Yahoo Groups archive
Thread
2006-02-25 by Richard Brewster
I've discovered my ZO is a little bit off on the 1V/Oct tracking. It is more apparent at lower frequencies. It would be handy if the manual pointed out the location of the 1V/Oct trimpot. I haven't tried looking for it yet, but I will. -Richard Brewster http://www.pugix.com
2006-02-25 by Cynthia Webster
Hi Richard! First, please be quite certain that it is the ZO and not rather that another oscillator (or keyboard) in your system being slightly off... The Zeroscillator 1volt/octave trimmer is located on the top board where the power plugs in. If you locate the logo saying Cynthia CYN109-C and rotate the ZO so that this logo is reading right side up, then the trimmer is the first one to the left, (right after the Tempco). It is a multi-turm trimmer laying flat. The other two trimmers next to it are for shaping the sine wave. We also have a precision Volt to the Octave Calibration Gadget in the works as a new product which should help tune-up all of the oscillators and keyboards in any system. We're planning a revision to the manual soon to include more infoon the power connector, and the trimmers etc, but we've been way busy building Zeroscillators night & day instead! Best Wishes! Cynthia http://www.cyndustries.com/ Richard Brewster wrote:
> I've discovered my ZO is a little bit off on the 1V/Oct tracking. It is > more apparent at lower frequencies. It would be handy if the manual > pointed out the location of the 1V/Oct trimpot. I haven't tried looking > for it yet, but I will. > > -Richard Brewster > > http://www.pugix.com > > > > > SPONSORED LINKS > Electronic instrument > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Electronic+instrument&w1=Electronic+instrument&w2=Electronic+exchange&w3=Electronic&w4=Instruments&c=4&s=85&.sig=pU0yASxt45GuhHnHMhKzxQ> > Electronic exchange > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Electronic+exchange&w1=Electronic+instrument&w2=Electronic+exchange&w3=Electronic&w4=Instruments&c=4&s=85&.sig=_ZyrI5bys0rl9YwaQFZV_Q> > Electronic > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Electronic&w1=Electronic+instrument&w2=Electronic+exchange&w3=Electronic&w4=Instruments&c=4&s=85&.sig=QWgKY7VdYqyLzedqDV0ROg> > > Instruments > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Instruments&w1=Electronic+instrument&w2=Electronic+exchange&w3=Electronic&w4=Instruments&c=4&s=85&.sig=OxZqy91UcXxO4HG76_5ziA> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > * Visit your group "The_Cyndustries_List > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/The_Cyndustries_List>" on the web. > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > The_Cyndustries_List-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > <mailto:The_Cyndustries_List-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >
2006-02-27 by Richard Brewster
Thanks, Cynthia. I found the trimpot easily. I ended up with a setting close to the original factory setting. But I was not able to fix a problem of the ZO tracking sharp in the lower octaves of the high range. I started down this calibration road because I noticed that the ZO and the MOTM-300 being used as the FM source in the starter ZO patch were not tracking each other well. The beats were quite noticable. I spent a couple of hours taking measurements, after setting the 1V/oct trimpot. Here's what I found. I measured with a digital voltmeter and a digital frequency counter. For comparison I performed the same tests on the MOTM-300 VCO. The results were all obtained by the same method and instruments, using the same power supply. I created a 1V source by a mixer with bias (my own mixer-comparator) and measured for 1V at the 1V/oct input jack. For each reading I dialed up a frequency, applied 1 volt and recorded the new frequency, which ideally is double for the next octave. For the ZO I did this in all four combinations of High/Low Bias and High/Mid range. I only measured what I could dial up that started in the audio range. Each number pair below represents the HZ value before and after, so 30/60 means 30HZ/60HZ. Low Bias/Mid Range 30/60 - right on 60/119.8 Low Bias/High Range 30/66 60/123.2 120/241.5 240/480 - right on 480/957 High Bias/Low Range 30/60.2 60/120 - right on 120/239.7 240/478.4 High Bias/High Range 30/66 60/124 120/243 240/482 480/960 - right on 960/1916 1920/3825 MOTM-300 30/60 - right on 60/120 - right on 120/240 - right on 240/480 - right on 480/960 - right on 960/1918 1920/3834 The ZO tracking isn't bad, but it isn't great either. The ZO starts out on the low end tracking more than one octave per volt (sharp), passes the sweet spot and starts going flat gradually. By contrast the MOTM-300 tracks perfectly over about six octaves and then also start going a little flat. Now this flatness on the high end may be by design, due to psycho-acoustic effects, I seem to recall. I'm not a music VCO expert. But sharpness on the low end isn't good. For my ZO the tracking is accurate over at best about three octaves. The lower octaves track better in the low range and the higher octaves track better in the high range. This was a useful finding. Of course I tested only my own ZO, so I can't say whether this is the general character of a ZO or not. Still, I would be interested to hear from other ZO owners whether they are able to replicate my findings. -Richard Brewster http://www.pugix.com Cynthia Webster wrote:
>Hi Richard! > >First, please be quite certain that it is the ZO and not rather >that another oscillator (or keyboard) in your system being slightly off... > >The Zeroscillator 1volt/octave trimmer is located on the top >board where the power plugs in. If you locate the logo >saying Cynthia CYN109-C and rotate the ZO so that this logo is >reading right side up, then the trimmer is the first one to the left, >(right after the Tempco). It is a multi-turm trimmer laying flat. > >The other two trimmers next to it are for shaping the sine wave. > >We also have a precision Volt to the Octave Calibration Gadget >in the works as a new product which should help tune-up all of >the oscillators and keyboards in any system. > >We're planning a revision to the manual soon to include more >infoon the power connector, and the trimmers etc, but we've been >way busy building Zeroscillators night & day instead! > >Best Wishes! > > >Cynthia > >http://www.cyndustries.com/ > > >Richard Brewster wrote: > > > >>I've discovered my ZO is a little bit off on the 1V/Oct tracking. It is >>more apparent at lower frequencies. It would be handy if the manual >>pointed out the location of the 1V/Oct trimpot. I haven't tried looking >>for it yet, but I will. >> >>-Richard Brewster >> >>http://www.pugix.com >> >> >>
2006-02-27 by John Loffink
Richard, For your testing, what is the output impedance of your Mixer-Comparator? Unless it is the range of ~100 ohm or less, it may cause some of the error you are seeing. An MOTM 820 VC Lag has a properly designed output for accurate 1V/oct tracking. You may want to put your voltage source through that for your measurements. For any broad tracking between ZO and other VCOs, I am thinking you may need to use a soft sync function between them. No matter how accurate the VCOs, there will be differences in beating through the audio range. Because one VCO is used as a modulator, the beating may sound more prominent than two VCOS that are simply mixed in parallel. John Loffink The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site http://www.wavemakers-synth.com
> -----Original Message----- > From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard > Brewster > Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 6:27 PM > To: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [The_Cyndustries_List] ZO 1V/Octave calibration > > Thanks, Cynthia. I found the trimpot easily. > > I ended up with a setting close to the original factory setting. But I > was not able to fix a problem of the ZO tracking sharp in the lower > octaves of the high range. I started down this calibration road because > I noticed that the ZO and the MOTM-300 being used as the FM source in > the starter ZO patch were not tracking each other well. The beats were > quite noticable. I spent a couple of hours taking measurements, after > setting the 1V/oct trimpot. Here's what I found. > > I measured with a digital voltmeter and a digital frequency counter. > For comparison I performed the same tests on the MOTM-300 VCO. The > results were all obtained by the same method and instruments, using the > same power supply. I created a 1V source by a mixer with bias (my own > mixer-comparator) and measured for 1V at the 1V/oct input jack. For > each reading I dialed up a frequency, applied 1 volt and recorded the > new frequency, which ideally is double for the next octave. For the ZO > I did this in all four combinations of High/Low Bias and High/Mid > range. I only measured what I could dial up that started in the audio > range. Each number pair below represents the HZ value before and after, > so 30/60 means 30HZ/60HZ. > > Low Bias/Mid Range > 30/60 - right on > 60/119.8 > > Low Bias/High Range > 30/66 > 60/123.2 > 120/241.5 > 240/480 - right on > 480/957 > > High Bias/Low Range > 30/60.2 > 60/120 - right on > 120/239.7 > 240/478.4 > > High Bias/High Range > 30/66 > 60/124 > 120/243 > 240/482 > 480/960 - right on > 960/1916 > 1920/3825 > > MOTM-300 > 30/60 - right on > 60/120 - right on > 120/240 - right on > 240/480 - right on > 480/960 - right on > 960/1918 > 1920/3834 > > The ZO tracking isn't bad, but it isn't great either. The ZO starts out > on the low end tracking more than one octave per volt (sharp), passes > the sweet spot and starts going flat gradually. By contrast the > MOTM-300 tracks perfectly over about six octaves and then also start > going a little flat. Now this flatness on the high end may be by > design, due to psycho-acoustic effects, I seem to recall. I'm not a > music VCO expert. But sharpness on the low end isn't good. > > For my ZO the tracking is accurate over at best about three octaves. > The lower octaves track better in the low range and the higher octaves > track better in the high range. This was a useful finding. Of course I > tested only my own ZO, so I can't say whether this is the general > character of a ZO or not. Still, I would be interested to hear from > other ZO owners whether they are able to replicate my findings. > > -Richard Brewster > > http://www.pugix.com > > > > > >
2006-02-27 by Richard Brewster
