Yahoo Groups archive

SergeModular

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:13 UTC

Thread

FRSX Question

FRSX Question

2003-10-02 by vtl5c3

Last night I was perusing my Serge catalog and noticed that
there were two versions of the Frequency Shifter. The second
version (FRSX) caught my attention.

Here's what it says about the FRSX:

"The basic unit features a built-in oscillator .... Available at a
higher cost and on special request is a version which accepts
any external shifting signal. This version may be of interest to
musicians wanting to shift the sound of one instrument by
another, say the flute by a tuba....."

Does anyone know how the Carrier input is designed? Is there
a pitch to voltage converter that is used to convert an audio
signal to drive the FS? The catalog is a bit vague as to how the
module works.

Romeo

Re: FRSX Question

2003-10-02 by John Papiewski

Yo,

If you think of the FS as a souped-up ring modulator you might get a
clearer idea. Now, some ring modulators have one signal input and they
use a built-in oscillator to modulate your incoming signal. That's like
the first frequency shifter. Built-in oscillator.

But some ring modulators have two open inputs so you can modulate
anything against anything. The Serge ring modulator has two inputs.
The FRSX is like that two. It drops the internal oscillator and accepts
anything.

Frequency shifting by a sine wave is 'simple' - the output is A + B
(upshift) and A - B (downshift). If your shifting a sine wave by a sine
wave, that's simplest. 100 hz in A and 200 in b gives you 300 upshift
and 100 downshift.

Frequency shift a square wave by a sine wave, things get a little
trickier. All the harmonics get shifted by the same absolute
difference. So the more you shift the more inharmonic the overtones
become. It sounds weird. Also, downshift by enough and you get
'harmonic inversion' - the fundamental is at the high frequency, and the
overtones are fractions (not multiples) of the fundamental.

NOW - shift a square by a square. You get lots of things going on. I'm
not familiar enough with it to go into it, but there must be a lot of
frequencies flying around in there.

I don't know why it would be so much more money - it might have
something to do with level compensation.

Anybody else care to comment?

vtl5c3 wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> Last night I was perusing my Serge catalog and noticed that
> there were two versions of the Frequency Shifter. The second
> version (FRSX) caught my attention.
>
> Here's what it says about the FRSX:
>
> "The basic unit features a built-in oscillator .... Available at a
> higher cost and on special request is a version which accepts
> any external shifting signal. This version may be of interest to
> musicians wanting to shift the sound of one instrument by
> another, say the flute by a tuba....."
>
> Does anyone know how the Carrier input is designed? Is there
> a pitch to voltage converter that is used to convert an audio
> signal to drive the FS? The catalog is a bit vague as to how the
> module works.
>
> Romeo
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> SergeModular-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Keep on Patchin'!
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Re: FRSX Question

2003-10-02 by metafoetus2002

Hi,

I'll try to have a shot at it,

In a one-input frequency-shifter [FRS], the built-in signal is supplied by a built-in
sine-wave oscillator which outputs two sine waves of identical frequencies, but one of
this sine waves is 90 degrees out of phase compared to the other. Serge has such a
quadrature oscillator [QUO] as a separate module - also, the [VCFX] can be patch-
programmed to be used as such.

The free input of the [FRS] has to pass thru a phase shifting network that allows for a
phase shift of 90 degrees. This phase shifting has to constant throughout the whole
frequency range. To build such a phase shifter is AFAIK what makes a frequency
shifter (from any brand) so costly.

The [FRSX] needs two of those phase shifting networks, one for each input. It drops
the [QUO], but this seems not to make up for the money needed for the second phase
shifting network.

I don't know if the [FRSX] also needs doubling the level compensation curcuits (it
might, if this treats the input signal and not the output signal on the [FRS]).

Two questions from me to all owners and users of the [FRS] on SMOG: I could not find
any note on how low the shift frequency from the internal oscillator can go on the
[FRS] by (a) manual control and (b) voltage control.

