Synth-DIY Yahoo! Groups Archives

New mod...

2012-10-19 by Michael Hawkins

I am considering adding something new to the Poly-800.

I am thoroughly disappointed with the Poly-800 DCO's.

1) The square wave output is OK but the sawtooth is horrible. It's much more of a slightly saw-ish square.
2) the detuning is pathetic. The detune circuit doesn't actually detune in the true sense. It just moves the DCO's 5-7 out of phase with DCO's 1-4.
3) There's no adjusting the wave shape at all. The adding and removing of harmonics is extremely rudimentary.

Now is the time for people to make suggestions for what they might like if I added new oscillators.

Keep in mind...

1) cost - cheap, cheap, cheap - try to keep the kit under $100 probably closer to $50.

2) complexity - simple - the kit is for modder's with simple electronic skills.

3) low time to develop - the full blown solution would be to use an FPGA to create waveforms. Sorry, not going that route because I don't have the time. Unless someone else can convince me that FPGA programming is going to be easy and require little time on my behalf.

Question: is anyone aware of a top octave generator still being manufactured that is similar to say the SGS M082 or the other various TG's that were widely used in the 80's? I can't find one but a simple design I have cooking would require a top octave generator.

Or, if anyone is aware of a low cost music synthesis chip I could use, please make suggestions.

The idea would be to disable the existing DCO's (under HAWK control) and enable an entirely new set of oscillators/sound generation to be injected into the audio path before the filter. I am not looking to spend much time on this. But I really would like to expand the Poly sound capabilities at the beginning of sound path.

Mike

Re: [korgpolyex] New mod...

2012-10-19 by james meagher

I have no specific suggestions, but I'd just like to be the first to say that I really like where this is heading.

James

On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Michael Hawkins <korgpolyex800@...> wrote:

I am considering adding something new to the Poly-800.

I am thoroughly disappointed with the Poly-800 DCO's.

1) The square wave output is OK but the sawtooth is horrible. It's much more of a slightly saw-ish square.
2) the detuning is pathetic. The detune circuit doesn't actually detune in the true sense. It just moves the DCO's 5-7 out of phase with DCO's 1-4.
3) There's no adjusting the wave shape at all. The adding and removing of harmonics is extremely rudimentary.

Now is the time for people to make suggestions for what they might like if I added new oscillators.

Keep in mind...

1) cost - cheap, cheap, cheap - try to keep the kit under $100 probably closer to $50.
2) complexity - simple - the kit is for modder's with simple electronic skills.
3) low time to develop - the full blown solution would be to use an FPGA to create waveforms. Sorry, not going that route because I don't have the time. Unless someone else can convince me that FPGA programming is going to be easy and require little time on my behalf.

Question: is anyone aware of a top octave generator still being manufactured that is similar to say the SGS M082 or the other various TG's that were widely used in the 80's? I can't find one but a simple design I have cooking would require a top octave generator.

Or, if anyone is aware of a low cost music synthesis chip I could use, please make suggestions.

The idea would be to disable the existing DCO's (under HAWK control) and enable an entirely new set of oscillators/sound generation to be injected into the audio path before the filter. I am not looking to spend much time on this. But I really would like to expand the Poly sound capabilities at the beginning of sound path.

Mike

--
C'est La Guerre Moving Pictures Inc.
364 Home Street
Winnipeg, Manitoba
R3G 1X4
(204) 918 9317

Re: [korgpolyex] New mod...

2012-10-19 by Gordon JC Pearce

On 19/10/12 18:43, Michael Hawkins wrote:

> 1) The square wave output is OK but the sawtooth is horrible. It's much
> more of a slightly saw-ish square.

It's pretty sawtoothy, although from a 4-bit DAC it's going to look more
like a staircase.

--
Gordon JC Pearce MM0YEQ

Re: [korgpolyex] New mod...

2012-10-19 by Daniel Forró

And if I remember well explanation somewhere, this staircase wave is
created only when all four stops in oscillator are on. It‘s done
artificially by balanced summing of them.

