,
>
> You have some good points for MIDI as an expansion interface. I'm

> A 4 x 6 board will fit in a Frac-Rac. Is 6-7 inches too deep for
> MOTM and Doepfer racks?

> One of the applications I'd use quite often would be the CV-to-midi
> capability.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
> paradigmshiftbeats
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "John Loffink"
> <jloffink@...> wrote:
> >
> > Dave,
> >
> > You have some good points for MIDI as an expansion interface. I'm
> sold.
>
> One of the applications I'd use quite often would be the CV-to-midi
> capability. I had the opportunity to use an Analogue Systems RS-300
> once, which opened my mind to all sorts of uses, using CV modules as
> sources to modulate midi devices, whether hardware or software
> (think about DAW mixing or Kyma); recording analog joystick/JAG
> movements to midi CCs for playback later; using midi-compatible
> software to process CV information and spit the result back out to
> the modular; and so on.
>
> Chris Sawyer
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Henry Till
>
> On Mar 10, 2006, at 4:49 PM, Grant Richter wrote:
> > A 4 x 6 board will fit in a Frac-Rac. Is 6-7 inches too deep for
> > MOTM and Doepfer racks?
>
> Some MOTM racks only accommodate 5 or so inches (SKB pop-up racks in
> particular), and I believe many of Paul's modules are only about 5"
> deep.
>
> Perhaps if you go with the 4 x 6 board, it could be mounted in
> shallower MOTM systems with the 4" on top using the two/three-piece
> special pot and jack brackets from Stooge Industries, rather than the
> stock single piece Stooge brackets.
>
> -Henry
>

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, Henry Till <htill@...> wrote:
>
> On Mar 10, 2006, at 4:49 PM, Grant Richter wrote:
> > A 4 x 6 board will fit in a Frac-Rac. Is 6-7 inches too deep for
> > MOTM and Doepfer racks?
>
> Some MOTM racks only accommodate 5 or so inches (SKB pop-up racks in
> particular), and I believe many of Paul's modules are only about 5"
> deep.
>
> Perhaps if you go with the 4 x 6 board, it could be mounted in
> shallower MOTM systems with the 4" on top using the two/three-piece
> special pot and jack brackets from Stooge Industries, rather than the
> stock single piece Stooge brackets.
>
> -Henry
>

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "John Loffink" <jloffink@...> wrote:
>
> I was thinking more of a unique controller I'd like to interface to my
> modular, where a digital IO would be the best means for interfacing.
>
> But it sounds like the MIDI option has lots of favorable applications.
>
> John Loffink
> The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
> http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
> The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
> http://www.wavemakers-synth.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
> > paradigmshiftbeats
> >
> > --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "John Loffink"
> > <jloffink@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Dave,
> > >
> > > You have some good points for MIDI as an expansion interface. I'm
> > sold.
> >
> > One of the applications I'd use quite often would be the CV-to-midi
> > capability. I had the opportunity to use an Analogue Systems RS-300
> > once, which opened my mind to all sorts of uses, using CV modules as
> > sources to modulate midi devices, whether hardware or software
> > (think about DAW mixing or Kyma); recording analog joystick/JAG
> > movements to midi CCs for playback later; using midi-compatible
> > software to process CV information and spit the result back out to
> > the modular; and so on.
> >
> > Chris Sawyer
> >
>

> Also, I have only seen one factory MOTM system in my whole life

> didn't get to see behind the panels at that.
>

>
> I think we just plan to rotate the board.

> I think we just plan to rotate the board.
>
> For Frac-Rac, the 4 inch is the vertcal dimension, for MOTM, the
> six inch is the vertical
> dimension. This why no board mounted pots or jacks.
>

> Could you explain the different mounting brackets you mentioned or
> give a link to
> mechanical drawings?

>
> I wouldn't assume that MOTM format PCBs must be 4-5 inches in depth. A
> majority of the Blacet and CGS conversions to MOTM format won't fit

> depth, and users have designed their cabinets to accommodate depths to 8
> inches or so (MiniWave, Time Machine, etc.).
>
> John Loffink
> The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
> http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
> The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
> http://www.wavemakers-synth.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Henry

> >
> > On Mar 10, 2006, at 4:49 PM, Grant Richter wrote:
> > > A 4 x 6 board will fit in a Frac-Rac. Is 6-7 inches too deep for
> > > MOTM and Doepfer racks?
> >
> > Some MOTM racks only accommodate 5 or so inches (SKB pop-up racks in
> > particular), and I believe many of Paul's modules are only about 5"
> > deep.
> >
> > Perhaps if you go with the 4 x 6 board, it could be mounted in
> > shallower MOTM systems with the 4" on top using the two/three-piece
> > special pot and jack brackets from Stooge Industries, rather than the
> > stock single piece Stooge brackets.
> >
> > -Henry
> >
>

