Modular Synth Panels group photo

Yahoo Groups archive

Modular Synth Panels

Archive for ModularSynthPanels.

Index last updated: 2026-03-30 01:07 UTC

Thread

JH Polymoog Resonators

JH Polymoog Resonators

2009-12-09 by Scott Deyo

okay, should i add an extra two inputs or not to this panel? there is
a prototyping area on the PCB to easily add a mixer -- dual op-amp, 6
resistors, you're good. loads of room on the panel...

Scott Deyo
contact@...
The Bridechamber
www.bridechamber.com
Jealous Edison Record Kompany
www.jealousedison.com

Re: [ModularSynthPanels] JH Polymoog Resonators

2009-12-09 by eric f

I vote yes.

--- On Wed, 12/9/09, Scott Deyo <contact@...> wrote:

From: Scott Deyo <contact@...>
Subject: [ModularSynthPanels] JH Polymoog Resonators
To: ModularSynthPanels@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, December 9, 2009, 12:04 AM

 

okay, should i add an extra two inputs or not to this panel? there is
a prototyping area on the PCB to easily add a mixer -- dual op-amp, 6
resistors, you're good. loads of room on the panel...

Scott Deyo
contact@bridechambe r.com
The Bridechamber
www.bridechamber. com
Jealous Edison Record Kompany
www.jealousedison. com

Re: [ModularSynthPanels] JH Polymoog Resonators

2009-12-09 by Scott Juskiw

Yes. Are there also attenuators for the inputs? How many U wide will
it be?

> okay, should i add an extra two inputs or not to this panel? there is
> a prototyping area on the PCB to easily add a mixer -- dual op-amp, 6
> resistors, you're good. loads of room on the panel...

Re: [ModularSynthPanels] JH Polymoog Resonators

2009-12-09 by Scott Deyo

No attenuators. 3U.
It's the 'ills' design:

Scott Deyo
The Bridechamber
Jealous Edison Record Kompany




On Dec 9, 2009, at 11:25 AM, Scott Juskiw wrote:

Yes. Are there also attenuators for the inputs? How many U wide will 
it be?

> okay, should i add an extra two inputs or not to this panel? there is
> a prototyping area on the PCB to easily add a mixer -- dual op-amp, 6
> resistors, you're good. loads of room on the panel...


Re: JH Polymoog Resonators

2009-12-09 by wjhall11

Will and I vote yes for the 3 inputs - does that count for two votes? <g>



--- In ModularSynthPanels@yahoogroups.com, Scott Deyo <contact@...> wrote:
>
> okay, should i add an extra two inputs or not to this panel? there is
> a prototyping area on the PCB to easily add a mixer -- dual op-amp, 6
> resistors, you're good. loads of room on the panel...
>
> Scott Deyo
> contact@...
> The Bridechamber
> www.bridechamber.com
> Jealous Edison Record Kompany
> www.jealousedison.com
>

Re: JH Polymoog Resonators

2009-12-09 by wjhall11

OK - now - Jurgen's circuit has only one input, so it looks to me like, for the input to be the proper polarity, the input mixer would be followed by a unity-gain inverter, right? Still plenty of room for that on the beadboard, just a matter of couple extra resistors and using a double OpAmp (TL072) rather than a single (TL071) sound right?

Also, going back over Will's notes on the Polymoog, he intended the "LINK OUT" to be a summed output of the 3 inputs like Dave Brown's implementation (Only Dave called it "MIX" which Will found a little confusing 'cause the OUTPUT is, after all, the mix of DRY OUT and RESON OUT.)

This LINK OUT jack is there so you could link a couple Polymoogs in tandem to the same summed inputs.

