Synth-DIY Yahoo! Groups Archives

CV to ADSR attack

2009-04-21 by johnrichoux

Hello all

Would someone with an ADSR on their panels confirm something for me? When I apply a CV to any of the blue inputs, it behaves as I would expect: +CV= longer delay, decay, etc, consistent with knob direction. Except on the attack portion, where +CV= shorter attack, the opposite of the knob direction.

So, I end up setting the attack knob to a maximum, then use +CV to shorten it; conversely, I set the knob to a minimum and use -CV to lengthen it.

If that really is the intent, perhaps someone could explain the advantage to me. Does it have something to do with VC-All? Even then I would expect +CV to lengthen the entire envelope (except for the delay portion).

Thanks
jmr

Re: CV to ADSR attack

2009-04-21 by matthew carpenter

Hi John,
That's how mine works, as well. I remember Rex telling me that this is the way it has to be.
Matt

Show quoted textHide quoted text

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:57 AM, johnrichoux <jrichoux@...> wrote:

Hello all

Would someone with an ADSR on their panels confirm something for me? When I apply a CV to any of the blue inputs, it behaves as I would expect: +CV= longer delay, decay, etc, consistent with knob direction. Except on the attack portion, where +CV= shorter attack, the opposite of the knob direction.

So, I end up setting the attack knob to a maximum, then use +CV to shorten it; conversely, I set the knob to a minimum and use -CV to lengthen it.

If that really is the intent, perhaps someone could explain the advantage to me. Does it have something to do with VC-All? Even then I would expect +CV to lengthen the entire envelope (except for the delay portion).

Thanks
jmr

Re: CV to ADSR attack

2009-04-22 by Kim Hansen

same thing here -

kim

On Apr 21, 2009, at 5:14 PM, matthew carpenter wrote:

>
>
> Hi John,
> That's how mine works, as well. I remember Rex telling me that this is
> the way it has to be.
> Matt
>
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:57 AM, johnrichoux
> <jrichoux@...> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hello all
>>
>> Would someone with an ADSR on their panels confirm something for me?
>> When I apply a CV to any of the blue inputs, it behaves as I would
>> expect: +CV= longer delay, decay, etc, consistent with knob
>> direction. Except on the attack portion, where +CV= shorter attack,
>> the opposite of the knob direction.
>>
>> So, I end up setting the attack knob to a maximum, then use +CV to
>> shorten it; conversely, I set the knob to a minimum and use -CV to
>> lengthen it.
>>
>> If that really is the intent, perhaps someone could explain the
>> advantage to me. Does it have something to do with VC-All? Even then
>> I would expect +CV to lengthen the entire envelope (except for the
>> delay portion).
>>
>> Thanks
>> jmr
>>
>
>

Re: CV to ADSR attack

2009-04-22 by ty hodson

Maybe the thinking behind that design was the higher the voltage the steeper the curve, rather than voltage being related to duration?

ty

_______________
http://sublevel9.net

From: SergeModular@yahoogroups.com [mailto: SergeModular@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Kim Hansen
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 1:11 PM
To: SergeModular@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [SergeModular] CV to ADSR attack

same thing here -

kim

On Apr 21, 2009, at 5:14 PM, matthew carpenter wrote:

Hi John,
That's how mine works, as well. I remember Rex telling me that this is the way it has to be.
Matt

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:57 AM, johnrichoux < jrichoux@... > wrote:

Hello all

Would someone with an ADSR on their panels confirm something for me? When I apply a CV to any of the blue inputs, it behaves as I would expect: +CV= longer delay, decay, etc, consistent with knob direction. Except on the attack portion, where +CV= shorter attack, the opposite of the knob direction.

So, I end up setting the attack knob to a maximum, then use +CV to shorten it; conversely, I set the knob to a minimum and use -CV to lengthen it.

If that really is the intent, perhaps someone could explain the advantage to me. Does it have something to do with VC-All? Even then I would expect +CV to lengthen the entire envelope (except for the delay portion).

Thanks
jmr

Re: CV to ADSR attack

2009-04-22 by Chris Muir

On Apr 21, 2009, at 7:57 AM, johnrichoux wrote:

Show quoted textHide quoted text

> When I apply a CV to any of the blue inputs, it behaves as I would
> expect: +CV= longer delay, decay, etc, consistent with knob
> direction. Except on the attack portion, where +CV= shorter attack,
> the opposite of the knob direction.

I don't have a Serge system anymore, but I think that this is what I
would want. Think of the "velocity" of striking a bell or plucking a
string: the attack would get more pronounced (faster) with higher
velocity, while the decay would take longer because the object was
more excited.

- C

Chris Muir
cbm@...
http://www.xfade.com

Re: CV to ADSR attack

2009-04-23 by johnrichoux

Hi Matt
I appreciate the verification. If it has to be, that's OK by me. Actually, it is a marvelous little module that I am just now beginning to appreciate. The ASR makes a good companion to it - rotating values to the segments.
Thanks again
jmr

Show quoted textHide quoted text

--- In SergeModular@yahoogroups.com, matthew carpenter <matfhew.carpenfer@...> wrote:
>
> Hi John,
> That's how mine works, as well. I remember Rex telling me that this is the
> way it has to be.
> Matt
>
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:57 AM, johnrichoux <jrichoux@...>wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Hello all
> >
> > Would someone with an ADSR on their panels confirm something for me? When I
> > apply a CV to any of the blue inputs, it behaves as I would expect: +CV=
> > longer delay, decay, etc, consistent with knob direction. Except on the
> > attack portion, where +CV= shorter attack, the opposite of the knob
> > direction.
> >
> > So, I end up setting the attack knob to a maximum, then use +CV to shorten
> > it; conversely, I set the knob to a minimum and use -CV to lengthen it.
> >
> > If that really is the intent, perhaps someone could explain the advantage
> > to me. Does it have something to do with VC-All? Even then I would expect
> > +CV to lengthen the entire envelope (except for the delay portion).
> >
> > Thanks
> > jmr
> >
> >
> >
>

Re: CV to ADSR attack

2009-04-23 by matthew carpenter

You're welcome, John.
Thanks for the tip on the ASR/ADSR combination! An SQP (n stages to n segments) is a good pairing, as well.

Show quoted textHide quoted text

On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:51 AM, johnrichoux <jrichoux@...> wrote:

Hi Matt
I appreciate the verification. If it has to be, that's OK by me. Actually, it is a marvelous little module that I am just now beginning to appreciate. The ASR makes a good companion to it - rotating values to the segments.
Thanks again
jmr

--- In SergeModular@yahoogroups.com, matthew carpenter <matfhew.carpenfer@...> wrote:
>
> Hi John,
> That's how mine works, as well. I remember Rex telling me that this is the
> way it has to be.
> Matt
>
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:57 AM, johnrichoux <jrichoux@...>wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Hello all
> >
> > Would someone with an ADSR on their panels confirm something for me? When I
> > apply a CV to any of the blue inputs, it behaves as I would expect: +CV=
> > longer delay, decay, etc, consistent with knob direction. Except on the
> > attack portion, where +CV= shorter attack, the opposite of the knob
> > direction.
> >
> > So, I end up setting the attack knob to a maximum, then use +CV to shorten
> > it; conversely, I set the knob to a minimum and use -CV to lengthen it.
> >
> > If that really is the intent, perhaps someone could explain the advantage
> > to me. Does it have something to do with VC-All? Even then I would expect
> > +CV to lengthen the entire envelope (except for the delay portion).
> >
> > Thanks
> > jmr
> >
> >
> >
>