My testing method isn't a problem. The output impedance of the source doesn't matter for the measurements I did. I adjusted to get 1.000 volt, as measured at the 1V/oct input. (Measured at the output pin of the op amp in my mixer, the voltage would be 1.010 volts, because of the 1K/100K divider formed between the mixer output and the 1V/oct input on the ZO.) Tracking two oscillators isn't the main point here. It's the irregularity of the response of a single VCO over several octaves. If something was amiss with my test method, it would have shown up on the MOTM-300 too. -Richard John Loffink wrote:
>Richard, > >For your testing, what is the output impedance of your Mixer-Comparator? >Unless it is the range of ~100 ohm or less, it may cause some of the error >you are seeing. > >An MOTM 820 VC Lag has a properly designed output for accurate 1V/oct >tracking. You may want to put your voltage source through that for your >measurements. > >For any broad tracking between ZO and other VCOs, I am thinking you may need >to use a soft sync function between them. No matter how accurate the VCOs, >there will be differences in beating through the audio range. Because one >VCO is used as a modulator, the beating may sound more prominent than two >VCOS that are simply mixed in parallel. > >John Loffink >The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site >http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com >The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site >http://www.wavemakers-synth.com > > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com >>[mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard >>Brewster >>Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 6:27 PM >>To: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com >>Subject: Re: [The_Cyndustries_List] ZO 1V/Octave calibration >> >>Thanks, Cynthia. I found the trimpot easily. >> >>I ended up with a setting close to the original factory setting. But I >>was not able to fix a problem of the ZO tracking sharp in the lower >>octaves of the high range. I started down this calibration road because >>I noticed that the ZO and the MOTM-300 being used as the FM source in >>the starter ZO patch were not tracking each other well. The beats were >>quite noticable. I spent a couple of hours taking measurements, after >>setting the 1V/oct trimpot. Here's what I found. >> >>I measured with a digital voltmeter and a digital frequency counter. >>For comparison I performed the same tests on the MOTM-300 VCO. The >>results were all obtained by the same method and instruments, using the >>same power supply. I created a 1V source by a mixer with bias (my own >>mixer-comparator) and measured for 1V at the 1V/oct input jack. For >>each reading I dialed up a frequency, applied 1 volt and recorded the >>new frequency, which ideally is double for the next octave. For the ZO >>I did this in all four combinations of High/Low Bias and High/Mid >>range. I only measured what I could dial up that started in the audio >>range. Each number pair below represents the HZ value before and after, >>so 30/60 means 30HZ/60HZ. >> >>Low Bias/Mid Range >>30/60 - right on >>60/119.8 >> >>Low Bias/High Range >>30/66 >>60/123.2 >>120/241.5 >>240/480 - right on >>480/957 >> >>High Bias/Low Range >>30/60.2 >>60/120 - right on >>120/239.7 >>240/478.4 >> >>High Bias/High Range >>30/66 >>60/124 >>120/243 >>240/482 >>480/960 - right on >>960/1916 >>1920/3825 >> >>MOTM-300 >>30/60 - right on >>60/120 - right on >>120/240 - right on >>240/480 - right on >>480/960 - right on >>960/1918 >>1920/3834 >> >>The ZO tracking isn't bad, but it isn't great either. The ZO starts out >>on the low end tracking more than one octave per volt (sharp), passes >>the sweet spot and starts going flat gradually. By contrast the >>MOTM-300 tracks perfectly over about six octaves and then also start >>going a little flat. Now this flatness on the high end may be by >>design, due to psycho-acoustic effects, I seem to recall. I'm not a >>music VCO expert. But sharpness on the low end isn't good. >> >>For my ZO the tracking is accurate over at best about three octaves. >>The lower octaves track better in the low range and the higher octaves >>track better in the high range. This was a useful finding. Of course I >>tested only my own ZO, so I can't say whether this is the general >>character of a ZO or not. Still, I would be interested to hear from >>other ZO owners whether they are able to replicate my findings. >> >>-Richard Brewster >> >>http://www.pugix.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > >
2006-02-27 by coyoteous
What is the quoted and/or typical tracking accuracy for the zeroscillator? I assumed it would be five octaves or better. Also, does it use an internal precision voltage reference or does its tuning vary with the power supply voltages? I was just about to pop for one of these before the price increase. Barry --- In The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com, Richard Brewster < pugix@...> wrote: > > My testing method isn't a problem. The output impedance of the source > doesn't matter for the measurements I did. I adjusted to get 1.000 > volt, as measured at the 1V/oct input. (Measured at the output pin of > the op amp in my mixer, the voltage would be 1.010 volts, because of the > 1K/100K divider formed between the mixer output and the 1V/oct input on > the ZO.) Tracking two oscillators isn't the main point here. It's the > irregularity of the response of a single VCO over several octaves. If > something was amiss with my test method, it would have shown up on the > MOTM-300 too. > > -Richard > > John Loffink wrote: > > >Richard, > > > >For your testing, what is the output impedance of your Mixer-Comparator? > >Unless it is the range of ~100 ohm or less, it may cause some of the error > >you are seeing. > > > >An MOTM 820 VC Lag has a properly designed output for accurate 1V/oct > >tracking. You may want to put your voltage source through that for your > >measurements. > > > >For any broad tracking between ZO and other VCOs, I am thinking you may need > >to use a soft sync function between them. No matter how accurate the VCOs, > >there will be differences in beating through the audio range. Because one > >VCO is used as a modulator, the beating may sound more prominent than two
> >VCOS that are simply mixed in parallel. > > > >John Loffink > >The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site > >http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com > >The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site > >http://www.wavemakers-synth.com > > > > > > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > >>[mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard > >>Brewster > >>Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 6:27 PM > >>To: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > >>Subject: Re: [The_Cyndustries_List] ZO 1V/Octave calibration > >> > >>Thanks, Cynthia. I found the trimpot easily. > >> > >>I ended up with a setting close to the original factory setting. But I > >>was not able to fix a problem of the ZO tracking sharp in the lower > >>octaves of the high range. I started down this calibration road because > >>I noticed that the ZO and the MOTM-300 being used as the FM source in > >>the starter ZO patch were not tracking each other well. The beats were > >>quite noticable. I spent a couple of hours taking measurements, after > >>setting the 1V/oct trimpot. Here's what I found. > >> > >>I measured with a digital voltmeter and a digital frequency counter. > >>For comparison I performed the same tests on the MOTM-300 VCO. The > >>results were all obtained by the same method and instruments, using the > >>same power supply. I created a 1V source by a mixer with bias (my own > >>mixer-comparator) and measured for 1V at the 1V/oct input jack. For > >>each reading I dialed up a frequency, applied 1 volt and recorded the > >>new frequency, which ideally is double for the next octave. For the ZO > >>I did this in all four combinations of High/Low Bias and High/Mid > >>range. I only measured what I could dial up that started in the audio > >>range. Each number pair below represents the HZ value before and after, > >>so 30/60 means 30HZ/60HZ. > >> > >>Low Bias/Mid Range > >>30/60 - right on > >>60/119.8 > >> > >>Low Bias/High Range > >>30/66 > >>60/123.2 > >>120/241.5 > >>240/480 - right on > >>480/957 > >> > >>High Bias/Low Range > >>30/60.2 > >>60/120 - right on > >>120/239.7 > >>240/478.4 > >> > >>High Bias/High Range > >>30/66 > >>60/124 > >>120/243 > >>240/482 > >>480/960 - right on > >>960/1916 > >>1920/3825 > >> > >>MOTM-300 > >>30/60 - right on > >>60/120 - right on > >>120/240 - right on > >>240/480 - right on > >>480/960 - right on > >>960/1918 > >>1920/3834 > >> > >>The ZO tracking isn't bad, but it isn't great either. The ZO starts out > >>on the low end tracking more than one octave per volt (sharp), passes > >>the sweet spot and starts going flat gradually. By contrast the > >>MOTM-300 tracks perfectly over about six octaves and then also start > >>going a little flat. Now this flatness on the high end may be by > >>design, due to psycho-acoustic effects, I seem to recall. I'm not a > >>music VCO expert. But sharpness on the low end isn't good. > >> > >>For my ZO the tracking is accurate over at best about three octaves. > >>The lower octaves track better in the low range and the higher octaves > >>track better in the high range. This was a useful finding. Of course I > >>tested only my own ZO, so I can't say whether this is the general > >>character of a ZO or not. Still, I would be interested to hear from > >>other ZO owners whether they are able to replicate my findings. > >> > >>-Richard Brewster > >> > >>http://www.pugix.com > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
2006-02-28 by coyoteous
Anybody care to comment? Time is short before the price increase and I'm still sitting on the fence. I would expect a $600+ VCO to track as well or better than any others. Thanks! --- In The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com, "coyoteous" <antithesist@...> wrote:
> > What is the quoted and/or typical tracking accuracy for the zeroscillator? I > assumed it would be five octaves or better. Also, does it use an internal > precision voltage reference or does its tuning vary with the power supply > voltages? I was just about to pop for one of these before the price increase. > > Barry
2006-02-28 by Greg James
What is the quoted and/or typical tracking accuracy for the zeroscillator? I
assumed it would be five octaves or better. Also, does it use an internal
precision voltage reference or does its tuning vary with the power supply
voltages? I was just about to pop for one of these before the price increase.