I don't know if this little diagram will come out -

INPUT 1 \ / RESONATOR
INPUT 2 MIXER > INVERTER
INPUT 3 / \ LINK OUT

Bill



--- In ModularSynthPanels@yahoogroups.com, Scott Deyo <contact@...> wrote:
>
> okay, should i add an extra two inputs or not to this panel? there is
> a prototyping area on the PCB to easily add a mixer -- dual op-amp, 6
> resistors, you're good. loads of room on the panel...
>
> Scott Deyo
> contact@...
> The Bridechamber
> www.bridechamber.com
> Jealous Edison Record Kompany
> www.jealousedison.com
>

Re: JH Polymoog Resonators

2009-12-09 by wjhall11

No - the diagram didn't come out right - th lines to the RESONATOR and the LINK OUT were supposed to be coming from "INVERTER" rather than "MIXER"



--- In ModularSynthPanels@yahoogroups.com, Scott Deyo <contact@...> wrote:
>
> okay, should i add an extra two inputs or not to this panel? there is
> a prototyping area on the PCB to easily add a mixer -- dual op-amp, 6
> resistors, you're good. loads of room on the panel...
>
> Scott Deyo
> contact@...
> The Bridechamber
> www.bridechamber.com
> Jealous Edison Record Kompany
> www.jealousedison.com
>

Re: JH Polymoog Resonators

2009-12-09 by wjhall11

INPUT 1 \---------------/ RESONATOR
INPUT 2 MIXER > INVERTER
INPUT 3 /---------------\ LINK OUT



--- In ModularSynthPanels@yahoogroups.com, Scott Deyo <contact@...> wrote:
>
> okay, should i add an extra two inputs or not to this panel? there is
> a prototyping area on the PCB to easily add a mixer -- dual op-amp, 6
> resistors, you're good. loads of room on the panel...
>
> Scott Deyo
> contact@...
> The Bridechamber
> www.bridechamber.com
> Jealous Edison Record Kompany
> www.jealousedison.com
>

Re: JH Polymoog Resonators

2009-12-09 by wjhall11

Sorry for all the postings... just my fumbling about before I had my caffeine fix and through my bleary rhinovirus infected brain. Dave Brown's implementation details how he built this - including his clipping minimizer thing.

http://modularsynthesis.com/jhaible/resonator/polyres.htm

I see in Will's notes that he's planning for us to drill a hole for the LED where Dave shows it. So he must be planning to implement Dave's clever gadget.

None of this effects the panel layout.

I'll shut up now and leave it to my betters <g>




--- In ModularSynthPanels@yahoogroups.com, Scott Deyo <contact@...> wrote:
>
> okay, should i add an extra two inputs or not to this panel? there is
> a prototyping area on the PCB to easily add a mixer -- dual op-amp, 6
> resistors, you're good. loads of room on the panel...
>
> Scott Deyo
> contact@...
> The Bridechamber
> www.bridechamber.com
> Jealous Edison Record Kompany
> www.jealousedison.com
>

Re: JH Polymoog Resonators

2009-12-10 by djbrow54

Just a couple of thoughts on the multiple inputs. The resonator has a lot of gain and it it easy to drive this into clipping - which isn't necessarily bad, just something I wanted to be able to control and monitor. Having three inputs which sum is just going to produce a +/- 15 volt pk-pk input which will clip so the input to the resonator and the dry mix signals will be clipped. The resonator gain controls and output attenuators can reduce the output to +/-5 volts pk-pk but with the input clipping still present.

The circuitry of the resonator uses +5 volts as the reference so you only have about +/-9 volts of usable signal range which is lower than most modules. That's why my clipping indicator is at +/- 7.5 volts.

I added the individual input controls to be able to adjust the sum of the input levels to a reasonable range for the resonator and to avoid input clipping. I also wanted to not have to adjust the individual resonator gain controls every time I added or removed an input signal.

I'm not sure that three inputs with no attenuation controls will be that useful so this is something to ponder.

I'm able to fully follow the thread on the Link Out function. The link connector on the PCB is for three additional inputs to the output mixer, presumably to link together multiple resonators. Since the output mixer is an inverter with level restoration, these need to be fed with inverted outputs referenced to + 5 volts from other resonators, so perhaps an inverted output referenced to +5 volts would be useful for cascading. I have only one module and plenty of mixers so I wasn't too interested in adding this functionality. Or, maybe I'm missing it's function and usefulness.

I don't understand what the Link Out jack is for, unless it is the output of the input mixer. In that case, I would label it Dry Out. If so, remember the reference for the internal signals is +5 volts, so Dry out has to be restored to a ground reference.

