Doepfer

In theory maybe you're correct, but what really matters is in practice, 
right? ;)

A digital sinusoid can easily be made to have a spurious-free response 
greater than the dynamic range of any DAC I know of (and probably 
greater than the dynamic range of the analog system the signal ends up 
in). In fact with a couple neat tricks I've seen a digital sinusoid 
built with a spurious-free response in excess of 150 dB.

Nick

Monroe Eskew wrote:
> Isn't it true that in theory, analog should have purer waveforms than  
> digital?  Digitally produced waves are limited by the bit resolution,  
> so on a small scale they are step functions.  Analog oscillators may  
> produce distorted shapes but at least they are truly smooth  
> functions.  Right?
> 
> On Nov 29, 2008, at 2:57 AM, madrayken wrote:
> 
>> Only just joined this curiously tense thread.
>>
>> Is there something so fundamentally (unintended joke) annoying about
>> wanting sine waves when spending well over a thousand pounds on a
>> mono-synth?
>>
>> *I* want sine waves as pure as possible because I like using ring mod
>> which tends to sound rather nasty and noisy with anything other than
>> pure sines. I know because I've tried using things other than sine
>> waves, not because someone told me so.
>>
>> I heard the A110 wasn't a pure sine.
>> I bought an A111 and a dual cwejman instead.
>> They produce nice non-noisy sines and the ring mod produced sounds
>> good to my ears.
>> I am now happy.
>>
>> I'm happy to hear what solutions other people have found to the
>> pure-sine dilemma. I'm also happy to hear that other people don't care
>> about pure sines - that's interesting in itself, and I love hearing
>> the work-arounds.
>>
>> Can't we all move on or play nice?
>>
>> --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Monroe Eskew <monroe.eskew@...>
>> wrote:
>>> So what is the purpose of this? Isn't a slightly imperfect sine
>>> impossible to distinguish aurally? And can't you filter out any
>>> imperfections to near-silence with an LPF?
>>>
>>> On Nov 28, 2008, at 10:02 AM, laryn91 wrote:
>>>
>>>> My ZO starts to distort at lower freqs (looks like a square with
>>>> rounded corners). So it's a
>>>> sine for only part of its range.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not so much interested about whose *distorted* sine wave  
>> sounds
>>>> best, but who's sine
>>>> output actually has no audible harmonic distortion (i.e  
>> fundamental
>>>> only).
>>>>
>>>> --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Bakis Sirros
>>>> <synth_freak_2000@> wrote:
>>>>> or maybe Cyndustries Zeroscillator...i think that should also  
>> have
>>>> a very good sinewave.
>>>>> that said, i also really like a lot the sine of the A111's (i  
>> use
>>>> them all the time!) and the
>>>> sine of the AFG (regarding Euro).
>>>>>
>>>>> Bakis Sirros - Parallel Worlds / Interconnected / Memory Geist
>>>>> [Doepfer_a100] group owner
>>>>> www. parallel - worlds - music. com
>>>>> www. myspace. com/ parallelworldsmusic
>>>>> www. myspace. com/ interconnectedmusic
>>>>> www. myspace. com/ memorygeist
>>>>> www. DiN. org. uk
>>>>> www. musicamaximamagnetica. com
>>>>> www. shimarecords. co. uk
>>>>> www. rubberrecords. gr
>>>>> Athens - Greece
>>>>>
>>>>> --- On Fri, 11/28/08, laryn91 <caymus91@> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> From: laryn91 <caymus91@>
>>>>> Subject: [Doepfer_a100] Re: starting a modular - Z3000 waveform
>>>> quality?
>>>>> To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
>>>>> Date: Friday, November 28, 2008, 7:17 PM
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I originally asked if anybody sold a VCO with undistorted sine
>>>> outputs. In summary here
>>>>> are the replies I got:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1 - Manufactures claim they can spec any wave with rounded peaks
>>>> as "Sine". Even if
>>>> you
>>>>> can clearly hear even harmonic distortion - any roundish looking
>>>> shape is a close
>>>> enough
>>>>> to be called a Sine.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2 - Analog vs. Digital religion states that analog must always
>>>> remain imprecise because
>>>>> that is its character. We don't want a clean analog wave with no
>>>> added harmonics in our
>>>>> system because that would make it digital.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3 - Finally the topic police posted their overall disapproval of
>>>> this discussion. Even
>>>>> banning members was suggested!
>>>>>
>>>>> So I learned if you want a real sine wave (as defined by  