Barry
--- In The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com, Richard Brewster <
pugix@...> wrote:
>
> My testing method isn't a problem. The output impedance of the source
> doesn't matter for the measurements I did. I adjusted to get 1.000
> volt, as measured at the 1V/oct input. (Measured at the output pin of
> the op amp in my mixer, the voltage would be 1.010 volts, because of the
> 1K/100K divider formed between the mixer output and the 1V/oct input on
> the ZO.) Tracking two oscillators isn't the main point here. ; It's the
> irregularity of the response of a single VCO over several octaves. If
> something was amiss with my test method, it would have shown up on the
> MOTM-300 too.
>
> -Richard
>
> John Loffink wrote:
>
> >Richard,
> >
> >For your testing, what is the output impedance of your Mixer-Comparator?
> >Unless it is the range of ~100 ohm or less, it may cause some of the error
> >you are seeing.
> >
> >An MOTM 820 VC Lag has a properly designed output for accurate 1V/oct
> >tracking. You may want to put your voltage source through that for your
> >measurements.
> >
> >For any broad tracking between ZO and other VCOs, I am thinking you
may need
> >to use a soft sync function between them. No matter how accurate the
VCOs,
> >there will be differences in beating through the audio range. Because one
> >VCO is used as a modulator, the beating may sound more prominent than
two
> >VCOS that are simply mixed in parallel.
> >
> >John Loffink
> >The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
> >http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
> >The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
> >http://www.wavemakers-synth.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com
> >>[mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard
> >>Brewster
> >>Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 6:27 PM
> >>To: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com
> >>Subject: Re: [The_Cyndustries_List] ZO 1V/Octave calibration
> >>
> >>Thanks, Cynthia. I found the trimpot easily.
> >>
> >>I ended up with a setting close to the original factory setting. But I
> >>was not able to fix a problem of the ZO tracking sharp in the lower
> >>octaves of the high range. I started down this calibration road because
> >>I noticed that the ZO and the MOTM-300 being used as the FM source in
> >>the starter ZO patch were not tracking each other well. The beats were
> >>quite noticable. I spent a couple of hours taking measurements, after
> >>setting the 1V/oct trimpot. Here's what I found.
> >>
> >>I measured with a digital voltmeter and a digital frequency counter.
> >>For comparison I performed the same tests on the MOTM-300 VCO. The
> >>results were all obtained by the same method and instruments, using the
> >>same power supply. I created a 1V source by a mixer with bias (my own
> >>mixer-comparator) and measured for 1V at the 1V/oct input jack. For
> >>each reading I dialed up a frequency, applied 1 volt and recorded the
> >>new frequency, which ideally is double for the next octave. For the ZO
> >>I did this in all four combinations of High/Low Bias and High/Mid
> >>range. I only measured what I could dial up that started in the audio
> >>range. Each number pair below represents the HZ value before and after,
> >>so 30/60 means 30HZ/60HZ.
> >>
> >>Low Bias/Mid Range
> >>30/60 - right on
> >>60/119.8
> >>
>; >>Low Bias/High Range
> >>30/66
> >>60/123.2
> >>120/241.5
> >>240/480 - right on
> >>480/957
> >>
> >>High Bias/Low Range
> >>30/60.2
> >>60/120 - right on
> >>120/239.7
> >>240/478.4
> >>
> >>High Bias/High Range
> >>30/66
> >>60/124
> >>120/243
> >>240/482
> >>480/960 - right on
> >>960/1916
> >>1920/3825
> >>
> >>MOTM-300
> >>30/60 - right on
> >>60/120 - right on
> >>120/240 - right on
> >>240/480 - right on
> >>480/960 - right on
> >>960/1918
> >>1920/3834
> >>
> >>The ZO tracking isn't bad, but it isn't great either. The ZO starts out
> >>on the low end tracking more than one octave per volt (sharp), passes
> >>the sweet spot and starts going flat gradually. By contrast the
> >>MOTM-300 tracks perfectly over about six octaves and then also start
> >>going a little flat. Now this flatness on the high end may be by
> >>design, due to psycho-acoustic effects, I seem to recall. I'm not a
> >>music VCO expert. But sharpness on the low end isn't good.
> >>
> >>For my ZO the tracking is accurate over at best about three octaves.
> >>The lower octaves track better in the low range and the higher octaves
> >>track better in the high range. This was a useful finding. Of course I
> >>tested only my own ZO, so I can't say whether this is the general
> >>character of a ZO or not. Still, I would be interested to hear from
> >>other ZO owners whether they are able to replicate my findings.
> >>
> >>-Richard Brewster
> >>
> >>http://www.pugix.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
2006-02-28 by mate_stubb
Sorry, I can't help you. I don't have any way to check tracking until I get my MOTM-650 in a few weeks. Moe --- In The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com, "coyoteous" <antithesist@...> wrote: > > Anybody care to comment? Time is short before the price increase and I'm still > sitting on the fence. I would expect a $600+ VCO to track as well or better than
> any others. > > Thanks!
2006-02-28 by Greg James
-----Original Message-----Anybody care to comment? Time is short before the price increase and I'm still
From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com [mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of coyoteous
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 10:12 PM
To: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [The_Cyndustries_List] Re: ZO 1V/Octave calibration
sitting on the fence. I would expect a $600+ VCO to track as well or better than
any others.
Thanks!
--- In The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com, "coyoteous"
wrote:
>
> What is the quoted and/or typical tracking accuracy for the zeroscillator? I
> assumed it would be five octaves or better. Also, does it use an internal
> precision voltage reference or does its tuning vary with the power supply
> voltages? I was just about to pop for one of these before the price increase.
>
> Barry
2006-02-28 by Greg James
-----Original Message-----Anybody care to comment? Time is short before the price increase and I'm still
From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com [mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of coyoteous
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 10:12 PM
To: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [The_Cyndustries_List] Re: ZO 1V/Octave calibration
sitting on the fence. I would expect a $600+ VCO to track as well or better than
any others.
Thanks!