Just some thoughts to consider. - Dave

--- In ModularSynthPanels@yahoogroups.com, "wjhall11" <wjhall@...> wrote:
>
> Sorry for all the postings... just my fumbling about before I had my caffeine fix and through my bleary rhinovirus infected brain. Dave Brown's implementation details how he built this - including his clipping minimizer thing.
>
> http://modularsynthesis.com/jhaible/resonator/polyres.htm
>
> I see in Will's notes that he's planning for us to drill a hole for the LED where Dave shows it. So he must be planning to implement Dave's clever gadget.

Re: [ModularSynthPanels] Re: JH Polymoog Resonators

2009-12-10 by Scott Juskiw

I agree with Dave on this one. I'll be building the Polymoog resonator
the same as Dave has done. It does use up a few more pots, but it's
the most flexible in terms of being able to set the levels. In fact,
I'm going to be redoing the input and output structures on my 40 band
filter bank to match what Dave has done with the Polymoog resonator:

1. input mixer with level controls to set gain into circuit
2. level controls for each of the individual frequency bands
3. mixer on the output to set the levels of both dry signal and
filtered signal

On the 3U wide big knob panel proposed by Bill & Will, there simply
isn't enough room to fit all this. I'll be using Dave's 2U wide small
knob version.

For those who want to build the big knob 3U version, I'd suggest
simply hooking up the 3 input jacks together (like a multiple) rather
than using a mixer. Assuming you're driving the resonator with modules
that have 1K output resistors, the inputs will still mix together
(passively). But they won't add together they way they would with a
mixer, and you'll have a better chance of avoiding clipping.

> Just a couple of thoughts on the multiple inputs. The resonator has
> a lot of gain and it it easy to drive this into clipping - which
> isn't necessarily bad, just something I wanted to be able to control
> and monitor. Having three inputs which sum is just going to produce
> a +/- 15 volt pk-pk input which will clip so the input to the
> resonator and the dry mix signals will be clipped. The resonator
> gain controls and output attenuators can reduce the output to +/-5
> volts pk-pk but with the input clipping still present.
>
> The circuitry of the resonator uses +5 volts as the reference so you
> only have about +/-9 volts of usable signal range which is lower
> than most modules. That's why my clipping indicator is at +/- 7.5
> volts.
>
> I added the individual input controls to be able to adjust the sum
> of the input levels to a reasonable range for the resonator and to
> avoid input clipping. I also wanted to not have to adjust the
> individual resonator gain controls every time I added or removed an
> input signal.
>
> I'm not sure that three inputs with no attenuation controls will be
> that useful so this is something to ponder.
>
> I'm able to fully follow the thread on the Link Out function. The
> link connector on the PCB is for three additional inputs to the
> output mixer, presumably to link together multiple resonators.
> Since the output mixer is an inverter with level restoration, these
> need to be fed with inverted outputs referenced to + 5 volts from
> other resonators, so perhaps an inverted output referenced to +5
> volts would be useful for cascading. I have only one module and
> plenty of mixers so I wasn't too interested in adding this
> functionality. Or, maybe I'm missing it's function and usefulness.
>
> I don't understand what the Link Out jack is for, unless it is the
> output of the input mixer. In that case, I would label it Dry Out.
> If so, remember the reference for the internal signals is +5 volts,
> so Dry out has to be restored to a ground reference.
>
> Just some thoughts to consider. - Dave
>

Re: JH Polymoog Resonators

2009-12-10 by wjhall11

Well then, stubbornly adhering to the large-knob format, so far as inputs are concerned, I suggest we big-knobbers plan on taking Scott's suggestion - specifically, just ganging the three inputs up like a multiple. In the case of inputting an external audio signal, I suppose we could put it through a mixer first - like the 830 if need to, right?

Now as for the "LINK OUTPUT" - this was intended for cascading two (or more) of the polymoogs so there would, effectively, be more "bands." I haven't a clue what the best way to do this is and the jack was stuck there in the design before the PCBs came available and we really knew what was happening.

Dave, Scott - is this jack even necessary? Would taking the output from one resonator and just sticking it into another one have the desired effect of cascading them? Maybe it would be an output of just the resonator without any "dry" mixed back in (via the DRY OUT pot). I dunno -

I suppose it depends on how the signal flows through the resonator bands... series or parallel... or something.