There‘s nothing like saw wave in Poly 800.

Daniel Forro

On Oct 20, 2012, at 6:03 AM, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:

> On 19/10/12 18:43, Michael Hawkins wrote:
>
>> 1) The square wave output is OK but the sawtooth is horrible. It's
>> much
>> more of a slightly saw-ish square.
>
> It's pretty sawtoothy, although from a 4-bit DAC it's going to look
> more
> like a staircase.
>
> --
> Gordon JC Pearce MM0YEQ
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Feel free to upload into the files section any sysex dumps and tape
> dumps of patches that you may have but please discuss (with the
> entire group) the posting of other files *before* posting them. This
> helps us to keep redundant information from showing up everywhere
> and also allows us to constantly improve the format and structure of
> the documentation. We talk about the HAWK-800 quite a bit but we
> also discuss and help owners of the original Poly-800 models. So
> don't be shy if you haven't got the HAWK-800.Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Re: New mod...

2012-10-20 by bimmerfan222

---if anyone is aware of a low cost music synthesis chip I could use, please make suggestions.---

This might be worth checking into,

http://www.electricdruid.net/index.php?page=projects.vcdo

it's a PIC
looks like it costs about $1.60 plus shipping from Thailand.

he's supplied the code with comments and raw code.. guess you could just upload the code onto microchip's order site and it'll be delivered to your door, pre-programmed.

Sounds like an interesting package.

Re: New mod...

2012-10-20 by scituate_mass

I'm all for this idea. I really like playing with my hawk-modded EX, but the basic sound of the DCOs makes me queasy. I always thought that maybe I just wasn't a big fan of the filter... so it's nice to hear that maybe it really is just the DCOs....

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, "bimmerfan222" <bperkins211@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> ---if anyone is aware of a low cost music synthesis chip I could use, please make suggestions.---
>
>
>
> This might be worth checking into,
>
> http://www.electricdruid.net/index.php?page=projects.vcdo
>
>
> it's a PIC
> looks like it costs about $1.60 plus shipping from Thailand.
>
> he's supplied the code with comments and raw code.. guess you could just upload the code onto microchip's order site and it'll be delivered to your door, pre-programmed.
>
>
> Sounds like an interesting package.
>

Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

2012-10-20 by Michael Hawkins

very interesting. Although it's a pity it doesn't have digital control of the oscillators. creating an accurate D2A and S&H's for controlling eight of then it will increase the cost of using that package.

Has anyone ever used the Keterex KX1400? http://keterex.com/kx1400eg.php

That looks interesting too.

Mike

From: bimmerfan222 <bperkins211@...>
To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 1:55 AM
Subject: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

---if anyone is aware of a low cost music synthesis chip I could use, please make suggestions.---

This might be worth checking into,

http://www.electricdruid.net/index.php?page=projects.vcdo

it's a PIC
looks like it costs about $1.60 plus shipping from Thailand.

he's supplied the code with comments and raw code.. guess you could just upload the code onto microchip's order site and it'll be delivered to your door, pre-programmed.

Sounds like an interesting package.

Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

2012-10-20 by Michael Hawkins

I used to think that the single filter was a big down side to the Poly. But over the years I slowly switched to blaming the DCO's. There is only so much you can do with a filter if the underlying signal is bland.

In the case of the DCO's, the lack of an independent second oscillator removes character. And the lack of more comprehensive harmonics that you get with a larger selection of waveforms also removes character.

Mike

From: scituate_mass <sneakyflute@...>
To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 7:56 AM
Subject: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

I'm all for this idea. I really like playing with my hawk-modded EX, but the basic sound of the DCOs makes me queasy. I always thought that maybe I just wasn't a big fan of the filter... so it's nice to hear that maybe it really is just the DCOs....