>
> I think we just plan to rotate the board.
>
> For Frac-Rac, the 4 inch is the vertcal dimension, for MOTM, the six

> dimension. This why no board mounted pots or jacks.
>

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, Henry Till <htill@...> wrote:
>
> On Mar 11, 2006, at 10:28 AM, Grant Richter wrote:
>
> > I think we just plan to rotate the board.
> >
> > For Frac-Rac, the 4 inch is the vertcal dimension, for MOTM, the
> > six inch is the vertical
> > dimension. This why no board mounted pots or jacks.
> >
>
> Sounds good.
>
>
> > Could you explain the different mounting brackets you mentioned or
> > give a link to
> > mechanical drawings?
>
> Here are some pictures of the MOTM Stooge Brackets:
>
> Modular Brackets:
> http://www.wiseguysynth.com/larry/brackets/modular_brackets.htm
> Perhaps Stooge Moe could give us mechanical drawings for these, as I
> don't have any.
>
> The Regular Stooge Brackets (short and long, 3 and four pot):
> http://www.wiseguysynth.com/larry/brackets/4brackets.jpg (picture)
> http://www.wiseguysynth.com/larry/brackets/bracket-draw2.jpg (mech.
> drawing)
>
> (both of these brackets are now sold through http://
> www.stoogeindustries.com, above link just for reference)
>
> So as you can see, using the modular brackets, you can put the
> mounting hole anywhere you please on the main plate, or on the jack/
> pot bracket. I think the plate is about 4 x 6" from the looks of,
> but I haven't purchased any yet, so maybe someone who has one can
> verify this? Moe?
>
> -Henry
>

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Chang" <gchang@...> wrote:
>
> "Grant Richter" <grichter@> wrote:
> >
> > I think we just plan to rotate the board.
> >
> > For Frac-Rac, the 4 inch is the vertcal dimension, for MOTM, the six
> inch is the vertical
> > dimension. This why no board mounted pots or jacks.
> >
>
> Grant,
>
> Regarding the pcb design and application, are you planning for a
> perpendicularly oriented pc (ala Blacet), or a parallel oriented pcb,
> (ala Wiard)?
>
> gary
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Grant Richter
>
> All packaging will be by the end user. I only see a PC board coming out of
> this. Hopefully a
> group buy will make them available to the public for under $50. With
> publicly published
> parts sources. You supply the solder.
>
> I'm still thinking "high school science fair project" (maybe with Dad's
> help?). It is a general
> purpose processor board with voltage I/O, you could use it to control
> Christmas tree lights
> around the house. We are just adding the tweaks so it fits perfectly with
> analog modulars.
>

>
> The Blacet mechanical scheme will work for the most mechanical formats
> (PC board 90
> degrees from panel).
>
> You can always mount the board parallel to the faceplate in a desktop
> design using longer
> standoffs to the faceplate.
>
> All packaging will be by the end user. I only see a PC board coming
> out of this. Hopefully a
> group buy will make them available to the public for under $50. With
> publicly published
> parts sources. You supply the solder.
>
> If people do layouts for Schaefer panels, it will be nice if they
> share them with the group.
>
> I'm still thinking "high school science fair project" (maybe with
> Dad's help?). It is a general
> purpose processor board with voltage I/O, you could use it to control
> Christmas tree lights
> around the house. We are just adding the tweaks so it fits perfectly
> with analog modulars.
>
> The fact that it will be very fun for ALL modular guys is a bonus.
>
> For a didactic object, the more immediate the reward, the better the
> learning potential.
> What better "reward" for learning than to hear music you caused with
> your own
> programming? And the worst punishment for failure is the music sounds
> strange, nothing
> students would need therapy for.
>
> I wish there was still an "all in one" synth chip so we could put a
> synth voice right on the
> PC board. The Speakjet is an OK substitute (pitches are not very
> accurate).
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Chang"
> <gchang@...> wrote:
> >
> > "Grant Richter" <grichter@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I think we just plan to rotate the board.
> > >
> > > For Frac-Rac, the 4 inch is the vertcal dimension, for MOTM, the
> six
> > inch is the vertical
> > > dimension. This why no board mounted pots or jacks.
> > >
> >
> > Grant,
> >
> > Regarding the pcb design and application, are you planning for a
> > perpendicularly oriented pc (ala Blacet), or a parallel oriented
> pcb,
> > (ala Wiard)?
> >
> > gary
> >
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
>
> Music instrument stores Electronic Instruments
>
> Module
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
> + Visit your group "ComputerVoltageSources" on the web.
>
> + To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> ComputerVoltageSources-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> + Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>
> So would the LCD microcontroller and drivers be placed on this PCB, or
> expected to be attached externally?
>
> John Loffink
> The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
> http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
> The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
> http://www.wavemakers-synth.com
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Grant
> Richter
> >
> > All packaging will be by the end user. I only see a PC board coming
> out of
> > this. Hopefully a
> > group buy will make them available to the public for under $50. With
> > publicly published
> > parts sources. You supply the solder.
> >
> > I'm still thinking "high school science fair project" (maybe with
> Dad's
> > help?). It is a general
> > purpose processor board with voltage I/O, you could use it to
> control
> > Christmas tree lights
> > around the house. We are just adding the tweaks so it fits perfectly
> with
> > analog modulars.
> >
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
>
> Music instrument stores Electronic Instruments
>
> Module
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
> + Visit your group "ComputerVoltageSources" on the web.
>
> + To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> ComputerVoltageSources-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> + Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> From Grant Richter:

> RE: LCD display

> 4 pins would be Ground, TXD, Reset amd +5 volts, is that correct?
> The voltage regulator is only a TO-92, don't plan on powering the LCD if
> it draws more than 25 ma.

> Two comments. First, I'd go with a 4 pin interface. I think there
> should be a ground and it would be nice to tie the resets together.
> You can do them independent but you have timing issues on power-up not
> knowing which processor is active first (although the displays take
> some time to initialize.

> Doing a little research, I found the following Lumex LCD.

> LCM-S01602DSF/C
> LCD 16x2 STN Y/G LED backlit
> $13.36 available from stock from either Mouser or Digi-Key
> Board size: 3.346 x 1.181 inches

> Width just fits within a MOTM 2U panel. Height is as little as can be
> expected for a 2 line LCD.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of harrybissell
>
> Hmmm... The LCD display chosen should probably have its own
> micro and drivers on board. The only downside is that ties you to
> a smaller number of displays.
>
> I'd suggest choosing one that is multiple sourced and has a simple
> interface so that obsolescence does not occur too early
>
> The number of lines to drive the dispay of the LCD would be pretty high
> if all
> the electronics are offboard (ie on the main PCB).
>
> H^) harry
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Loffink
>
> Dave already has most of the code needed to do this (see previous
> threads).
> I could do the secondary LCD microcontroller board, unless Dave prefers to
> do it himself.
>

> Backlight is 160 mA. Sounds like the 4 pin interface means the LCD
> microcontroller is on another board.

> > Doing a little research, I found the following Lumex LCD.
> > LCM-S01602DSF/C
> > LCD 16x2 STN Y/G LED backlit
> > $13.36 available from stock from either Mouser or Digi-Key
> > Board size: 3.346 x 1.181 inches

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of djbrow54
> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 6:38 PM
> To: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [ComputerVoltageSources] Re: LCD support
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> > Backlight is 160 mA. Sounds like the 4 pin interface means the LCD
> > microcontroller is on another board.
>
> The backlights for these LCD controllers do take a lot of power. My
> first display was a VFD which took 400 mA of +5!!! My 8x2 takes about
> 70 mA of +5. I would suspect that we wouldn't use this display at
> full 160 mA backlight. Generally, they are very bright! Some
> experimentation would be needed to determine an appropriate
> brightness. The A and K for the backlight are on separate pins which
> means we could power these from either a +5 or a +15 supply if
> desired.
>
> The LCD logic is only a couple of mA. The controller is the same.
> The MIDI spec is 5 mA. Total display/MIDI power without the backlight
> is probably around 10 mA. I think you will find, however, that the
> AtomPro28 might consume more than 25 mA. My PSIM consumes 70 mA with
> all the LEDs on. I've not measured it with the LEDs off.
>
> > > Doing a little research, I found the following Lumex LCD.
> > > LCM-S01602DSF/C
> > > LCD 16x2 STN Y/G LED backlit
> > > $13.36 available from stock from either Mouser or Digi-Key
> > > Board size: 3.346 x 1.181 inches
>
> This looks like a nice display. Crummy data sheets, though. I assume
> the Samsung controller is compatible with the Hitachi. There are some
> features built into the controller that it would be nice to know if
> are implemented in the display module. For example, what is the
> character font (I can't find it), how many programmable characters,
> etc. I assume this is a 5x7 with an 8th row for cursor. I'll keep
> looking for a complete data sheet.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

>
> Lumex Samsung controller LCD spec:
>
> http://www.lumex.com/technotes.aspx
>
>> There are some features built into the controller that it would
>> be nice to know if are implemented in the display module. For
>> example, what is the character font (I can't find it), how many
>> programmable characters, etc. I assume this is a 5x7 with an 8th
>> row for cursor.