--- In The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com, "coyoteous"
wrote:
>
> What is the quoted and/or typical tracking accuracy for the zeroscillator? I
> assumed it would be five octaves or better. Also, does it use an internal
> precision voltage reference or does its tuning vary with the power supply
> voltages? I was just about to pop for one of these before the price increase.
>
> Barry
2006-02-28 by Greg James
-----Original Message-----Anybody care to comment? Time is short before the price increase and I'm still
From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com [mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of coyoteous
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 10:12 PM
To: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [The_Cyndustries_List] Re: ZO 1V/Octave calibration
sitting on the fence. I would expect a $600+ VCO to track as well or better than
any others.
Thanks!
--- In The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com, "coyoteous"
wrote:
>
> What is the quoted and/or typical tracking accuracy for the zeroscillator? I
> assumed it would be five octaves or better. Also, does it use an internal
> precision voltage reference or does its tuning vary with the power supply
> voltages? I was just about to pop for one of these before the price increase.
>
> Barry
2006-02-28 by Greg James
-----Original Message-----
From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com [mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Greg James
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 10:33 PM
To: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [The_Cyndustries_List] Re: ZO 1V/Octave calibrationI would like to know this too...Greg-----Original Message-----Anybody care to comment? Time is short before the price increase and I'm still
From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com [mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of coyoteous
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 10:12 PM
To: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [The_Cyndustries_List] Re: ZO 1V/Octave calibration
sitting on the fence. I would expect a $600+ VCO to track as well or better than
any others.
Thanks!
--- In The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com, "coyoteous"
wrote:
>
> What is the quoted and/or typical tracking accuracy for the zeroscillator? I
> assumed it would be five octaves or better. Also, does it use an internal
> precision voltage reference or does its tuning vary with the power supply
> voltages? I was just about to pop for one of these before the price increase.
>
> Barry
2006-02-28 by John Loffink
John Loffink The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site http://www.wavemakers-synth.com I am having trouble getting a stable frequency reading at 30 Hertz, with the frequency varying up to 0.5 Hertz with an Extech Multimaster 560 5/6 digit DMM. I may have to "normalize" to another frequency. I am driving it with an Encore Expressionist which is very consistent for 1V/oct, to about 5.0 mV over a four octave range and to 15.0 mV over an eight octave range. There are comments in the manual about range settings to use for pitch tracking accuracy, so I will use these for measurements. Range switch: Lowest setting Bias switch: High Tuning Knob in middle of range John Loffink The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site http://www.wavemakers-synth.com
> -----Original Message----- > From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mate_stubb > > Sorry, I can't help you. I don't have any way to check tracking until > I get my MOTM-650 in a few weeks. > > Moe > > --- In The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com, "coyoteous" > <antithesist@...> wrote: > > > > Anybody care to comment? Time is short before the price increase and > I'm still > > sitting on the fence. I would expect a $600+ VCO to track as well or > better than > > any others. > > > > Thanks! >
2006-02-28 by John Loffink
My results. I used the preferred ZO setting for accuracy per the manual. I did not adjust the ZO 1V/oct tracking trimmer. It is at the factory setting. Range switch: Lowest setting Bias switch: High Tuning Knob in middle of range Encore Expressionist used as the voltage source. Both VCOs patched to 1V/oct jacks. Measured frequency on sine out. No other cables plugged in, all modulation controls at minimum. Both VCOs in the same cabinet running from the same power supply. I set the VCO tuning as accurately as I could to 120 Hz at the 2 volt input. This is the reference frequency. MOTM VCO calibrated by me recently. Measurements with Extech Multimaster 560 5/6 digit DMM. Voltage accuracy is rated at +/- 0.03%. Frequency accuracy is rated at +/- 0.008%. ZO data Desired Voltage Input Voltage Desired Frequency Actual Frequency Error (Hertz) Error (percent) -1 -1.0007 15 14.812 -0.188 -1.25% 0 -0.0034 30 30.16 0.160 0.53% 1 0.9940 60 60.308 0.308 0.51% 2 1.9915 120 119.99 -0.010 -0.01% 3 2.9887 240 238.16 -1.840 -0.77% 4 3.9862 480 472.2 -7.800 -1.63% 5 4.9837 960 934.25 -25.750 -2.68% 6 5.9820 1,920 1841.7 -78.300 -4.08% MOTM-300 data Desired Voltage Input Voltage Desired Frequency Actual Frequency Error (Hertz) Error (percent) -1 -1.0007 15 14.965 -0.035 -0.23% 0 -0.0034 30 29.958 -0.042 -0.14% 1 0.9940 60 59.954 -0.046 -0.08% 2 1.9915 120 119.96 -0.040 -0.03% 3 2.9887 240 239.89 -0.110 -0.05% 4 3.9862 480 479.68 -0.320 -0.07% 5 4.9837 960 958.23 -1.770 -0.18% 6 5.9820 1,920 1912.1 -7.900 -0.41% For comparison, Synthesizers.com VCO data from their web site, not measured by me, uses 128 Hz as based frequency. Desired Frequency Actual Frequency Error Hertz Error Percent 32 32.07 -0.07 -0.22% 64 64.16 -0.16 -0.25% 128 128.2 -0.20 -0.16% 256 256.2 -0.20 -0.08% 512 511.9 0.10 0.02% 1,024 1023.2 0.80 0.08% 2,048 2046 2.00 0.10% 4,096 4094 2.00 0.05% 8,192 8236 -44.00 -0.54% 16,384 16778 -394.00 -2.40% I hope the ASCII tables don't become too jarbled. John Loffink The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site http://www.wavemakers-synth.com
> -----Original Message----- > From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard > Brewster > Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 6:27 PM > To: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [The_Cyndustries_List] ZO 1V/Octave calibration > > Thanks, Cynthia. I found the trimpot easily. > > I ended up with a setting close to the original factory setting. But I > was not able to fix a problem of the ZO tracking sharp in the lower > octaves of the high range. I started down this calibration road because > I noticed that the ZO and the MOTM-300 being used as the FM source in > the starter ZO patch were not tracking each other well. The beats were > quite noticable. I spent a couple of hours taking measurements, after > setting the 1V/oct trimpot. Here's what I found. > > I measured with a digital voltmeter and a digital frequency counter. > For comparison I performed the same tests on the MOTM-300 VCO. The > results were all obtained by the same method and instruments, using the > same power supply. I created a 1V source by a mixer with bias (my own > mixer-comparator) and measured for 1V at the 1V/oct input jack. For > each reading I dialed up a frequency, applied 1 volt and recorded the > new frequency, which ideally is double for the next octave. For the ZO > I did this in all four combinations of High/Low Bias and High/Mid > range. I only measured what I could dial up that started in the audio > range. Each number pair below represents the HZ value before and after, > so 30/60 means 30HZ/60HZ. > > Low Bias/Mid Range > 30/60 - right on > 60/119.8 > > Low Bias/High Range > 30/66 > 60/123.2 > 120/241.5 > 240/480 - right on > 480/957 > > High Bias/Low Range > 30/60.2 > 60/120 - right on > 120/239.7 > 240/478.4 > > High Bias/High Range > 30/66 > 60/124 > 120/243 > 240/482 > 480/960 - right on > 960/1916 > 1920/3825 > > MOTM-300 > 30/60 - right on > 60/120 - right on > 120/240 - right on > 240/480 - right on > 480/960 - right on > 960/1918 > 1920/3834 > > The ZO tracking isn't bad, but it isn't great either. The ZO starts out > on the low end tracking more than one octave per volt (sharp), passes > the sweet spot and starts going flat gradually. By contrast the > MOTM-300 tracks perfectly over about six octaves and then also start > going a little flat. Now this flatness on the high end may be by > design, due to psycho-acoustic effects, I seem to recall. I'm not a > music VCO expert. But sharpness on the low end isn't good. > > For my ZO the tracking is accurate over at best about three octaves. > The lower octaves track better in the low range and the higher octaves > track better in the high range. This was a useful finding. Of course I > tested only my own ZO, so I can't say whether this is the general > character of a ZO or not. Still, I would be interested to hear from > other ZO owners whether they are able to replicate my findings. > > -Richard Brewster > > http://www.pugix.com > > > > > > > > Cynthia Webster wrote: > > >Hi Richard! > > > >First, please be quite certain that it is the ZO and not rather > >that another oscillator (or keyboard) in your system being slightly > off... > > > >The Zeroscillator 1volt/octave trimmer is located on the top > >board where the power plugs in. If you locate the logo > >saying Cynthia CYN109-C and rotate the ZO so that this logo is > >reading right side up, then the trimmer is the first one to the left, > >(right after the Tempco). It is a multi-turm trimmer laying flat. > > > >The other two trimmers next to it are for shaping the sine wave. > > > >We also have a precision Volt to the Octave Calibration Gadget > >in the works as a new product which should help tune-up all of > >the oscillators and keyboards in any system. > > > >We're planning a revision to the manual soon to include more > >infoon the power connector, and the trimmers etc, but we've been > >way busy building Zeroscillators night & day instead! > > > >Best Wishes! > > > > > >Cynthia > > > >http://www.cyndustries.com/ > > > > > >Richard Brewster wrote: > > > > > > > >>I've discovered my ZO is a little bit off on the 1V/Oct tracking. It is > >>more apparent at lower frequencies. It would be handy if the manual > >>pointed out the location of the 1V/Oct trimpot. I haven't tried looking > >>for it yet, but I will. > >> > >>-Richard Brewster > >> > >>http://www.pugix.com > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
2006-02-28 by Michael Zacherl (aka TonTaub)
John Loffink wrote:
> My results.