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, "bimmerfan222" <bperkins211@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> ---if anyone is aware of a low cost music synthesis chip I could use, please make suggestions.---
>
>
>
> This might be worth checking into,
>
> http://www.electricdruid.net/index.php?page=projects.vcdo
>
>
> it's a PIC
> looks like it costs about $1.60 plus shipping from Thailand.
>
> he's supplied the code with comments and raw code.. guess you could just upload the code onto microchip's order site and it'll be delivered to your door, pre-programmed.
>
>
> Sounds like an interesting package.
>

How about a Juno 106 clone?

2012-10-20 by bimmerfan222

http://www.analoguerenaissance.com/D5534A/

At 25 Euro each, they are pricey.. but the 80's tech should interface well.

The Juno-106 is probably the closest "real" ramp/saw wave you can get from 80's tech DCO's.

It might not be too difficult to figure out how/what he used to make his MC5534A clone and configure it for physical use in a Poly800.

This guy gives a good explanation of a MC5534A chip.

http://www.electricdruid.net/index.php?page=info.junodcos

Re: [korgpolyex] How about a Juno 106 clone?

2012-10-20 by Michael Hawkins

Those also are VCO's and would require D2A's.

From: bimmerfan222 <bperkins211@...>
To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 11:45 AM
Subject: [korgpolyex] How about a Juno 106 clone?

http://www.analoguerenaissance.com/D5534A/

At 25 Euro each, they are pricey.. but the 80's tech should interface well.

The Juno-106 is probably the closest "real" ramp/saw wave you can get from 80's tech DCO's.

It might not be too difficult to figure out how/what he used to make his MC5534A clone and configure it for physical use in a Poly800.

This guy gives a good explanation of a MC5534A chip.

http://www.electricdruid.net/index.php?page=info.junodcos

Re: [korgpolyex] New mod...

2012-10-20 by Nate King

I scoped all the waves to prove a point in an argument that went nowhere :) ill dig up the file and post it. Anyway, the 16' saw is the same as the 16' square (more or less- at least very similar). As you add footages, the square gets all wonky as the saw gets more sawish. The saw with all footages on isnt that terrible imho. The conclusion is only the saw with all footages sounds good and only the square at 16' sounds good. The rest is timbrally indistinct.
I would venture to say a better square would be just as welcome as a better saw.
Tom has other chips (tap2lfo has been used many times) and im sure he'd be open to discussion.
(Over my head here, but: ) could there be a use for an arduino? Atmega328? Cheap, easy to program, big community.

Nate
Paper Products Music

On Oct 19, 2012 6:36 PM, "Daniel Forró" <dan.for@...> wrote:
And if I remember well explanation somewhere, this staircase wave is
created only when all four stops in oscillator are on. It‘s done
artificially by balanced summing of them.

There‘s nothing like saw wave in Poly 800.

Daniel Forro

On Oct 20, 2012, at 6:03 AM, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:

> On 19/10/12 18:43, Michael Hawkins wrote:
>
>> 1) The square wave output is OK but the sawtooth is horrible. It's
>> much
>> more of a slightly saw-ish square.
>
> It's pretty sawtoothy, although from a 4-bit DAC it's going to look
> more
> like a staircase.
>
> --
> Gordon JC Pearce MM0YEQ
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Feel free to upload into the files section any sysex dumps and tape
> dumps of patches that you may have but please discuss (with the
> entire group) the posting of other files *before* posting them. This
> helps us to keep redundant information from showing up everywhere
> and also allows us to constantly improve the format and structure of
> the documentation. We talk about the HAWK-800 quite a bit but we
> also discuss and help owners of the original Poly-800 models. So
> don't be shy if you haven't got the HAWK-800.Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

------------------------------------

Feel free to upload into the files section any sysex dumps and tape dumps of patches that you may have but please discuss (with the entire group) the posting of other files *before* posting them. This helps us to keep redundant information from showing up everywhere and also allows us to constantly improve the format and structure of the documentation. We talk about the HAWK-800 quite a bit but we also discuss and help owners of the original Poly-800 models. So don't be shy if you haven't got the HAWK-800.Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/korgpolyex/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/korgpolyex/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
korgpolyex-digest@yahoogroups.com
korgpolyex-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
korgpolyex-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: New mod...