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "djbrow54" <davebr@...> wrote:
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> > Backlight is 160 mA. Sounds like the 4 pin interface means the LCD
> > microcontroller is on another board.
>
> The backlights for these LCD controllers do take a lot of power. My
> first display was a VFD which took 400 mA of +5!!! My 8x2 takes about
> 70 mA of +5. I would suspect that we wouldn't use this display at
> full 160 mA backlight. Generally, they are very bright! Some
> experimentation would be needed to determine an appropriate
> brightness. The A and K for the backlight are on separate pins which
> means we could power these from either a +5 or a +15 supply if
> desired.
>
> The LCD logic is only a couple of mA. The controller is the same.
> The MIDI spec is 5 mA. Total display/MIDI power without the backlight
> is probably around 10 mA. I think you will find, however, that the
> AtomPro28 might consume more than 25 mA. My PSIM consumes 70 mA with
> all the LEDs on. I've not measured it with the LEDs off.
>
> > > Doing a little research, I found the following Lumex LCD.
> > > LCM-S01602DSF/C
> > > LCD 16x2 STN Y/G LED backlit
> > > $13.36 available from stock from either Mouser or Digi-Key
> > > Board size: 3.346 x 1.181 inches
>
> This looks like a nice display. Crummy data sheets, though. I assume
> the Samsung controller is compatible with the Hitachi. There are some
> features built into the controller that it would be nice to know if
> are implemented in the display module. For example, what is the
> character font (I can't find it), how many programmable characters,
> etc. I assume this is a 5x7 with an 8th row for cursor. I'll keep
> looking for a complete data sheet.
>
> Dave
>

>
> A complete MIDI interface will be on the main board.
> As I understand it, the LCD display microcontroller monitors the
> MIDI data stream looking for a SYSEX string.
>
> My thought was to simply send the 5 volt level TXD pin to the
> external LCD board. Not the current loop signal.
>
> That would eliminate any need for level shifting or an opto
> isolator on the display sub assembly.
>
> It would also allow the display to mounted in many more mechanical
> positions if seperate from the main board, and with it's own power
> supply.
>
> It would also be possible to have different size displays, or
> multiple displays each with a unique SYSEX code.
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of djbrow54
>
> A couple of thoughts. First, the LCD microcontroller should be on
> the same PCB as the display. This allows changes to support a
> variety of displays and interfaces.
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Loffink
> Subject: [ComputerVoltageSources] RE: [ComputerVoltageSources offlist] Re:
> LCD support
>

>
> Oop! Not offlist after all.
>
> No matter. If we named these things we'd be able to keep them
> straight. My suggestions, these can just be placeholders:
>
> CVS PCB = New custom PCB designed by Harry to populate the BASIC
> ATOM PRO and associated circuitry
>
> LCD Support PCB = New custom PCB to contain intermediary
> microcontroller (ATMEGA proposed by Dave) to translate
> serial/MIDI from CVS PCB to LCD Assembly parallel format.
>
> LCD Assembly = Piece as bought from Lumex/Mouser/Digi-Key.
> Includes the Samsung LSI controller.

>
> Oop! Not offlist after all.
>
> No matter. If we named these things we'd be able to keep them

> suggestions, these can just be placeholders:
>
> CVS PCB = New custom PCB designed by Harry to populate the BASIC

> and associated circuitry
> LCD Support PCB = New custom PCB to contain intermediary microcontroller
> (ATMEGA proposed by Dave) to translate serial/MIDI from CVS PCB to LCD
> Assembly parallel format.
> LCD Assembly = Piece as bought from Lumex/Mouser/Digi-Key. Includes the
> Samsung LSI controller.
>
> Everytime someone mentioned "LCD controller," I wonder whether they are
> referring to the ATMEGA or Samsung part. Let's juust call them out by
> manufacturer for clarity.
>
> John Loffink
> The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
> http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
> The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
> http://www.wavemakers-synth.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John

> > Subject: [ComputerVoltageSources] RE: [ComputerVoltageSources

> > LCD support
> >
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of djbrow54
>
> Fine. A couple of notes. The Samsung controller is compatible with
> the Hitachi controller so this means all of these parallel LCD
> Assemblies will be compatible.
>
> I would propose an ATTINY2313 for the LCD support PCB. Note that this
> PCB would contain only the following parts:
>
> ATTINY2313 20 pin DIP
> 14 pin header to connect to LCD Assembly
> 3 or 4 pin header to connect to CVS PC
> (Tx, Reset, Ground, and possibly +5)
> Input power connector for the LCD Assembly backlight
> Current limit resistor for the LCD Assembly backlight
> 8 MHz crystal and two 22 pF capacitors
> Optional 6 pin header to program the ATTINY2313 in-circuit
> Optional contrast potentiometer (my experience is to run the LCD
> at full contrast with no potentiometer)
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of djbrow54
>

> Alternatives for the +5 volt power are:
> 1) Use the CVS PCB. Power for the ATTINY2313 is 6 mA. The LCD
> Assembly selected has a separate 2 pin connector for the backlight.
> This could be powered from +15 volts with a current limit resistor or
> from +5 volts with a current limit resistor if available from the
> power supply.
>
> 2) Local +5 volt regulation for the ATTINY2313 and power the backlight
> from +15 volts with a current limit resistor.
>
> 3) Power both the ATTINY2313 and backlight from +5 volts with a
> current limit resistor if available from the power supply.
>