Second one. From trying out different frequency shifters on Musikmesse and NAMM, I
found out that there two different frequency shifter designs out there -- thru-zero-
ones and not-thru-zero-ones. On a thru-zero (e.g. Modcan, Bode, Analogue
Solutions or Systems, I always confuse these two) one you can turn the shifting
frequency not only very low, to say like 0.1 Hz, but you can also make it negative. If
negative, the upshift output becomes the downshift output and vice versa. As you can
voltage control the shifting frequencies, you can voltage control if downshift and
upshift outputs exchange places. This should be useful for very interesting stereo
effects (connect upshift to left and downshift to right).

How does the Serge [FRS] fit in here? Thru--zero or not?

Thanks,
Jan-Hinnerk
Show quoted textHide quoted text

--- In SergeModular@yahoogroups.com, John Papiewski
<johnp299792@a...> wrote:
> Yo,
>
> If you think of the FS as a souped-up ring modulator you might get
a
> clearer idea. Now, some ring modulators have one signal input and
they
> use a built-in oscillator to modulate your incoming signal. That's
like
> the first frequency shifter. Built-in oscillator.
>
> But some ring modulators have two open inputs so you can modulate
> anything against anything. The Serge ring modulator has two inputs.
> The FRSX is like that two. It drops the internal oscillator and
accepts
> anything.
>
> Frequency shifting by a sine wave is 'simple' - the output is A + B
> (upshift) and A - B (downshift). If your shifting a sine wave by a
sine
> wave, that's simplest. 100 hz in A and 200 in b gives you 300
upshift
> and 100 downshift.
>
> Frequency shift a square wave by a sine wave, things get a little
> trickier. All the harmonics get shifted by the same absolute
> difference. So the more you shift the more inharmonic the
overtones
> become. It sounds weird. Also, downshift by enough and you get
> 'harmonic inversion' - the fundamental is at the high frequency,
and the
> overtones are fractions (not multiples) of the fundamental.
>
> NOW - shift a square by a square. You get lots of things going on.
I'm
> not familiar enough with it to go into it, but there must be a lot
of
> frequencies flying around in there.
>
> I don't know why it would be so much more money - it might have
> something to do with level compensation.
>
> Anybody else care to comment?
>
> vtl5c3 wrote:
> > Last night I was perusing my Serge catalog and noticed that
> > there were two versions of the Frequency Shifter. The second
> > version (FRSX) caught my attention.
> >
> > Here's what it says about the FRSX:
> >
> > "The basic unit features a built-in oscillator .... Available at
a
> > higher cost and on special request is a version which accepts
> > any external shifting signal. This version may be of interest to
> > musicians wanting to shift the sound of one instrument by
> > another, say the flute by a tuba....."
> >
> > Does anyone know how the Carrier input is designed? Is there
> > a pitch to voltage converter that is used to convert an audio
> > signal to drive the FS? The catalog is a bit vague as to how the
> > module works.
> >
> > Romeo
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > SergeModular-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > Keep on Patchin'!
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http:/
/docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >

Re: FRSX Question

2003-10-02 by sasami@hotkey.net.au

>Last night I was perusing my Serge catalog and noticed that
>there were two versions of the Frequency Shifter. The second
>version (FRSX) caught my attention.

From my understanding -

The second has no quadrature oscillator. Instead it has a second Dome filter.

Ken
_______________________________________________________________________
Ken Stone sasami@...
Modular Synth PCBs for sale <http://www.blaze.net.au/~sasami/synth/>
Australian Miniature Horses & Ponies <http://www.blaze.net.au/~sasami/>

Re: FRSX Question

2003-10-04 by vtl5c3

Thanks to all who responded. It makes sense that a second
phase shift network would be used on the FRSX.

Steve Ridley suggested I look at the schematics for Buchla's 285
Frequency Shifter for further clarity. It has both a built in thru-zero
vco and a second input for audio signals. Neat module, actually.
Also has a ring mod that cv crossfades between dry and
processed signal.