2012-10-20 by bimmerfan222

If Tom is open for discussion on his VCO.. then perhaps there would be a way to change the code so instead of it using CV's, it would use a digital input instead?
Just a thought.. I found his tone generator pretty nice in that you can create your own waves by modifying his code.

And you just can't beat the price of those little PICs.. just sayin' ;)

-Blaine

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Nate King <nate@...> wrote:
>
> I scoped all the waves to prove a point in an argument that went nowhere :)
> ill dig up the file and post it. Anyway, the 16' saw is the same as the 16'
> square (more or less- at least very similar). As you add footages, the
> square gets all wonky as the saw gets more sawish. The saw with all
> footages on isnt that terrible imho. The conclusion is only the saw with
> all footages sounds good and only the square at 16' sounds good. The rest
> is timbrally indistinct.
> I would venture to say a better square would be just as welcome as a better
> saw.
> Tom has other chips (tap2lfo has been used many times) and im sure he'd be
> open to discussion.
> (Over my head here, but: ) could there be a use for an arduino? Atmega328?
> Cheap, easy to program, big community.
>
> Nate
> Paper Products Music
> On Oct 19, 2012 6:36 PM, "Daniel Forró" <dan.for@...> wrote:
>
> > And if I remember well explanation somewhere, this staircase wave is
> > created only when all four stops in oscillator are on. It`s done
> > artificially by balanced summing of them.
> >
> > There`s nothing like saw wave in Poly 800.
> >
> > Daniel Forro
> >
> > On Oct 20, 2012, at 6:03 AM, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
> >
> > > On 19/10/12 18:43, Michael Hawkins wrote:
> > >
> > >> 1) The square wave output is OK but the sawtooth is horrible. It's
> > >> much
> > >> more of a slightly saw-ish square.
> > >
> > > It's pretty sawtoothy, although from a 4-bit DAC it's going to look
> > > more
> > > like a staircase.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Gordon JC Pearce MM0YEQ
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Feel free to upload into the files section any sysex dumps and tape
> > > dumps of patches that you may have but please discuss (with the
> > > entire group) the posting of other files *before* posting them. This
> > > helps us to keep redundant information from showing up everywhere
> > > and also allows us to constantly improve the format and structure of
> > > the documentation. We talk about the HAWK-800 quite a bit but we
> > > also discuss and help owners of the original Poly-800 models. So
> > > don't be shy if you haven't got the HAWK-800.Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Feel free to upload into the files section any sysex dumps and tape dumps
> > of patches that you may have but please discuss (with the entire group) the
> > posting of other files *before* posting them. This helps us to keep
> > redundant information from showing up everywhere and also allows us to
> > constantly improve the format and structure of the documentation. We talk
> > about the HAWK-800 quite a bit but we also discuss and help owners of the
> > original Poly-800 models. So don't be shy if you haven't got the
> > HAWK-800.Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

2012-10-20 by Michael Hawkins

Yes, looking into the PIC family of microcontrollers really looks like the way to go.

Even if we used the little 8 or 16/18 pin devices, they only cost at most 2 bucks and change.

I am going to look into those a bit more.

Mike

From: bimmerfan222 <bperkins211@...>
To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 2:19 PM
Subject: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

If Tom is open for discussion on his VCO.. then perhaps there would be a way to change the code so instead of it using CV's, it would use a digital input instead?
Just a thought.. I found his tone generator pretty nice in that you can create your own waves by modifying his code.