many thanks for that efforts, John!
It would be interesting to see if two or more ZOs track the same.
(But AFAIK there's noone running more than one ZO)
To me that's even more important than the absolute precision.
I'd be willing to adjust my other VCOs to the ZO(s) if I achieved better
tracking this way. But my applications may differ.
Michael.> I used the preferred ZO setting for accuracy per the manual. I did not > adjust the ZO 1V/oct tracking trimmer. It is at the factory setting. > > Range switch: Lowest setting > Bias switch: High > Tuning Knob in middle of range > ZO data > > Desired Voltage Input Voltage Desired Frequency Actual Frequency > Error (Hertz) Error (percent) > -1 -1.0007 15 14.812 -0.188 -1.25% > 0 -0.0034 30 30.16 0.160 0.53% > 1 0.9940 60 60.308 0.308 0.51% > 2 1.9915 120 119.99 -0.010 -0.01% > 3 2.9887 240 238.16 -1.840 -0.77% > 4 3.9862 480 472.2 -7.800 -1.63% > 5 4.9837 960 934.25 -25.750 -2.68% > 6 5.9820 1,920 1841.7 -78.300 -4.08% > > MOTM-300 data > > Desired Voltage Input Voltage Desired Frequency Actual Frequency > Error (Hertz) Error (percent) > -1 -1.0007 15 14.965 -0.035 -0.23% > 0 -0.0034 30 29.958 -0.042 -0.14% > 1 0.9940 60 59.954 -0.046 -0.08% > 2 1.9915 120 119.96 -0.040 -0.03% > 3 2.9887 240 239.89 -0.110 -0.05% > 4 3.9862 480 479.68 -0.320 -0.07% > 5 4.9837 960 958.23 -1.770 -0.18% > 6 5.9820 1,920 1912.1 -7.900 -0.41% > > For comparison, Synthesizers.com VCO data from their web site, not measured > by me, uses 128 Hz as based frequency. > > Desired Frequency Actual Frequency Error Hertz Error > Percent > 32 32.07 -0.07 -0.22% > 64 64.16 -0.16 -0.25% > 128 128.2 -0.20 -0.16% > 256 256.2 -0.20 -0.08% > 512 511.9 0.10 0.02% > 1,024 1023.2 0.80 0.08% > 2,048 2046 2.00 0.10% > 4,096 4094 2.00 0.05% > 8,192 8236 -44.00 -0.54% > 16,384 16778 -394.00 -2.40% > > I hope the ASCII tables don't become too jarbled. > > John Loffink > The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site > http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com > The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site > http://www.wavemakers-synth.com > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com >>[mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard >>Brewster >>Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 6:27 PM >>To: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com >>Subject: Re: [The_Cyndustries_List] ZO 1V/Octave calibration >> >>Thanks, Cynthia. I found the trimpot easily. >> >>I ended up with a setting close to the original factory setting. But I >>was not able to fix a problem of the ZO tracking sharp in the lower >>octaves of the high range. I started down this calibration road because >>I noticed that the ZO and the MOTM-300 being used as the FM source in >>the starter ZO patch were not tracking each other well. The beats were >>quite noticable. I spent a couple of hours taking measurements, after >>setting the 1V/oct trimpot. Here's what I found. >> >>I measured with a digital voltmeter and a digital frequency counter. >>For comparison I performed the same tests on the MOTM-300 VCO. The >>results were all obtained by the same method and instruments, using the >>same power supply. I created a 1V source by a mixer with bias (my own >>mixer-comparator) and measured for 1V at the 1V/oct input jack. For >>each reading I dialed up a frequency, applied 1 volt and recorded the >>new frequency, which ideally is double for the next octave. For the ZO >>I did this in all four combinations of High/Low Bias and High/Mid >>range. I only measured what I could dial up that started in the audio >>range. Each number pair below represents the HZ value before and after, >>so 30/60 means 30HZ/60HZ. >> >>Low Bias/Mid Range >>30/60 - right on >>60/119.8 >> >>Low Bias/High Range >>30/66 >>60/123.2 >>120/241.5 >>240/480 - right on >>480/957 >> >>High Bias/Low Range >>30/60.2 >>60/120 - right on >>120/239.7 >>240/478.4 >> >>High Bias/High Range >>30/66 >>60/124 >>120/243 >>240/482 >>480/960 - right on >>960/1916 >>1920/3825 >> >>MOTM-300 >>30/60 - right on >>60/120 - right on >>120/240 - right on >>240/480 - right on >>480/960 - right on >>960/1918 >>1920/3834 >> >>The ZO tracking isn't bad, but it isn't great either. The ZO starts out >>on the low end tracking more than one octave per volt (sharp), passes >>the sweet spot and starts going flat gradually. By contrast the >>MOTM-300 tracks perfectly over about six octaves and then also start >>going a little flat. Now this flatness on the high end may be by >>design, due to psycho-acoustic effects, I seem to recall. I'm not a >>music VCO expert. But sharpness on the low end isn't good. >> >>For my ZO the tracking is accurate over at best about three octaves. >>The lower octaves track better in the low range and the higher octaves >>track better in the high range. This was a useful finding. Of course I >>tested only my own ZO, so I can't say whether this is the general >>character of a ZO or not. Still, I would be interested to hear from >>other ZO owners whether they are able to replicate my findings. >> >>-Richard Brewster >> >>http://www.pugix.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>Cynthia Webster wrote: >> >> >>>Hi Richard! >>> >>>First, please be quite certain that it is the ZO and not rather >>>that another oscillator (or keyboard) in your system being slightly >> >>off... >> >>>The Zeroscillator 1volt/octave trimmer is located on the top >>>board where the power plugs in. If you locate the logo >>>saying Cynthia CYN109-C and rotate the ZO so that this logo is >>>reading right side up, then the trimmer is the first one to the left, >>>(right after the Tempco). It is a multi-turm trimmer laying flat. >>> >>>The other two trimmers next to it are for shaping the sine wave. >>> >>>We also have a precision Volt to the Octave Calibration Gadget >>>in the works as a new product which should help tune-up all of >>>the oscillators and keyboards in any system. >>> >>>We're planning a revision to the manual soon to include more >>>infoon the power connector, and the trimmers etc, but we've been >>>way busy building Zeroscillators night & day instead! >>> >>>Best Wishes! >>> >>> >>>Cynthia >>> >>>http://www.cyndustries.com/ >>> >>> >>>Richard Brewster wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>I've discovered my ZO is a little bit off on the 1V/Oct tracking. It is >>>>more apparent at lower frequencies. It would be handy if the manual >>>>pointed out the location of the 1V/Oct trimpot. I haven't tried looking >>>>for it yet, but I will. >>>> >>>>-Richard Brewster >>>> >>>>http://www.pugix.com >>>>
2006-02-28 by tontaub
Hi John, I'm afraid you're right. :-( looking at your measurement results the deviations look more design immanent than like an calibration error. Regarding the second MSG you just posted, I've to admit that I'm not sure if I fully understand the Vari-Synch functionality. Looking into the manual it appears to me like a soft sync on traditional sawtooth core VCOs but time reversing the core output rather than resetting. I just wonder if the sawtooth output delivers this typical hard sync sounds when set up correctly. Michael. > I doubt relative precision will be much better than absolute > precision. You cannot necessarily tweak other VCOs to replicate > the non-ideal tracking of the ZO. > > John Loffink > The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site > http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com > The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site > http://www.wavemakers-synth.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > > [mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Michael Zacherl
> > > > many thanks for that efforts, John! > > It would be interesting to see if two or more ZOs track the same. > > (But AFAIK there's noone running more than one ZO) > > To me that's even more important than the absolute precision. > > I'd be willing to adjust my other VCOs to the ZO(s) if I > > achieved better > > tracking this way. But my applications may differ. > > > > Michael. > > >
2006-02-28 by tontaub
PS: --- In The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com, "John Loffink" wrote --- > Results are much better, as the ZO tracks the MOTM VCO frequency. I have > not checked the audible difference between modulating this ZO configuration > and the one without soft sync. These measurements are with an unmodulated ZO. The reversal of direction appears to me like a good chance to generate some additional harmonics (even subharmonics I'd say). IMHO that should be audible.