--- In ModularSynthPanels@yahoogroups.com, Scott Juskiw <scott@...> wrote:
>
> I agree with Dave on this one. I'll be building the Polymoog resonator
> the same as Dave has done. It does use up a few more pots, but it's
> the most flexible in terms of being able to set the levels. In fact,
> I'm going to be redoing the input and output structures on my 40 band
> filter bank to match what Dave has done with the Polymoog resonator:
>
> 1. input mixer with level controls to set gain into circuit
> 2. level controls for each of the individual frequency bands
> 3. mixer on the output to set the levels of both dry signal and
> filtered signal
>
> On the 3U wide big knob panel proposed by Bill & Will, there simply
> isn't enough room to fit all this. I'll be using Dave's 2U wide small
> knob version.
>
> For those who want to build the big knob 3U version, I'd suggest
> simply hooking up the 3 input jacks together (like a multiple) rather
> than using a mixer. Assuming you're driving the resonator with modules
> that have 1K output resistors, the inputs will still mix together
> (passively). But they won't add together they way they would with a
> mixer, and you'll have a better chance of avoiding clipping.
>
> > Just a couple of thoughts on the multiple inputs. The resonator has
> > a lot of gain and it it easy to drive this into clipping - which
> > isn't necessarily bad, just something I wanted to be able to control
> > and monitor. Having three inputs which sum is just going to produce
> > a +/- 15 volt pk-pk input which will clip so the input to the
> > resonator and the dry mix signals will be clipped. The resonator
> > gain controls and output attenuators can reduce the output to +/-5
> > volts pk-pk but with the input clipping still present.
> >
> > The circuitry of the resonator uses +5 volts as the reference so you
> > only have about +/-9 volts of usable signal range which is lower
> > than most modules. That's why my clipping indicator is at +/- 7.5
> > volts.
> >
> > I added the individual input controls to be able to adjust the sum
> > of the input levels to a reasonable range for the resonator and to
> > avoid input clipping. I also wanted to not have to adjust the
> > individual resonator gain controls every time I added or removed an
> > input signal.
> >
> > I'm not sure that three inputs with no attenuation controls will be
> > that useful so this is something to ponder.
> >
> > I'm able to fully follow the thread on the Link Out function. The
> > link connector on the PCB is for three additional inputs to the
> > output mixer, presumably to link together multiple resonators.
> > Since the output mixer is an inverter with level restoration, these
> > need to be fed with inverted outputs referenced to + 5 volts from
> > other resonators, so perhaps an inverted output referenced to +5
> > volts would be useful for cascading. I have only one module and
> > plenty of mixers so I wasn't too interested in adding this
> > functionality. Or, maybe I'm missing it's function and usefulness.
> >
> > I don't understand what the Link Out jack is for, unless it is the
> > output of the input mixer. In that case, I would label it Dry Out.
> > If so, remember the reference for the internal signals is +5 volts,
> > so Dry out has to be restored to a ground reference.
> >
> > Just some thoughts to consider. - Dave
> >
>

Re: JH Polymoog Resonators

2009-12-10 by wjhall11

Or, reading Dave's note more carefully, does this mean there should be LINK OUT and LINK IN jacks to accomplish the cascade...