And you just can't beat the price of those little PICs.. just sayin' ;)

-Blaine

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Nate King <nate@...> wrote:
>
> I scoped all the waves to prove a point in an argument that went nowhere :)
> ill dig up the file and post it. Anyway, the 16' saw is the same as the 16'
> square (more or less- at least very similar). As you add footages, the
> square gets all wonky as the saw gets more sawish. The saw with all
> footages on isnt that terrible imho. The conclusion is only the saw with
> all footages sounds good and only the square at 16' sounds good. The rest
> is timbrally indistinct.
> I would venture to say a better square would be just as welcome as a better
> saw.
> Tom has other chips (tap2lfo has been used many times) and im sure he'd be
> open to discussion.
> (Over my head here, but: ) could there be a use for an arduino? Atmega328?
> Cheap, easy to program, big community.
>
> Nate
> Paper Products Music
> On Oct 19, 2012 6:36 PM, "Daniel Forró" <dan.for@...> wrote:
>
> > And if I remember well explanation somewhere, this staircase wave is
> > created only when all four stops in oscillator are on. It`s done
> > artificially by balanced summing of them.
> >
> > There`s nothing like saw wave in Poly 800.
> >
> > Daniel Forro
> >
> > On Oct 20, 2012, at 6:03 AM, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
> >
> > > On 19/10/12 18:43, Michael Hawkins wrote:
> > >
> > >> 1) The square wave output is OK but the sawtooth is horrible. It's
> > >> much
> > >> more of a slightly saw-ish square.
> > >
> > > It's pretty sawtoothy, although from a 4-bit DAC it's going to look
> > > more
> > > like a staircase.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Gordon JC Pearce MM0YEQ
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Feel free to upload into the files section any sysex dumps and tape
> > > dumps of patches that you may have but please discuss (with the
> > > entire group) the posting of other files *before* posting them. This
> > > helps us to keep redundant information from showing up everywhere
> > > and also allows us to constantly improve the format and structure of
> > > the documentation. We talk about the HAWK-800 quite a bit but we
> > > also discuss and help owners of the original Poly-800 models. So
> > > don't be shy if you haven't got the HAWK-800.Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Feel free to upload into the files section any sysex dumps and tape dumps
> > of patches that you may have but please discuss (with the entire group) the
> > posting of other files *before* posting them. This helps us to keep
> > redundant information from showing up everywhere and also allows us to
> > constantly improve the format and structure of the documentation. We talk
> > about the HAWK-800 quite a bit but we also discuss and help owners of the
> > original Poly-800 models. So don't be shy if you haven't got the
> > HAWK-800.Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Re: New mod...

2012-10-21 by J.

Cool idea.

I'm wondering if it would be feasible to make an option to disable the original DCOs and use the new ones, and have another option to have all DCOs on (old and new 4 OSC)???

Also I like the idea to maybe have one original DCO ( so we had 8 note polyphony ) and then and one or two new Oscillators. Total of two or three? Or maybe the two new OSCs will be able to do 8 note polyphony?

I have no idea how to do this, or what can be achieved. Just throwing out ideas....

J.

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Michael Hawkins <korgpolyex800@...> wrote:
>
> I am considering adding something new to the Poly-800.
>
> I am thoroughly disappointed with the Poly-800 DCO's.
>
> 1) The square wave output is OK but the sawtooth is horrible. It's much more of a slightly saw-ish square.
> 2) the detuning is pathetic. The detune circuit doesn't actually detune in the true sense. It just moves the DCO's 5-7 out of phase with DCO's 1-4.
> 3) There's no adjusting the wave shape at all. The adding and removing of harmonics is extremely rudimentary.
>
> Now is the time for people to make suggestions for what they might like if I added new oscillators.
>
> Keep in mind...
>
> 1) cost - cheap, cheap, cheap - try to keep the kit under $100 probably closer to $50.
>
> 2) complexity - simple - the kit is for modder's with simple electronic skills.
> 3) low time to develop - the full blown solution would be to use an FPGA to create waveforms. Sorry, not going that route because I don't have the time. Unless someone else can convince me that FPGA programming is going to be easy and require little time on my behalf.
>
> Question: is anyone aware of a top octave generator still being manufactured that is similar to say the SGS M082 or the other various TG's that were widely used in the 80's? I can't find one but a simple design I have cooking would require a top octave generator.
>
> Or, if anyone is aware of a low cost music synthesis chip I could use, please make suggestions.
>
>
> The idea would be to disable the existing DCO's (under HAWK control) and enable an entirely new set of oscillators/sound generation to be injected into the audio path before the filter. I am not looking to spend much time on this. But I really would like to expand the Poly sound capabilities at the beginning of sound path.
>
>
> Mike
>

Re: New mod...