2006-02-28 by John Loffink
I doubt relative precision will be much better than absolute precision. You cannot necessarily tweak other VCOs to replicate the non-ideal tracking of the ZO. John Loffink The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site http://www.wavemakers-synth.com
> -----Original Message----- > From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Michael Zacherl > > many thanks for that efforts, John! > It would be interesting to see if two or more ZOs track the same. > (But AFAIK there's noone running more than one ZO) > To me that's even more important than the absolute precision. > I'd be willing to adjust my other VCOs to the ZO(s) if I achieved better > tracking this way. But my applications may differ. > > Michael. >
2006-02-28 by John Loffink
ZO results using the Varisync function. MOTM VCO triangle to ZO Varisync input. Varisync set to 1, soft sync. Range switch: Lowest setting Bias switch: High Tuning Knob in middle of range Desired Voltage Input Voltage Desired Frequency Actual Frequency Error (Hertz) Error (percent) -1 -1.0007 15 15.039 0.039 0.26% 0 -0.0034 30 30.25 0.250 0.83% 1 0.9940 60 60.17 0.170 0.28% 2 1.9915 120 119.99 -0.010 -0.01% 3 2.9887 240 240.09 0.090 0.04% 4 3.9862 480 480.2 0.200 0.04% 5 4.9837 960 959.87 -0.130 -0.01% 6 5.9820 1,920 1916.7 -3.300 -0.17% Results are much better, as the ZO tracks the MOTM VCO frequency. I have not checked the audible difference between modulating this ZO configuration and the one without soft sync. These measurements are with an unmodulated ZO. John Loffink The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site http://www.wavemakers-synth.com > -----Original Message----- > From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Loffink > Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 11:22 PM > To: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [The_Cyndustries_List] ZO 1V/Octave calibration > > My results. > > I used the preferred ZO setting for accuracy per the manual. I did not > adjust the ZO 1V/oct tracking trimmer. It is at the factory setting. > > Range switch: Lowest setting > Bias switch: High > Tuning Knob in middle of range > > Encore Expressionist used as the voltage source. Both VCOs patched to > 1V/oct jacks. Measured frequency on sine out. No other cables plugged > in, > all modulation controls at minimum. Both VCOs in the same cabinet running > from the same power supply. > > I set the VCO tuning as accurately as I could to 120 Hz at the 2 volt > input. > This is the reference frequency. > > MOTM VCO calibrated by me recently. > > Measurements with Extech Multimaster 560 5/6 digit DMM. Voltage accuracy > is > rated at +/- 0.03%. Frequency accuracy is rated at +/- 0.008%. > > ZO data > > Desired Voltage Input Voltage Desired Frequency Actual Frequency > Error (Hertz) Error (percent) > -1 -1.0007 15 14.812 -0.188 -1.25% > 0 -0.0034 30 30.16 0.160 0.53% > 1 0.9940 60 60.308 0.308 0.51% > 2 1.9915 120 119.99 -0.010 -0.01% > 3 2.9887 240 238.16 -1.840 -0.77% > 4 3.9862 480 472.2 -7.800 -1.63% > 5 4.9837 960 934.25 -25.750 -2.68% > 6 5.9820 1,920 1841.7 -78.300 -4.08% > > MOTM-300 data > > Desired Voltage Input Voltage Desired Frequency Actual Frequency
> Error (Hertz) Error (percent) > -1 -1.0007 15 14.965 -0.035 -0.23% > 0 -0.0034 30 29.958 -0.042 -0.14% > 1 0.9940 60 59.954 -0.046 -0.08% > 2 1.9915 120 119.96 -0.040 -0.03% > 3 2.9887 240 239.89 -0.110 -0.05% > 4 3.9862 480 479.68 -0.320 -0.07% > 5 4.9837 960 958.23 -1.770 -0.18% > 6 5.9820 1,920 1912.1 -7.900 -0.41% > > For comparison, Synthesizers.com VCO data from their web site, not > measured > by me, uses 128 Hz as based frequency. > > Desired Frequency Actual Frequency Error Hertz Error > Percent > 32 32.07 -0.07 -0.22% > 64 64.16 -0.16 -0.25% > 128 128.2 -0.20 -0.16% > 256 256.2 -0.20 -0.08% > 512 511.9 0.10 0.02% > 1,024 1023.2 0.80 0.08% > 2,048 2046 2.00 0.10% > 4,096 4094 2.00 0.05% > 8,192 8236 -44.00 -0.54% > 16,384 16778 -394.00 -2.40% > > I hope the ASCII tables don't become too jarbled. > > John Loffink > The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site > http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com > The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site > http://www.wavemakers-synth.com >
2006-02-28 by John Loffink
OK, I tried the Indexed Linear FM with and without Varisync from the MOTM 300 triangle wave. Without Varisync I definitely hear the mistracking of the ZO compared to the MOTM as clangorous inharmonics as I play up the keyboard. With Varisync connected, set to soft sync at 1.5, the sound does not exhibit the clangorous tones, and modulates normally. Since you require another VCO anyway for the Linear FM, it is a simple matter to plug the sine wave into Linear FM and triangle into the Varisync. This will provide the best results, using the same VCO master for both. So this appears to be a valid and simple workaround. A second ZO is not recommended as the master VCO. You cannot really use a MOTM 310 either since the output is a sawtooth to square mix. You'll normally want a sine wave for the Linear FM input. John Loffink The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site http://www.wavemakers-synth.com > -----Original Message----- > From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Loffink > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 7:33 AM > To: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [The_Cyndustries_List] ZO 1V/Octave calibration > > ZO results using the Varisync function. MOTM VCO triangle to ZO Varisync > input. Varisync set to 1, soft sync. > > Range switch: Lowest setting > Bias switch: High > Tuning Knob in middle of range > > Desired Voltage Input Voltage Desired Frequency Actual Frequency
> Error (Hertz) Error (percent) > -1 -1.0007 15 15.039 0.039 0.26% > 0 -0.0034 30 30.25 0.250 0.83% > 1 0.9940 60 60.17 0.170 0.28% > 2 1.9915 120 119.99 -0.010 -0.01% > 3 2.9887 240 240.09 0.090 0.04% > 4 3.9862 480 480.2 0.200 0.04% > 5 4.9837 960 959.87 -0.130 -0.01% > 6 5.9820 1,920 1916.7 -3.300 -0.17% > > Results are much better, as the ZO tracks the MOTM VCO frequency. I have > not checked the audible difference between modulating this ZO > configuration > and the one without soft sync. These measurements are with an unmodulated > ZO. > > John Loffink > The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site > http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com > The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site > http://www.wavemakers-synth.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > > [mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Loffink > > Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 11:22 PM > > To: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: RE: [The_Cyndustries_List] ZO 1V/Octave calibration > > > > My results. > > > > I used the preferred ZO setting for accuracy per the manual. I did not > > adjust the ZO 1V/oct tracking trimmer. It is at the factory setting. > > > > Range switch: Lowest setting > > Bias switch: High > > Tuning Knob in middle of range > > > > Encore Expressionist used as the voltage source. Both VCOs patched to > > 1V/oct jacks. Measured frequency on sine out. No other cables plugged > > in, > > all modulation controls at minimum. Both VCOs in the same cabinet > running > > from the same power supply. > > > > I set the VCO tuning as accurately as I could to 120 Hz at the 2 volt > > input. > > This is the reference frequency. > > > > MOTM VCO calibrated by me recently. > > > > Measurements with Extech Multimaster 560 5/6 digit DMM. Voltage > accuracy > > is > > rated at +/- 0.03%. Frequency accuracy is rated at +/- 0.008%. > > > > ZO data > > > > Desired Voltage Input Voltage Desired Frequency Actual > Frequency > > Error (Hertz) Error (percent) > > -1 -1.0007 15 14.812 -0.188 -1.25% > > 0 -0.0034 30 30.16 0.160 0.53% > > 1 0.9940 60 60.308 0.308 0.51% > > 2 1.9915 120 119.99 -0.010 -0.01% > > 3 2.9887 240 238.16 -1.840 -0.77% > > 4 3.9862 480 472.2 -7.800 -1.63% > > 5 4.9837 960 934.25 -25.750 -2.68% > > 6 5.9820 1,920 1841.7 -78.300 -4.08% > > > > MOTM-300 data > > > > Desired Voltage Input Voltage Desired Frequency Actual > Frequency > > Error (Hertz) Error (percent) > > -1 -1.0007 15 14.965 -0.035 -0.23% > > 0 -0.0034 30 29.958 -0.042 -0.14% > > 1 0.9940 60 59.954 -0.046 -0.08% > > 2 1.9915 120 119.96 -0.040 -0.03% > > 3 2.9887 240 239.89 -0.110 -0.05% > > 4 3.9862 480 479.68 -0.320 -0.07% > > 5 4.9837 960 958.23 -1.770 -0.18% > > 6 5.9820 1,920 1912.1 -7.900 -0.41% > > > > For comparison, Synthesizers.com VCO data from their web site, not > > measured > > by me, uses 128 Hz as based frequency. > > > > Desired Frequency Actual Frequency Error Hertz Error > > Percent > > 32 32.07 -0.07 -0.22% > > 64 64.16 -0.16 -0.25% > > 128 128.2 -0.20 -0.16% > > 256 256.2 -0.20 -0.08% > > 512 511.9 0.10 0.02% > > 1,024 1023.2 0.80 0.08% > > 2,048 2046 2.00 0.10% > > 4,096 4094 2.00 0.05% > > 8,192 8236 -44.00 -0.54% > > 16,384 16778 -394.00 -2.40% > > > > I hope the ASCII tables don't become too jarbled. > > > > John Loffink > > The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site > > http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com > > The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site > > http://www.wavemakers-synth.com > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