>
> Attiny2313 availability is limited, only Arrow and All American at

> moment. Should we go to a more common 28 pin part? Cost wouldn't

> more, maybe 60 cents or so.
>
> John Loffink
> The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
> http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
> The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
> http://www.wavemakers-synth.com

>
> Forward voltage on the backlight is 4.2 volts. It must have LEDs in

> Forward current is 160 mA.
>
> Power dissipation for backlight from +15V is (15 V - 4.2 V) * 160 mA

> Watts. Ouch! We could put a big clunky 5 Watt power resistor down,

> don't put this next to a VCO. :-)
>
> Power dissipation for backlight from +5V is (5 V - 4.2 V) * 160 mA =

> Watts. Suggest we use a half watt resistor minimum. Resistor is 0.

> 160 mA = 5 ohms.
>
> We need to account for systems without 5 volt power, so we'll need a

> or stuffing option for a 1/2 watt or so regulator and multiple power
> connector options.
>
> Seems like we should just power everything from the LCD support PCB

> volts.
>
> John Loffink
> The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
> http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
> The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
> http://www.wavemakers-synth.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of

> >
>
> > Alternatives for the +5 volt power are:
> > 1) Use the CVS PCB. Power for the ATTINY2313 is 6 mA. The LCD
> > Assembly selected has a separate 2 pin connector for the

> > This could be powered from +15 volts with a current limit resistor

> > from +5 volts with a current limit resistor if available from the
> > power supply.
> >
> > 2) Local +5 volt regulation for the ATTINY2313 and power the

> > from +15 volts with a current limit resistor.
> >
> > 3) Power both the ATTINY2313 and backlight from +5 volts with a
> > current limit resistor if available from the power supply.
> >
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Loffink
>
> We need to account for systems without 5 volt power, so we'll need a
> jumper
> or stuffing option for a 1/2 watt or so regulator and multiple power
> connector options.
>

>
> Correction. We need about 160 mA at 5 V, or 800 mW, and regulator

> specified well above that. LM341 is $0.60 from Digi-Key. TO-220

> up to 500 mA.
>
> John Loffink
> The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
> http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
> The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
> http://www.wavemakers-synth.com

>
> Attiny2313 availability is limited, only Arrow and All American at

> moment. Should we go to a more common 28 pin part? Cost wouldn't

> more, maybe 60 cents or so.
>
> John Loffink
> The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
> http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
> The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
> http://www.wavemakers-synth.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of djbrow54
>
> The Atmel web site shows it as current production.
>
> Digikey has 3500 in stock.
>
> Dave
>

>
> A couple of thoughts. First, the LCD microcontroller should be on
> the same PCB as the display. This allows changes to support a
> variety of displays and interfaces.
>
> The MIDI out signal is generated via two resistors so there's not a
> lot of circuitry involved. Monitoring the TTL signal is appropriate.
>
> There are two options here: simply monitor the MIDI out signal or
> loop it through the microcontroller.
>
> Advantages of looping it through the microcontroller is that you can
> actually filter out the display sysex messages and not send them
> out. Since they are sysex messages it shouldn't matter but you
> always have the opportunity to add or expand the protocol since you
> can filter the messages out. Right now I'm using the educational
> ID. I suppose that is OK since this is a non-commercial
> application. It doesn't really matter, though since the messages
> are never passed through to MIDI out.
>
> Disadvantages are that it adds a 1 or 2 byte delay to the message.
> Pretty minimal.
>
> One possibility would be to loop through the TTL signal at the
> connector (e.g. put a jumper on the connector). This allows MIDI to
> work without a display but when a display is connected, it filters
> out the display messages. It can still be done with a 4 pin
> connector.