2012-10-21 by k9k9dog

also think this is a cool idea. cross modulation would
be nice too, or whatever the jx3p has. modern DCOs must
have loads of possibilities.

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, "J." <lovgh2000@...> wrote:
>
> Cool idea.
>
> I'm wondering if it would be feasible to make an option to disable the original DCOs and use the new ones, and have another option to have all DCOs on (old and new 4 OSC)???
>
> Also I like the idea to maybe have one original DCO ( so we had 8 note polyphony ) and then and one or two new Oscillators. Total of two or three? Or maybe the two new OSCs will be able to do 8 note polyphony?
>
> I have no idea how to do this, or what can be achieved. Just throwing out ideas....
>
>
> J.
>
>
>
> --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Michael Hawkins <korgpolyex800@> wrote:
> >
> > I am considering adding something new to the Poly-800.
> >
> > I am thoroughly disappointed with the Poly-800 DCO's.
> >
> > 1) The square wave output is OK but the sawtooth is horrible. It's much more of a slightly saw-ish square.
> > 2) the detuning is pathetic. The detune circuit doesn't actually detune in the true sense. It just moves the DCO's 5-7 out of phase with DCO's 1-4.
> > 3) There's no adjusting the wave shape at all. The adding and removing of harmonics is extremely rudimentary.
> >
> > Now is the time for people to make suggestions for what they might like if I added new oscillators.
> >
> > Keep in mind...
> >
> > 1) cost - cheap, cheap, cheap - try to keep the kit under $100 probably closer to $50.
> >
> > 2) complexity - simple - the kit is for modder's with simple electronic skills.
> > 3) low time to develop - the full blown solution would be to use an FPGA to create waveforms. Sorry, not going that route because I don't have the time. Unless someone else can convince me that FPGA programming is going to be easy and require little time on my behalf.
> >
> > Question: is anyone aware of a top octave generator still being manufactured that is similar to say the SGS M082 or the other various TG's that were widely used in the 80's? I can't find one but a simple design I have cooking would require a top octave generator.
> >
> > Or, if anyone is aware of a low cost music synthesis chip I could use, please make suggestions.
> >
> >
> > The idea would be to disable the existing DCO's (under HAWK control) and enable an entirely new set of oscillators/sound generation to be injected into the audio path before the filter. I am not looking to spend much time on this. But I really would like to expand the Poly sound capabilities at the beginning of sound path.
> >
> >
> > Mike
> >
>

Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

2012-10-21 by Atom Smasher

i've been lurking since i hit my head and not keeping up with everything,
but i have to ask... at what point will you stop modding the P-800 and
just design a DIY kit that we can assemble, starting with a printed and
drilled board? now that you're looking at new DCOs, i'd say the time has
come ;)

among other things, you can really get the UI right, from the start...
like having a 2x16 char LCD, and 4-6 front-panel knobs that are
user-assignable, per patch.

i'm still waiting for a rack-mount kit for my EX-800, but if you come up
with your own DIY kit that's "inspired" by the P-800 (and its
modifications), and available with an option for a rack-kit, then i may
just sell my EX-800.

--
...atom

________________________
http://atom.smasher.org/
762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
-------------------------------------------------

"Today every inhabitant of this planet must contemplate the
day when this planet may no longer be habitable. Every man,
woman and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles,
hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut
at any moment by accident or miscalculation or madness."
-- John F. Kennedy

Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

2012-10-21 by Michael Hawkins

Hey Atom,

great to hear from you. I sent you an email about a week ago but I think your antispam rules are a bit too strict.