--- In ModularSynthPanels@yahoogroups.com, "wjhall11" <wjhall@...> wrote:
>
> Well then, stubbornly adhering to the large-knob format, so far as inputs are concerned, I suggest we big-knobbers plan on taking Scott's suggestion - specifically, just ganging the three inputs up like a multiple. In the case of inputting an external audio signal, I suppose we could put it through a mixer first - like the 830 if need to, right?
>
> Now as for the "LINK OUTPUT" - this was intended for cascading two (or more) of the polymoogs so there would, effectively, be more "bands." I haven't a clue what the best way to do this is and the jack was stuck there in the design before the PCBs came available and we really knew what was happening.
>
> Dave, Scott - is this jack even necessary? Would taking the output from one resonator and just sticking it into another one have the desired effect of cascading them? Maybe it would be an output of just the resonator without any "dry" mixed back in (via the DRY OUT pot). I dunno -
>
> I suppose it depends on how the signal flows through the resonator bands... series or parallel... or something.
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In ModularSynthPanels@yahoogroups.com, Scott Juskiw <scott@> wrote:
> >
> > I agree with Dave on this one. I'll be building the Polymoog resonator
> > the same as Dave has done. It does use up a few more pots, but it's
> > the most flexible in terms of being able to set the levels. In fact,
> > I'm going to be redoing the input and output structures on my 40 band
> > filter bank to match what Dave has done with the Polymoog resonator:
> >
> > 1. input mixer with level controls to set gain into circuit
> > 2. level controls for each of the individual frequency bands
> > 3. mixer on the output to set the levels of both dry signal and
> > filtered signal
> >
> > On the 3U wide big knob panel proposed by Bill & Will, there simply
> > isn't enough room to fit all this. I'll be using Dave's 2U wide small
> > knob version.
> >
> > For those who want to build the big knob 3U version, I'd suggest
> > simply hooking up the 3 input jacks together (like a multiple) rather
> > than using a mixer. Assuming you're driving the resonator with modules
> > that have 1K output resistors, the inputs will still mix together
> > (passively). But they won't add together they way they would with a
> > mixer, and you'll have a better chance of avoiding clipping.
> >
> > > Just a couple of thoughts on the multiple inputs. The resonator has
> > > a lot of gain and it it easy to drive this into clipping - which
> > > isn't necessarily bad, just something I wanted to be able to control
> > > and monitor. Having three inputs which sum is just going to produce
> > > a +/- 15 volt pk-pk input which will clip so the input to the
> > > resonator and the dry mix signals will be clipped. The resonator
> > > gain controls and output attenuators can reduce the output to +/-5
> > > volts pk-pk but with the input clipping still present.
> > >
> > > The circuitry of the resonator uses +5 volts as the reference so you
> > > only have about +/-9 volts of usable signal range which is lower
> > > than most modules. That's why my clipping indicator is at +/- 7.5
> > > volts.
> > >
> > > I added the individual input controls to be able to adjust the sum
> > > of the input levels to a reasonable range for the resonator and to
> > > avoid input clipping. I also wanted to not have to adjust the
> > > individual resonator gain controls every time I added or removed an
> > > input signal.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure that three inputs with no attenuation controls will be
> > > that useful so this is something to ponder.
> > >
> > > I'm able to fully follow the thread on the Link Out function. The
> > > link connector on the PCB is for three additional inputs to the
> > > output mixer, presumably to link together multiple resonators.
> > > Since the output mixer is an inverter with level restoration, these
> > > need to be fed with inverted outputs referenced to + 5 volts from
> > > other resonators, so perhaps an inverted output referenced to +5
> > > volts would be useful for cascading. I have only one module and
> > > plenty of mixers so I wasn't too interested in adding this
> > > functionality. Or, maybe I'm missing it's function and usefulness.
> > >
> > > I don't understand what the Link Out jack is for, unless it is the
> > > output of the input mixer. In that case, I would label it Dry Out.
> > > If so, remember the reference for the internal signals is +5 volts,
> > > so Dry out has to be restored to a ground reference.
> > >
> > > Just some thoughts to consider. - Dave
> > >
> >
>

Re: [ModularSynthPanels] Re: JH Polymoog Resonators

2009-12-10 by Scott Juskiw

I really don't see why you need a LINK jack at all. None of my other
filters have LINK jacks, and I hook them up in series, parallel, one
in inside the feedback loop of another, all kinds of ways. If you are
going to simply mult the input jacks together, then there's little
need for a LINK jack at all. The three filters on each board are in
parallel. Not much use in putting them in series, except to narrow a
specific band even more. If you wanted to get 6 bands, then you'd
connect two of these modules in parallel. To link them together, you'd
simply connect all the inputs together, which is exactly what the mult
does. So in the end, if you really want three inputs on each board,
and be able to link several modules together, just patch a cord
between the IN jacks on the modules.