>
> 6 of one, half dozen of the other ...
>
> Dave
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter"
> <grichter@> wrote:
> >
> > A complete MIDI interface will be on the main board.
> > As I understand it, the LCD display microcontroller monitors the
> > MIDI data stream looking for a SYSEX string.
> >
> > My thought was to simply send the 5 volt level TXD pin to the
> > external LCD board. Not the current loop signal.
> >
> > That would eliminate any need for level shifting or an opto
> > isolator on the display sub assembly.
> >
> > It would also allow the display to mounted in many more mechanical
> > positions if seperate from the main board, and with it's own power
> > supply.
> >
> > It would also be possible to have different size displays, or
> > multiple displays each with a unique SYSEX code.
> >
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of drmabuce
>
> Hi All (especially John, Dave, Eric & any other LCD enthusiasts)
> first off,
>
> please feel free to tell me to [insert favorite euphemism for consume
> feces and cease to exist here] because i lack the expertise and the
> time to pitch in on this suggestion in any substantive way....
>
> it's a fair cop...
>
> but here goes
>
> i've been trying to digest all the discussion about the LCD
> implementation and my (so-called) mind wandered into the question of
> using this gadget not only as a display but as part of an INPUT scheme
> for user interaction as well.
> (yes! i know i've always been sort of indifferent to the LCD before
> and so i have to wear the 'hypocrite hat' for 24 hours too!)
>
>
>
> ------------
> but considering the following two design ideas:
>
> a separate (Samsung? Hitachi?) microcontroller residing on a separate
> PCB with the LCD
>
> and
>
> a fairly flexible and open-ended interface, specifically: piggybacking
> display data traffic on MIDI sysex
> (which strikes me as cleverer every time i think about it... kudos Dave!)
> -------
>
> Is it feasible and practical to consider the addition of a few (maybe
> 5) buttons to interact with the display via cursor? (up down left
> right enter)
> and THUS transmit some data to the main CSV processor (ie program
> selection parameter select etc.) via sysex
> Now as i have already expressed my readiness to be openly ridiculed
> for broaching such a can of worms. Let me say that i have a little
> experience with the software side of interpreting 'Keyhole' interfaces
> and i realize that as a user interface, they are far from luxurious
> (ala the DX7 or the Mirage)
>
> i also realize that we'd have to "OR" into the RXD pin on the Main
> processor but that doesn't 'SEEM' to intrusive to my unschooled eye.
>
> so i'll shut up about this now
> and leave this notion to those better able to judge it's merits than
> myself
>
> a tip of the hat to all for keeping this barn-raising in motion,
> -doc
>

>
> Doc,
>
> No problem making the suggestion. A free flow of ideas is good.

> couple of considerations that I see:
>
> 1. Dave has already allocated all pins of the ATtiny2313. We'd

> larger ATMEGA device for the button inputs.
> 2. MIDI RX at the CVS board can't be easily shared, or OR'd as

> unless you have a toggle to turn external MIDI on/off or insure MIDI

> not used. So MIDI from the LCD Support PCB to the CVS PCB requires

> dedicated pin on the BASIC ATOM PRO.
> 3. Need a cursor character for button data entry, which consumes

> programmable LCD characters.
> 4. Program or parameter selection can also be done from the CVS

> so desired. Maybe one knob scrolls through functions, another

> values. This makes buttons redundant, but dedicates the knobs to

> function.
> 5. Data entry is really valuable if we have runtime Flash storage,

> apparently get with the ATOM PRO 28M.
>
> John Loffink
> The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
> http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
> The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
> http://www.wavemakers-synth.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of

> >
> > Hi All (especially John, Dave, Eric & any other LCD enthusiasts)
> > first off,
> >
> > please feel free to tell me to [insert favorite euphemism for

> > feces and cease to exist here] because i lack the expertise and

> > time to pitch in on this suggestion in any substantive way....
> >
> > it's a fair cop...
> >
> > but here goes
> >
> > i've been trying to digest all the discussion about the LCD
> > implementation and my (so-called) mind wandered into the question

> > using this gadget not only as a display but as part of an INPUT

> > for user interaction as well.
> > (yes! i know i've always been sort of indifferent to the LCD

> > and so i have to wear the 'hypocrite hat' for 24 hours too!)
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------
> > but considering the following two design ideas:
> >
> > a separate (Samsung? Hitachi?) microcontroller residing on a

> > PCB with the LCD
> >
> > and
> >
> > a fairly flexible and open-ended interface, specifically:

> > display data traffic on MIDI sysex
> > (which strikes me as cleverer every time i think about it... kudos

> > -------
> >
> > Is it feasible and practical to consider the addition of a few

> > 5) buttons to interact with the display via cursor? (up down left
> > right enter)
> > and THUS transmit some data to the main CSV processor (ie program
> > selection parameter select etc.) via sysex
> > Now as i have already expressed my readiness to be openly

> > for broaching such a can of worms. Let me say that i have a little
> > experience with the software side of interpreting 'Keyhole'

> > and i realize that as a user interface, they are far from

> > (ala the DX7 or the Mirage)
> >
> > i also realize that we'd have to "OR" into the RXD pin on the Main
> > processor but that doesn't 'SEEM' to intrusive to my unschooled

> >
> > so i'll shut up about this now
> > and leave this notion to those better able to judge it's merits

> > myself
> >
> > a tip of the hat to all for keeping this barn-raising in motion,
> > -doc
> >
>

>
> Hi All (especially John, Dave, Eric & any other LCD enthusiasts)
> first off,
>
> please feel free to tell me to [insert favorite euphemism for

> feces and cease to exist here] because i lack the expertise and the
> time to pitch in on this suggestion in any substantive way....
>
> it's a fair cop...
>
> but here goes
>
> i've been trying to digest all the discussion about the LCD
> implementation and my (so-called) mind wandered into the question of
> using this gadget not only as a display but as part of an INPUT