2006-02-28 by tontaub
--- In The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com, "John Loffink" <jloffink@...> wrote: > A second ZO is not recommended as the master VCO. In terms of Yamaha FM: ZO = Carrier MOTM-300 = Modulator When does it make sense to have more than one ZO? Just for more voices? Can't believe that. What's with an "Algorithm" (Yamaha lingo) like this: [MOTM-300] -> [ZO 1] -> [ZO 2] Given that the bigger Yamaha synths had 6 operators and the Synclavier was freely configurable I wonder if this kind of complexity can be ported and mastered to an analouge setup with ZOs. Michael.
2006-02-28 by tuninghead
Hi there John and other trackers, John L., we repeated your measurements, but this time we used the appropriate range setting for low audio which is the MEDIUM range setting. You are stretching the LFO range into boy's choir territory. For the same frequency range you used, we measured our octave ratios at: volts ratio -1 0 2.009 1 2.003 2 2.007 3 1.996 4 1.999 5 1.989 6 1.981 This shows 6 great octaves and a usable 7th. Now, why aren't there 10 good octaves? The topology of the Zeroscillator core is unlike any conventional VCO sawtooth or triangle core. The current that runs the core is the result of arithmetic computations that are all performed in analog -- most critically, a multiplication. This multiplication (which I have covered in a previous post) does not exist in conventional VCOs and because of its very prescence, is a small source of error. The multiplier used for this task is the finest one available in the free world, period. Additionally, issues of dynamic range loom large in the design trade-offs that must be made to bring you the absolutely outrageous amount of modulation this oscillator offers. Techniques to maximize accuracy are covered in the Zeroscillator manual. We have 15V of power supply to work with (Euro versions have 12V). Everything has to happen within that space. Improved accuracy can always be traded for modulation range. The HIGH BIAS position provides 1V of bias and the LOW BIAS position provides about 0.2, if I'm remembering correctly. This means in HIGH BIAS we can attain about 1000% modulation before the multiplier will be taxed for accuracy (at about 10V). In LOW BIAS we get about 5000%. Considering that 100% is the most you can ever get from a conventional VCO (and most designs restrict the range to far below that), this is pretty darn exciting. The BIAS switch is not there to change frequency range. It's there because of accuracy tradeoffs. To get improved accuracy you could pump 5V into the LINEAR FM input to give the multiplier more to work with. The accuracy will get better at the expense of the modulation range being reduced to about 200% which may still be enough for the sound you are looking for. To answer another question, yes, a precision voltage reference is used for all critical internal voltages. The power supply rejection was tested and found to be superior to the Modcan oscillator. John Ross is responsible for adding to the design, the most comprehensive power supply cleansing I have ever seen on an EM module. We could have just regulated down to +/-12V, but that too would have cost us range. There have been other attempts at thru-zero, analog VCOs in the past. None of them turned into products because although they did the FM thing, none of them tracked well enough to be accepted. I found the ZO's tracking to be quite adequate to make any sound I desired along with a Modcan VCO as a modulator. Personally, as a user, I have no complaints with the ZO's performance, and as an engineer, I have held nothing back about the ZO's operation and design tradeoffs. We are doing something in analog that has been traditionally believed to be the sole property of digital and I believe we have pulled it off well. In choosing an oscillator, one always compares features and specs, but comparing the ZO to a traditional oscillator is like comparing apples and oranges. They're both fruits, but if you need citrus, an apple isn't going to cut it. You can be about the measuring or about the music. The Zeroscillator offers sounds that are unobtainable from any other commercially available analog module in the solar system. It's up to each individual musician to decide what is important. The units are flying off the shelves and the feedback we are getting from users ranges from sheer delight to ecstatic euphoria. --Mark Barton
2006-02-28 by John Loffink
I should have been clearer. I used the middle setting for Range, which must be your MEDIUM. I did not use the LFO range. John Loffink The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site http://www.wavemakers-synth.com
> -----Original Message----- > From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of tuninghead > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 12:11 PM > To: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [The_Cyndustries_List] Re: ZO 1V/Octave calibration > > Hi there John and other trackers, > > John L., we repeated your measurements, but this time we used the > appropriate range setting for low audio which is the MEDIUM range > setting. You are stretching the LFO range into boy's choir territory. > For the same frequency range you used, we measured our octave ratios at: > > volts ratio > -1 > 0 2.009 > 1 2.003 > 2 2.007 > 3 1.996 > 4 1.999 > 5 1.989 > 6 1.981 > > This shows 6 great octaves and a usable 7th. Now, why aren't there 10 > good octaves? > > The topology of the Zeroscillator core is unlike any conventional VCO > sawtooth or triangle core. The current that runs the core is the > result of arithmetic computations that are all performed in analog -- > most critically, a multiplication. This multiplication (which I have > covered in a previous post) does not exist in conventional VCOs and > because of its very prescence, is a small source of error. The > multiplier used for this task is the finest one available in the free > world, period. Additionally, issues of dynamic range loom large in > the design trade-offs that must be made to bring you the absolutely > outrageous amount of modulation this oscillator offers. Techniques to > maximize accuracy are covered in the Zeroscillator manual. > > We have 15V of power supply to work with (Euro versions have 12V). > Everything has to happen within that space. Improved accuracy can > always be traded for modulation range. The HIGH BIAS position > provides 1V of bias and the LOW BIAS position provides about 0.2, if > I'm remembering correctly. This means in HIGH BIAS we can attain > about 1000% modulation before the multiplier will be taxed for > accuracy (at about 10V). In LOW BIAS we get about 5000%. Considering > that 100% is the most you can ever get from a conventional VCO (and > most designs restrict the range to far below that), this is pretty > darn exciting. The BIAS switch is not there to change frequency > range. It's there because of accuracy tradeoffs. To get improved > accuracy you could pump 5V into the LINEAR FM input to give the > multiplier more to work with. The accuracy will get better at the > expense of the modulation range being reduced to about 200% which may > still be enough for the sound you are looking for. > > To answer another question, yes, a precision voltage reference is used > for all critical internal voltages. The power supply rejection was > tested and found to be superior to the Modcan oscillator. John Ross > is responsible for adding to the design, the most comprehensive power > supply cleansing I have ever seen on an EM module. We could have just > regulated down to +/-12V, but that too would have cost us range. > > There have been other attempts at thru-zero, analog VCOs in the past. > None of them turned into products because although they did the FM > thing, none of them tracked well enough to be accepted. I found the > ZO's tracking to be quite adequate to make any sound I desired along > with a Modcan VCO as a modulator. Personally, as a user, I have no > complaints with the ZO's performance, and as an engineer, I have held > nothing back about the ZO's operation and design tradeoffs. We are > doing something in analog that has been traditionally believed to be > the sole property of digital and I believe we have pulled it off well. > > In choosing an oscillator, one always compares features and specs, but > comparing the ZO to a traditional oscillator is like comparing apples > and oranges. They're both fruits, but if you need citrus, an apple > isn't going to cut it. You can be about the measuring or about the > music. The Zeroscillator offers sounds that are unobtainable from any > other commercially available analog module in the solar system. It's > up to each individual musician to decide what is important. The units > are flying off the shelves and the feedback we are getting from users > ranges from sheer delight to ecstatic euphoria. > > --Mark Barton > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