Anyway, I hope you're doing well and great to hear from you!

I don't have a lot of time on my hands these days so I am not sure which way I am going to go.

We have:

1) the unfinished rack project.
2) some unfinished software features in HAWK.
3) a desire for more control over DCO's

I am not sure which way to go to be honest.

Mike

From: Atom Smasher <atom@...>
To: "korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com" <korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

i've been lurking since i hit my head and not keeping up with everything,
but i have to ask... at what point will you stop modding the P-800 and
just design a DIY kit that we can assemble, starting with a printed and
drilled board? now that you're looking at new DCOs, i'd say the time has
come ;)

among other things, you can really get the UI right, from the start...
like having a 2x16 char LCD, and 4-6 front-panel knobs that are
user-assignable, per patch.

i'm still waiting for a rack-mount kit for my EX-800, but if you come up
with your own DIY kit that's "inspired" by the P-800 (and its
modifications), and available with an option for a rack-kit, then i may
just sell my EX-800.

--
...atom

________________________
http://atom.smasher.org/
762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
-------------------------------------------------

"Today every inhabitant of this planet must contemplate the
day when this planet may no longer be habitable. Every man,
woman and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles,
hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut
at any moment by accident or miscalculation or madness."
-- John F. Kennedy

Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

2012-10-22 by Nate King

yeah, after reading the last post by bimmerfan and re-reading atom's - I agree it doesn't make sense to add too many features rather than just start fresh. it would seem more intelligent to just design a small polysynth for diy rather than keep going with a $150 shell. Unless we just GUT what's in there - i'd be ok with that. I can help with the pcb design work but that's about all i'm good for :)

my 2p from experience:

1. very few people actually care about 19" rack units anymore. Those that do are studios and studios generally aren't interested in DIY or projects. I tried to repurpose 19" rack units for modular synth usage and I seemed to be the only one that thought it was a good idea.

2. a better HAWK is always welcome.

3. More control of the Oscillators in the original poly doesn't really get you much. as stated, neither the square or the saw is really that great to begin with, so chrome-plating a turd is :? What's more, it may be better suited to just replace the voice processor all together with one that just has more in the box options. Nothing too fancy, just more waveforms. Maybe even a third oscillator...... I'd be up for an extra filter, but it seems to add a level of complexity and expense that is unnecessary. Tweaking the voice itself and maybe turning it a bit more additive accomplishes the same or similar timbral options wise.

sorry, if that's blunt, I just don't like to beat around the bush. I love my poly for what it is, a $150 poly synth that is packed with features. If we get ridiculous with the features, it'll be near impossible to use. if we get too complex with the hardware, it will be too easy to botch - and likely be expensive.

the more I think about it, I really like the idea of gutting it and just using the important bits of hardware. shouldn't be that difficult for the common diy-er either.

Nate

On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Michael Hawkins <korgpolyex800@...> wrote:

Hey Atom,

great to hear from you. I sent you an email about a week ago but I think your antispam rules are a bit too strict.

Anyway, I hope you're doing well and great to hear from you!

I don't have a lot of time on my hands these days so I am not sure which way I am going to go.

We have:

1) the unfinished rack project.
2) some unfinished software features in HAWK.
3) a desire for more control over DCO's

I am not sure which way to go to be honest.

Mike

From: Atom Smasher <atom@...>
To: "korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com" <korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

i've been lurking since i hit my head and not keeping up with everything,
but i have to ask... at what point will you stop modding the P-800 and
just design a DIY kit that we can assemble, starting with a printed and
drilled board? now that you're looking at new DCOs, i'd say the time has
come ;)

among other things, you can really get the UI right, from the start...
like having a 2x16 char LCD, and 4-6 front-panel knobs that are
user-assignable, per patch.

i'm still waiting for a rack-mount kit for my EX-800, but if you come up
with your own DIY kit that's "inspired" by the P-800 (and its
modifications), and available with an option for a rack-kit, then i may
just sell my EX-800.