> for user interaction as well.
> (yes! i know i've always been sort of indifferent to the LCD before
> and so i have to wear the 'hypocrite hat' for 24 hours too!)
>
>
>
> ------------
> but considering the following two design ideas:
>
> a separate (Samsung? Hitachi?) microcontroller residing on a

> PCB with the LCD
>
> and
>
> a fairly flexible and open-ended interface, specifically:

> display data traffic on MIDI sysex
> (which strikes me as cleverer every time i think about it... kudos

> -------
>
> Is it feasible and practical to consider the addition of a few

> 5) buttons to interact with the display via cursor? (up down left
> right enter)
> and THUS transmit some data to the main CSV processor (ie program
> selection parameter select etc.) via sysex
> Now as i have already expressed my readiness to be openly ridiculed
> for broaching such a can of worms. Let me say that i have a little
> experience with the software side of interpreting 'Keyhole'

> and i realize that as a user interface, they are far from luxurious
> (ala the DX7 or the Mirage)
>
> i also realize that we'd have to "OR" into the RXD pin on the Main
> processor but that doesn't 'SEEM' to intrusive to my unschooled eye.
>
> so i'll shut up about this now
> and leave this notion to those better able to judge it's merits than
> myself
>
> a tip of the hat to all for keeping this barn-raising in motion,
> -doc
>
>
>

>>> rdrake@... 03/16/06 10:57 AM >>>

> in terms of core functionality, a full featured LCD display seems
> like icing on the cake rather than critical feature, at least to me.

> frankly, i'd be completly satisfied with a few LEDs to display a
> program number in binary, a la the miniwave... perhaps that's a
> spartan extreme, but there ya are.

> a second consideration is programming complexity & compatibilty.

> 1. Dave has already allocated all pins of the ATtiny2313. We'd need a
> larger ATMEGA device for the button inputs.

> 2. MIDI RX at the CVS board can't be easily shared, or OR'd as

> 4. Program or parameter selection can also be done from the CVS

> so desired. Maybe one knob scrolls through functions, another

> values. This makes buttons redundant, but dedicates the knobs to that
> function.

> cursor control idea (if i get desperate to build a ship-in-a-bottle i
> can always write a patch on my DX7!) i just wanted keep the issue of
> user interface active. I think some very good ideas are stirred up
> here all around!
>

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "djbrow54" <davebr@...> wrote:
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "data2action" <rdrake@
> ...> wrote:
> > in terms of core functionality, a full featured LCD display seems
> > like icing on the cake rather than critical feature, at least to me.
>
> I believe it will be fully optional.
>
> > frankly, i'd be completly satisfied with a few LEDs to display a
> > program number in binary, a la the miniwave... perhaps that's a
> > spartan extreme, but there ya are.
>
> That's how I started. Where a display really helps is setting input
> controls. For example, one program uses a control to offset a
> waveform and another control to set duty cycle. I ran this program
> without a display but it is much nicer to now know what these controls
> are actually set to. Also, I could never remember what program was
> loaded. Every time I turned on my synth, I'd have to load the program
> I wanted into the module since I couldn't remember what was there.
> Sounds simple but it is a nice feature to display the program name.
>
> > a second consideration is programming complexity & compatibilty.
>
> Couldn't be simpler. The hserial system allows strings. The
> following command sends a message to the display:
>
> hserout [$f0,$7d,"Your message goes here",$f7]
>
> Using MIDI sysex to communicate with the display, programs written for
> a display will function without modification on systems without
> displays.
>
> Dave
>

>
> I personally think that Andrew's quest for on board memory, and
> whatever ancillary hardware is necessary to do so is more important
> that to contribute real estate to provide cursor control.
>
> If it were one thing or the other, I would choose the on board memory
> over the lcd display....
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of data2action
>
>
> i guess behind this all is, the display thing seems to be presenting
> difficulties. if these are resolvable and low-impact, that'd be
> great; if it becomes a stumbling block, i'd just want to keep in
> mind: is it a critical feature, or just a nice-to-have?
>
> my $.02

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of drmabuce
> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 11:26 AM
> To: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
>
> coupled with Dave's clever suggestion of exploiting the SOFTWARE Realm to:
>
> switch the MIDI input stream into a program mode
>
> use the keyboard to select functions or data
>
> use a wheel as an "enter' key (and other functions too)
>
> augment all of the above with a little bit of user feedback on the LCD
>
> ....and we got us a pretty decent user interface without dedicated buttons
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Gary Chang
>
>
> If it were one thing or the other, I would choose the on board memory
> over the lcd display....
>