Romeo
Show quoted textHide quoted text

--- In SergeModular@yahoogroups.com, "metafoetus2002"
<jan-hinnerk.helms@t...> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'll try to have a shot at it,
>
> In a one-input frequency-shifter [FRS], the built-in signal is
supplied by a built-in
> sine-wave oscillator which outputs two sine waves of identical
frequencies, but one of
> this sine waves is 90 degrees out of phase compared to the
other. Serge has such a
> quadrature oscillator [QUO] as a separate module - also, the
[VCFX] can be patch-
> programmed to be used as such.
>
> The free input of the [FRS] has to pass thru a phase shifting
network that allows for a
> phase shift of 90 degrees. This phase shifting has to constant
throughout the whole
> frequency range. To build such a phase shifter is AFAIK what
makes a frequency
> shifter (from any brand) so costly.
>
> The [FRSX] needs two of those phase shifting networks, one
for each input. It drops
> the [QUO], but this seems not to make up for the money
needed for the second phase
> shifting network.
>
> I don't know if the [FRSX] also needs doubling the level
compensation curcuits (it
> might, if this treats the input signal and not the output signal on
the [FRS]).
>
> Two questions from me to all owners and users of the [FRS]
on SMOG: I could not find
> any note on how low the shift frequency from the internal
oscillator can go on the
> [FRS] by (a) manual control and (b) voltage control.
>
> Second one. From trying out different frequency shifters on
Musikmesse and NAMM, I
> found out that there two different frequency shifter designs out
there -- thru-zero-
> ones and not-thru-zero-ones. On a thru-zero (e.g. Modcan,
Bode, Analogue
> Solutions or Systems, I always confuse these two) one you can
turn the shifting
> frequency not only very low, to say like 0.1 Hz, but you can also
make it negative. If
> negative, the upshift output becomes the downshift output and
vice versa. As you can
> voltage control the shifting frequencies, you can voltage control
if downshift and
> upshift outputs exchange places. This should be useful for very
interesting stereo
> effects (connect upshift to left and downshift to right).
>
> How does the Serge [FRS] fit in here? Thru--zero or not?
>
> Thanks,
> Jan-Hinnerk
>
> --- In SergeModular@yahoogroups.com, John Papiewski
> <johnp299792@a...> wrote:
> > Yo,
> >
> > If you think of the FS as a souped-up ring modulator you
might get
> a
> > clearer idea. Now, some ring modulators have one signal
input and
> they
> > use a built-in oscillator to modulate your incoming signal.
That's
> like
> > the first frequency shifter. Built-in oscillator.
> >
> > But some ring modulators have two open inputs so you can
modulate
> > anything against anything. The Serge ring modulator has
two inputs.
> > The FRSX is like that two. It drops the internal oscillator and
> accepts
> > anything.
> >
> > Frequency shifting by a sine wave is 'simple' - the output is A
+ B
> > (upshift) and A - B (downshift). If your shifting a sine wave by
a
> sine
> > wave, that's simplest. 100 hz in A and 200 in b gives you 300
> upshift
> > and 100 downshift.
> >
> > Frequency shift a square wave by a sine wave, things get a
little
> > trickier. All the harmonics get shifted by the same absolute
> > difference. So the more you shift the more inharmonic the
> overtones
> > become. It sounds weird. Also, downshift by enough and
you get
> > 'harmonic inversion' - the fundamental is at the high
frequency,
> and the
> > overtones are fractions (not multiples) of the fundamental.
> >
> > NOW - shift a square by a square. You get lots of things
going on.
> I'm
> > not familiar enough with it to go into it, but there must be a lot
> of
> > frequencies flying around in there.
> >
> > I don't know why it would be so much more money - it might
have
> > something to do with level compensation.
> >
> > Anybody else care to comment?
> >
> > vtl5c3 wrote:
> > > Last night I was perusing my Serge catalog and noticed
that
> > > there were two versions of the Frequency Shifter. The
second
> > > version (FRSX) caught my attention.
> > >
> > > Here's what it says about the FRSX:
> > >
> > > "The basic unit features a built-in oscillator .... Available at
> a
> > > higher cost and on special request is a version which
accepts
> > > any external shifting signal. This version may be of interest
to
> > > musicians wanting to shift the sound of one instrument by
> > > another, say the flute by a tuba....."
> > >
> > > Does anyone know how the Carrier input is designed? Is
there
> > > a pitch to voltage converter that is used to convert an audio
> > > signal to drive the FS? The catalog is a bit vague as to how
the
> > > module works.
> > >
> > > Romeo
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > SergeModular-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > >
> > > Keep on Patchin'!
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http:/
> /docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >

Re: FRSX Question

2003-10-04 by Peter Grenader

Best of luck with the Buchla shifter as it's one of Don's most aggressively
wack schematic layouts,

There's another list I belong to made up of EAM composers and one recently
posted the question if anyone knew of anything ever published regarding the
effects of pharmaceuticals on electronic music composition in the 70's and I
recommended he try the Buchla Owner's Manual.

Didn't get ONE laugh.

Well, I thought it was funny...


P
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> Thanks to all who responded. It makes sense that a second
> phase shift network would be used on the FRSX.
>
> Steve Ridley suggested I look at the schematics for Buchla's 285
> Frequency Shifter for further clarity. It has both a built in thru-zero
> vco and a second input for audio signals. Neat module, actually.
> Also has a ring mod that cv crossfades between dry and
> processed signal.
>
> Romeo
>
> --- In SergeModular@yahoogroups.com, "metafoetus2002"
> <jan-hinnerk.helms@t...> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'll try to have a shot at it,
>>
>> In a one-input frequency-shifter [FRS], the built-in signal is
> supplied by a built-in
>> sine-wave oscillator which outputs two sine waves of identical
> frequencies, but one of
>> this sine waves is 90 degrees out of phase compared to the
> other. Serge has such a
>> quadrature oscillator [QUO] as a separate module - also, the
> [VCFX] can be patch-
>> programmed to be used as such.
>>
>> The free input of the [FRS] has to pass thru a phase shifting
> network that allows for a
>> phase shift of 90 degrees. This phase shifting has to constant
> throughout the whole
>> frequency range. To build such a phase shifter is AFAIK what
> makes a frequency
>> shifter (from any brand) so costly.
>>
>> The [FRSX] needs two of those phase shifting networks, one
> for each input. It drops
>> the [QUO], but this seems not to make up for the money
> needed for the second phase
>> shifting network.
>>
>> I don't know if the [FRSX] also needs doubling the level
> compensation curcuits (it
>> might, if this treats the input signal and not the output signal on
> the [FRS]).
>>
>> Two questions from me to all owners and users of the [FRS]
> on SMOG: I could not find
>> any note on how low the shift frequency from the internal
> oscillator can go on the
>> [FRS] by (a) manual control and (b) voltage control.
>>
>> Second one. From trying out different frequency shifters on
> Musikmesse and NAMM, I
>> found out that there two different frequency shifter designs out
> there -- thru-zero-
>> ones and not-thru-zero-ones. On a thru-zero (e.g. Modcan,
> Bode, Analogue
>> Solutions or Systems, I always confuse these two) one you can
> turn the shifting
>> frequency not only very low, to say like 0.1 Hz, but you can also
> make it negative. If
>> negative, the upshift output becomes the downshift output and
> vice versa. As you can
>> voltage control the shifting frequencies, you can voltage control
> if downshift and
>> upshift outputs exchange places. This should be useful for very
> interesting stereo
>> effects (connect upshift to left and downshift to right).
>>
>> How does the Serge [FRS] fit in here? Thru--zero or not?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jan-Hinnerk
>>
>> --- In SergeModular@yahoogroups.com, John Papiewski
>> <johnp299792@a...> wrote:
>>> Yo,
>>>
>>> If you think of the FS as a souped-up ring modulator you
> might get
>> a
>>> clearer idea. Now, some ring modulators have one signal
> input and
>> they
>>> use a built-in oscillator to modulate your incoming signal.
> That's
>> like
>>> the first frequency shifter. Built-in oscillator.
>>>
>>> But some ring modulators have two open inputs so you can
> modulate
>>> anything against anything. The Serge ring modulator has
> two inputs.
>>> The FRSX is like that two. It drops the internal oscillator and
>> accepts
>>> anything.
>>>
>>> Frequency shifting by a sine wave is 'simple' - the output is A
> + B
>>> (upshift) and A - B (downshift). If your shifting a sine wave by
> a
>> sine
>>> wave, that's simplest. 100 hz in A and 200 in b gives you 300
>> upshift
>>> and 100 downshift.
>>>
>>> Frequency shift a square wave by a sine wave, things get a
> little
>>> trickier. All the harmonics get shifted by the same absolute
>>> difference. So the more you shift the more inharmonic the
>> overtones
>>> become. It sounds weird. Also, downshift by enough and
> you get
>>> 'harmonic inversion' - the fundamental is at the high
> frequency,
>> and the
>>> overtones are fractions (not multiples) of the fundamental.
>>>
>>> NOW - shift a square by a square. You get lots of things
> going on.
>> I'm
>>> not familiar enough with it to go into it, but there must be a lot
>> of
>>> frequencies flying around in there.
>>>
>>> I don't know why it would be so much more money - it might
> have
>>> something to do with level compensation.
>>>
>>> Anybody else care to comment?
>>>
>>> vtl5c3 wrote:
>>>> Last night I was perusing my Serge catalog and noticed
> that
>>>> there were two versions of the Frequency Shifter. The
> second
>>>> version (FRSX) caught my attention.
>>>>
>>>> Here's what it says about the FRSX:
>>>>
>>>> "The basic unit features a built-in oscillator .... Available at
>> a
>>>> higher cost and on special request is a version which
> accepts
>>>> any external shifting signal. This version may be of interest
> to
>>>> musicians wanting to shift the sound of one instrument by
>>>> another, say the flute by a tuba....."
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone know how the Carrier input is designed? Is
> there
>>>> a pitch to voltage converter that is used to convert an audio
>>>> signal to drive the FS? The catalog is a bit vague as to how
> the
>>>> module works.
>>>>
>>>> Romeo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>>>> SergeModular-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>>>>
>>>> Keep on Patchin'!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http:/
>> /docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> SergeModular-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Keep on Patchin'!
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Re: FRSX Question

