Hello all.... sorry I didnt jump into this sooner. I have noticed the
problem with the quantizer, and it did not bother me much until I was
feeding the QTKB outputs into an ASR... The delay from th quantizer can
really screw you up here. I talked to Rex about it at length and he felt
that the quantizer was not the best design and that was it's normal
behavior.
My solution was to use 2 doepfer quantizers on the side in a small
cabinet and forget the QTKB. The Doepfer, like the AS quantizer, has a
gate in and out and since you feed a gate into these quantizers, and
they then give you a gate out... you just dont have these problems.
Rex suggested that an aditional sample and hold between the qtkb and the
asr, but that would also reqire some sort of gate delay that would fire
slightly after the main clock driving the TKB to catch the notes after
they have settled from the Qtkb output. Seemed like alot to go
through... I suggested to Rex that he re-disign the quantizer and add a
gate input.... we chuckled about this for a while.....
....jp
peff2cv wrote:
problem with the quantizer, and it did not bother me much until I was
feeding the QTKB outputs into an ASR... The delay from th quantizer can
really screw you up here. I talked to Rex about it at length and he felt
that the quantizer was not the best design and that was it's normal
behavior.
My solution was to use 2 doepfer quantizers on the side in a small
cabinet and forget the QTKB. The Doepfer, like the AS quantizer, has a
gate in and out and since you feed a gate into these quantizers, and
they then give you a gate out... you just dont have these problems.
Rex suggested that an aditional sample and hold between the qtkb and the
asr, but that would also reqire some sort of gate delay that would fire
slightly after the main clock driving the TKB to catch the notes after
they have settled from the Qtkb output. Seemed like alot to go
through... I suggested to Rex that he re-disign the quantizer and add a
gate input.... we chuckled about this for a while.....
....jp
peff2cv wrote:
>Ok, folks, I have been reading the continuing quantizer thread(s) and
>decided to settle it once and for all, at least scientifically...
>
>I pulled out the oscilloscope and there IS both a delay and slew
>(portamento) effect imposed by the QTKB. I initally set the TKB up to
>alternate between min and max pot settings between stages and ran it
>with a DTG at various speeds.
>
>Results:
>
>Delay: the QTKB adds an average 2-3 millisecond delay between input
>and output.
>
>Portamento: this is nonlinear so it's hard to quantify in ms/v but I
>measured it takes ~10 ms to slew between values. The QTKB seems to
>output a new value at ~2 ms intervals so there are bigger
>"stairsteps" between TKB stages as you increase the pot values
>between 2 stages. But, there is definiately a zippering portamento
>thing going on here.
>
>That's the view from the lab. I leave the debate as to the musical
>implications up to you, the composers. I personally have no beef with
>delay, but would like to see the portamento eliminated or minimized.
>
>cheers,
>
>Peff
>
>
>