On 10-Dec-09, at 11:32 AM, wjhall11 wrote:

> Or, reading Dave's note more carefully, does this mean there should
> be LINK OUT and LINK IN jacks to accomplish the cascade...
>
>
>
> --- In ModularSynthPanels@yahoogroups.com, "wjhall11" <wjhall@...>
> wrote:
>>
>> Well then, stubbornly adhering to the large-knob format, so far as
>> inputs are concerned, I suggest we big-knobbers plan on taking
>> Scott's suggestion - specifically, just ganging the three inputs up
>> like a multiple. In the case of inputting an external audio
>> signal, I suppose we could put it through a mixer first - like the
>> 830 if need to, right?
>>
>> Now as for the "LINK OUTPUT" - this was intended for cascading two
>> (or more) of the polymoogs so there would, effectively, be more
>> "bands." I haven't a clue what the best way to do this is and the
>> jack was stuck there in the design before the PCBs came available
>> and we really knew what was happening.
>>
>> Dave, Scott - is this jack even necessary? Would taking the output
>> from one resonator and just sticking it into another one have the
>> desired effect of cascading them? Maybe it would be an output of
>> just the resonator without any "dry" mixed back in (via the DRY OUT
>> pot). I dunno -
>>
>> I suppose it depends on how the signal flows through the resonator
>> bands... series or parallel... or something.

Re: JH Polymoog Resonators

2009-12-11 by wjhall11

The LINK OUT jack was to have been the summed output of the 3 inputs; Post mixer>inverter pre-resonator so that the same summed inputs could be fed into a second resonator.

In an early iteration of proposed panel designs, this jack was called "MIXED OUT" or somesuch, but because the OUTPUT jack is a mixture of the input and the resonator output via the DRY OUT and RESON OUT controls, I suggested that "MIX" might be confusing and proposed
"LINK" instead. I took this term from something I saw on the PCB.

If there is to be no active mixer ie the 3 inputs are just a multiple, then I agree, the "LINK" jack (or whatever we call it) is purposeless. But if some people want to implement the module including Mr. Brown's and your, Mr. Juskiw, ideas of mixing but without attenuating pots, then having an output post-mixed-input pre-resonator might be handy.

If the jack is provided and the mixer isn't implemented, then the jack could be wired up either as a second output or as just another of the multiple inputs.

I'm neither attached to the jack's existence nor to it's name.

Shall there be a jack provided for people who want an output of the input mixer?

If so, what shall we call it?

At this moment, I'd vote for omitting it altogether because I plan to convince Dad that we should implement our two resonators without a summing mixer per Scott's advice, but with Dave Brown's cool clipping indicator - ha ha ha haaaa - evil laugh.

Will




--- In ModularSynthPanels@yahoogroups.com, Scott Juskiw <scott@...> wrote:
>
> I really don't see why you need a LINK jack at all. None of my other
> filters have LINK jacks, and I hook them up in series, parallel, one
> in inside the feedback loop of another, all kinds of ways. If you are
> going to simply mult the input jacks together, then there's little
> need for a LINK jack at all. The three filters on each board are in
> parallel. Not much use in putting them in series, except to narrow a
> specific band even more. If you wanted to get 6 bands, then you'd
> connect two of these modules in parallel. To link them together, you'd
> simply connect all the inputs together, which is exactly what the mult
> does. So in the end, if you really want three inputs on each board,
> and be able to link several modules together, just patch a cord
> between the IN jacks on the modules.
>
> On 10-Dec-09, at 11:32 AM, wjhall11 wrote:
>
> > Or, reading Dave's note more carefully, does this mean there should
> > be LINK OUT and LINK IN jacks to accomplish the cascade...
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In ModularSynthPanels@yahoogroups.com, "wjhall11" <wjhall@>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Well then, stubbornly adhering to the large-knob format, so far as
> >> inputs are concerned, I suggest we big-knobbers plan on taking
> >> Scott's suggestion - specifically, just ganging the three inputs up
> >> like a multiple. In the case of inputting an external audio
> >> signal, I suppose we could put it through a mixer first - like the
> >> 830 if need to, right?
> >>
> >> Now as for the "LINK OUTPUT" - this was intended for cascading two
> >> (or more) of the polymoogs so there would, effectively, be more
> >> "bands." I haven't a clue what the best way to do this is and the
> >> jack was stuck there in the design before the PCBs came available
> >> and we really knew what was happening.
> >>
> >> Dave, Scott - is this jack even necessary? Would taking the output
> >> from one resonator and just sticking it into another one have the
> >> desired effect of cascading them? Maybe it would be an output of
> >> just the resonator without any "dry" mixed back in (via the DRY OUT
> >> pot). I dunno -
> >>
> >> I suppose it depends on how the signal flows through the resonator
> >> bands... series or parallel... or something.
>