2003-10-04 by Scott E.

I would be interested to know where the 285 schems might be available....

Thanks, Scott

vtl5c3 wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> Thanks to all who responded. It makes sense that a second
> phase shift network would be used on the FRSX.
>
> Steve Ridley suggested I look at the schematics for Buchla's 285
> Frequency Shifter for further clarity. It has both a built in thru-zero
> vco and a second input for audio signals. Neat module, actually.
> Also has a ring mod that cv crossfades between dry and
> processed signal.
>
> Romeo

Re: FRSX Question

2003-10-06 by vtl5c3

They're not on the web... yet. I scanned in my copy and will post
them in the next couple of days. The plan is to add them to
Magnus Danielson's Buchla schematic page.

Romeo
Show quoted textHide quoted text

--- In SergeModular@yahoogroups.com, "Scott E."
<yahudinyhwh@s...> wrote:
> I would be interested to know where the 285 schems might be
available....
>
> Thanks, Scott
>
> vtl5c3 wrote:
>
> > Thanks to all who responded. It makes sense that a second
> > phase shift network would be used on the FRSX.
> >
> > Steve Ridley suggested I look at the schematics for Buchla's
285
> > Frequency Shifter for further clarity. It has both a built in
thru-zero
> > vco and a second input for audio signals. Neat module,
actually.
> > Also has a ring mod that cv crossfades between dry and
> > processed signal.
> >
> > Romeo

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.