>> Fourier),
>>>> get Plan-B Model 15...
>>>>> --- In Doepfer_a100@ yahoogroups. com, york luethje <ybl@>  
>> wrote:
>>>>>> Why ban people? I found the debate lively at first, although  
>> it
>>>> later turned somewhat
>>>>> obnoxious. Dieter Doepfer has given an excellent reply and I  
>> think
>>>> matters should rest
>>>>> there.
>>>>>> York
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ____________ _________ _________ __
>>>>>> From: kovski774 <kovski@>
>>>>>> To: Doepfer_a100@ yahoogroups. com
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 6:30:55 AM
>>>>>> Subject: [Doepfer_a100] Re: starting a modular - Z3000  
>> waveform
>>>> quality?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> or perhaps we can just ban argitoth? the guy's a trainwreck,
>>>> spoils
>>>>>> every message board he signs up to with inane opinions  
>> presented
>>>> as
>>>>>> fact and a TOTAL lack of self awareness.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --- In Doepfer_a100@ yahoogroups. com, Bakis Sirros
>>>>>> <synth_freak_ 2000@> wrote:
>>>>>>> yes, good idea. i can then NOT join that group...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bakis Sirros - Parallel Worlds / Interconnected / Memory  
>> Geist
>>>>>>> [Doepfer_a100] group owner
>>>>>>> www. parallel - worlds - music. com
>>>>>>> www. myspace. com/ parallelworldsmusic
>>>>>>> www. myspace. com/ interconnectedmusic
>>>>>>> www. myspace. com/ memorygeist
>>>>>>> www. DiN. org. uk
>>>>>>> www. musicamaximamagneti ca. com
>>>>>>> www. shimarecords. co. uk
>>>>>>> www. rubberrecords. gr
>>>>>>> Athens - Greece
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --- On Tue, 11/25/08, Frequency Divider <freq.div@ .> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: Frequency Divider <freq.div@ .>
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Doepfer_a100] Re: starting a modular - Z3000
>>>> waveform
>>>>>> quality?
>>>>>>> To: Doepfer_a100@ yahoogroups. com
>>>>>>> Date: Tuesday, November 25, 2008, 9:31 PM
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i would like to suggest the creation of a seperate list or  
>> yahoo
>>>>>> group
>>>>>>> for any future sine wave purity discussions. you could  
>> even join
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> alternate tunings list for obsessive talk about tuning the  
>> vco
>>>> in
>>>>>> cents
>>>>>>> and fractions of cents
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Argitoth schreef:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> btw, here's the Tip Top Audio VCO waveform test:
>>>>>>>> http://www.muffwigg ler.com/forum/ viewtopic. php?t=2158
>>>>>>>> <http://www.muffwigg ler.com/forum/ viewtopic. php?t=2158>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is it just me or does Analogue Systems VCO produce better
>>>>>> traingles and
>>>>>>>> sines?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks James,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Laryn91, I just recorded my synth using the filter as a
>>>>>> waveshaper.
>>>>>>>> Good tracking is not needed, you just have to patch a 1v/ 
>> oct
>>>>>> signal
>>>>>>>> into the filter's VC, but that VC needs an attenuator. You
>>>> don't
>>>>>> want
>>>>>>>> to give it full VC. Here's the recording:
>>>>>>>> http://www.elanhick ler.com/misc/ filter-waveshapi ng- 
>> test.wav
>>>>>>>> <http://www.elanhick ler.com/misc/ filter-waveshapi
>> ng-test.wav
>>>>>>>> 1. Raw sound without filtering.
>>>>>>>> 2. With filtering (notice how you can't hear low notes,  
>> that's
>>>>>> how it
>>>>>>>> should be with sine waves, however the problem is that low
>>>> notes
>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>> have small peaks)
>>>>>>>> 3. With filtering used as a modulator (the lesser peaks  
>> means
>>>>>> it's not
>>>>>>>> good as a modulator, not enough volume anymore)
>>>>>>>> 4. Without filtering used as a pitch modulator (this is  
>> how
>>>> the
>>>>>>>> modulation should sound)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hmm... Its anyone's guess if a filter is really worth  
>> using
>>>> as a
>>>>>> waveshaper.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ------------ --------- --------- --------- ---------
>>>> --------- -
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>>>>>> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg. com
>>>>>>>> Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.10/1810 - Release
>>>> Date:
>>>>>> 11/24/2008 2:36 PM
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
>