2006-02-28 by John Loffink
Mark, I'll have to disagree here, as I corraborated with more precise measurements what Richard Brewster had provided and heard. Here's an experiment almost any ZO owner can do. Tune your ZO and your master oscillator MOTM-300 or whatever to exactly 240 Hz. Apply an envelope to the index FM and the master oscillator sine wave to the Dynamic 2 FM input. Put the Index knob at around 7. With this middle of the range setting, I hear harse beating just one octave above the 240 Hz root note. This beating is caused by mistracking of the ZO. It gets worse with higher frequencies and is downright clangorous. That is hardly 6 great octaves, it is not even 1. To clarify, ZO Range is Medium, Bias is High, and Tuning knob is almost centered within the 10 turn range, as recommended per the manual for best pitch accuracy. Which voltage source were used for your measurements? Which frequency counter was used? The use of ratios is potentially misleading. If you are just showing ratios between each succeeding octave, as implied by the 2:1 ratio, then the errors are cumulative as one goes up the scale. John Loffink The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site http://www.wavemakers-synth.com
> -----Original Message----- > From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > > I should have been clearer. I used the middle setting for Range, which > must > be your MEDIUM. I did not use the LFO range. > > John Loffink > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com > > [mailto:The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of tuninghead > > > > Hi there John and other trackers, > > > > John L., we repeated your measurements, but this time we used the > > appropriate range setting for low audio which is the MEDIUM range > > setting. You are stretching the LFO range into boy's choir territory. > > For the same frequency range you used, we measured our octave ratios > at: > > > > volts ratio > > -1 > > 0 2.009 > > 1 2.003 > > 2 2.007 > > 3 1.996 > > 4 1.999 > > 5 1.989 > > 6 1.981 > > > > This shows 6 great octaves and a usable 7th. Now, why aren't there 10 > > good octaves? > > > > The topology of the Zeroscillator core is unlike any conventional VCO > > sawtooth or triangle core. The current that runs the core is the > > result of arithmetic computations that are all performed in analog -- > > most critically, a multiplication. This multiplication (which I have > > covered in a previous post) does not exist in conventional VCOs and > > because of its very prescence, is a small source of error. The > > multiplier used for this task is the finest one available in the free > > world, period. Additionally, issues of dynamic range loom large in > > the design trade-offs that must be made to bring you the absolutely > > outrageous amount of modulation this oscillator offers. Techniques to > > maximize accuracy are covered in the Zeroscillator manual. > > > > We have 15V of power supply to work with (Euro versions have 12V). > > Everything has to happen within that space. Improved accuracy can > > always be traded for modulation range. The HIGH BIAS position > > provides 1V of bias and the LOW BIAS position provides about 0.2, if > > I'm remembering correctly. This means in HIGH BIAS we can attain > > about 1000% modulation before the multiplier will be taxed for > > accuracy (at about 10V). In LOW BIAS we get about 5000%. Considering > > that 100% is the most you can ever get from a conventional VCO (and > > most designs restrict the range to far below that), this is pretty > > darn exciting. The BIAS switch is not there to change frequency > > range. It's there because of accuracy tradeoffs. To get improved > > accuracy you could pump 5V into the LINEAR FM input to give the > > multiplier more to work with. The accuracy will get better at the > > expense of the modulation range being reduced to about 200% which may > > still be enough for the sound you are looking for. > > > > To answer another question, yes, a precision voltage reference is used > > for all critical internal voltages. The power supply rejection was > > tested and found to be superior to the Modcan oscillator. John Ross > > is responsible for adding to the design, the most comprehensive power > > supply cleansing I have ever seen on an EM module. We could have just > > regulated down to +/-12V, but that too would have cost us range. > > > > There have been other attempts at thru-zero, analog VCOs in the past. > > None of them turned into products because although they did the FM > > thing, none of them tracked well enough to be accepted. I found the > > ZO's tracking to be quite adequate to make any sound I desired along > > with a Modcan VCO as a modulator. Personally, as a user, I have no > > complaints with the ZO's performance, and as an engineer, I have held > > nothing back about the ZO's operation and design tradeoffs. We are > > doing something in analog that has been traditionally believed to be > > the sole property of digital and I believe we have pulled it off well. > > > > In choosing an oscillator, one always compares features and specs, but > > comparing the ZO to a traditional oscillator is like comparing apples > > and oranges. They're both fruits, but if you need citrus, an apple > > isn't going to cut it. You can be about the measuring or about the > > music. The Zeroscillator offers sounds that are unobtainable from any > > other commercially available analog module in the solar system. It's > > up to each individual musician to decide what is important. The units > > are flying off the shelves and the feedback we are getting from users > > ranges from sheer delight to ecstatic euphoria. > > > > --Mark Barton > >
2006-02-28 by Michael Zacherl (aka TonTaub)
I took the plunge ... and now I got some other problem to solve: I don't have enough space in my little cabinet. Oh well ... ;-) Michael.
2006-03-01 by Jason Proctor
i took the plunge too. i had 4 spaces left in my rack.... not any more! the zero is the kind of module that epitomises why i bought a modular in the first place...
>I took the plunge ... and now I got some other problem to solve: >I don't have enough space in my little cabinet. > >Oh well ... > > ;-) Michael. > > > > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
2006-03-01 by tontaub
And how does that feel? ;-) BTW, is that purchase the reason that you want to get rid of your cabinet? Or is it just another piece of hardware? Michael. (dearly hoping to have space for this triple pack soon) --- In The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com, Jason Proctor <jason@...> wrote:
> > i took the plunge too. i had 4 spaces left in my rack.... not any more! > > the zero is the kind of module that epitomises why i bought a modular > in the first place... > > >I took the plunge ... and now I got some other problem to solve: > >I don't have enough space in my little cabinet. > > > >Oh well ... > > > > ;-) Michael.
2006-03-01 by Jason Proctor
:-) the cabinet has long been obsolete. first it was replaced by an SKB case, then another SKB case was added, then the monolith kicked sand in the face of all my puny racks & cases etc -- http://www.redfish.net/red_fish_modular_new.jpg -- and a clearout was necessary. hence the giveaway. although pete only brought a 5-pack, it seems he had to drink one beer on the way...
>And how does that feel? ;-) >BTW, is that purchase the reason that you want to get rid of your >cabinet? Or is it just another piece of hardware? > > Michael. (dearly hoping to have space for this triple pack soon) >