>
> I have to say again Dave, that MIDI SYSEX trick for the display is

>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of drmabuce
>
> so....
> in service of the engineers natural instinct to distinguish and
> organize, John did us all the favor of suggesting some basic nomenclature.
> to wit:
>
> CVS PCB = New custom PCB designed by Harry to populate the BASIC ATOM
> PROand associated circuitry
>
> LCD Support PCB = New custom PCB to contain intermediary crocontroller
> (ATMEGA proposed by Dave) to translate serial/MIDI from CVS PCB to LCD
> Assembly parallel format.
>
> LCD Assembly = Piece as bought from Lumex/Mouser/Digi-Key. Includes
> theSamsung LSI controller.
>
> now here's the latest status of these critters (somebody PLEASE
> correct me if i'm off track here)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Real estate on the CVS PCB will be given to:
> The BasicAtomPro
> The DACs
> The ADCs and supporting circuitry for
> the following panel features
>
> Jacks:
> 1 v/oct in 1-4
> Variable CV in 1-4
> CV out 1-4
> Run Pulse in
> Stop Pulse in
> Gate out jack
> Trig out jack
> Gate in jack
> Trig in jack
>
> Pushbuttons:
> Run / Stop
>
> Knobs:
> CV offset 1-4
> CV attenuator 1-4
>
> 5 pin DIN:
> MIDI in
> MIDI out
> DIN in or out
>
> DB9 for programing interface
>
> thus hardware support for MIDI & DIN sync will be on the CVS PCB
> My reading of the posts indicates that these features were included
> because they require very little hardware to support
>
> everything else is 'peripheral'
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> real estate on the LCD Support PCB will be used to support the LCD and
> it's associated controller
> This will be an OPTIONAL addition to the CVS PCB
>
> ------------------------------------------------------

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "John Loffink" <jloffink@...> wrote:
>
> Doc,
>
> No problem making the suggestion. A free flow of ideas is good. Here are a
> couple of considerations that I see:
>
> 1. Dave has already allocated all pins of the ATtiny2313. We'd need a
> larger ATMEGA device for the button inputs.
> 2. MIDI RX at the CVS board can't be easily shared, or OR'd as suggested,
> unless you have a toggle to turn external MIDI on/off or insure MIDI IN is
> not used. So MIDI from the LCD Support PCB to the CVS PCB requires another
> dedicated pin on the BASIC ATOM PRO.
> 3. Need a cursor character for button data entry, which consumes one of the
> programmable LCD characters.
> 4. Program or parameter selection can also be done from the CVS knobs, if
> so desired. Maybe one knob scrolls through functions, another changes the
> values. This makes buttons redundant, but dedicates the knobs to that
> function.
> 5. Data entry is really valuable if we have runtime Flash storage, which we
> apparently get with the ATOM PRO 28M.
>
> John Loffink
> The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
> http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
> The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
> http://www.wavemakers-synth.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of drmabuce
> >
> > Hi All (especially John, Dave, Eric & any other LCD enthusiasts)
> > first off,
> >
> > please feel free to tell me to [insert favorite euphemism for consume
> > feces and cease to exist here] because i lack the expertise and the
> > time to pitch in on this suggestion in any substantive way....
> >
> > it's a fair cop...
> >
> > but here goes
> >
> > i've been trying to digest all the discussion about the LCD
> > implementation and my (so-called) mind wandered into the question of
> > using this gadget not only as a display but as part of an INPUT scheme
> > for user interaction as well.
> > (yes! i know i've always been sort of indifferent to the LCD before
> > and so i have to wear the 'hypocrite hat' for 24 hours too!)
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------
> > but considering the following two design ideas:
> >
> > a separate (Samsung? Hitachi?) microcontroller residing on a separate
> > PCB with the LCD
> >
> > and
> >
> > a fairly flexible and open-ended interface, specifically: piggybacking
> > display data traffic on MIDI sysex
> > (which strikes me as cleverer every time i think about it... kudos Dave!)
> > -------
> >
> > Is it feasible and practical to consider the addition of a few (maybe
> > 5) buttons to interact with the display via cursor? (up down left
> > right enter)
> > and THUS transmit some data to the main CSV processor (ie program
> > selection parameter select etc.) via sysex
> > Now as i have already expressed my readiness to be openly ridiculed
> > for broaching such a can of worms. Let me say that i have a little
> > experience with the software side of interpreting 'Keyhole' interfaces
> > and i realize that as a user interface, they are far from luxurious
> > (ala the DX7 or the Mirage)
> >
> > i also realize that we'd have to "OR" into the RXD pin on the Main
> > processor but that doesn't 'SEEM' to intrusive to my unschooled eye.
> >
> > so i'll shut up about this now
> > and leave this notion to those better able to judge it's merits than
> > myself
> >
> > a tip of the hat to all for keeping this barn-raising in motion,
> > -doc
> >
>

>
> Works for me.
>
> When the unit is stopped, the knobs can be mapped differently than

> mode.
>