--
...atom

________________________
http://atom.smasher.org/
762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
-------------------------------------------------

"Today every inhabitant of this planet must contemplate the
day when this planet may no longer be habitable. Every man,
woman and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles,
hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut
at any moment by accident or miscalculation or madness."
-- John F. Kennedy

--
n a t e

Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

2012-10-22 by Atom Smasher

> great to hear from you. I sent you an email about a week ago but I think
> your antispam rules are a bit too strict.

==============

i just looked for it, and can't find it anywhere. if you can re-send it,
make sure it goes to "atom@...". thanks...

>
> Anyway, I hope you're doing well and great to hear from you!
>
> I don't have a lot of time on my hands these days so I am not sure which way I am going to go.
>
> We have:
>
> 1) the unfinished rack project.
> 2) some unfinished software features in HAWK.
> 3) a desire for more control over DCO's
>
> I am not sure which way to go to be honest.
>
> Mike
>
>
> _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
> From: Atom Smasher <atom@...>
> To: "korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com" <korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 11:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...
>
> i've been lurking since i hit my head and not keeping up with everything,
> but i have to ask... at what point will you stop modding the P-800 and
> just design a DIY kit that we can assemble, starting with a printed and
> drilled board? now that you're looking at new DCOs, i'd say the time has
> come ;)
>
> among other things, you can really get the UI right, from the start...
> like having a 2x16 char LCD, and 4-6 front-panel knobs that are
> user-assignable, per patch.
>
> i'm still waiting for a rack-mount kit for my EX-800, but if you come up
> with your own DIY kit that's "inspired" by the P-800 (and its
> modifications), and available with an option for a rack-kit, then i may
> just sell my EX-800.
>
> --
> ...atom
>
> ________________________
> http://atom.smasher.org/
> 762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> "Today every inhabitant of this planet must contemplate the
> day when this planet may no longer be habitable. Every man,
> woman and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles,
> hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut
> at any moment by accident or miscalculation or madness."
> -- John F. Kennedy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

--
...atom

________________________
http://atom.smasher.org/
762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
-------------------------------------------------

"A world in which it is wrong to murder an individual
civilian and right to drop a thousand tons of high
explosive on a residential area does sometimes make
me wonder whether this earth of ours is not a loony
bin made use of by some other planet."
-- George Orwell

Re: New mod...

2012-10-23 by k9k9dog

a DCO mod sounds like a reasonable idea, if kept
within reasonable bounds: if the project has got this
far and you think it is possible to implement finer
DCOs, where you can have pulse width modulation and
cross modulation, better and maybe more waveforms,
why not?(you'd also want pitch envelope, osc sync,
and maybe a tracking bias)
but then, that's as far as you can go! maybe take it
a bit in the direction of a jx3p (or esq1?)..

atom: racking kit for ex800? do you want the dimensions
of the rack ears so you can make your own?

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Atom Smasher <atom@...> wrote:
>
> > great to hear from you. I sent you an email about a week ago but I think
> > your antispam rules are a bit too strict.
> ==============
>
> i just looked for it, and can't find it anywhere. if you can re-send it,
> make sure it goes to "atom@...". thanks...
>
>
> >
> > Anyway, I hope you're doing well and great to hear from you!
> >
> > I don't have a lot of time on my hands these days so I am not sure which way I am going to go.
> >
> > We have:
> >
> > 1) the unfinished rack project.
> > 2) some unfinished software features in HAWK.
> > 3) a desire for more control over DCO's
> >
> > I am not sure which way to go to be honest.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> > _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
> > From: Atom Smasher <atom@...>
> > To: "korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com" <korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 11:58 AM
> > Subject: Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...
> >
> > Â i've been lurking since i hit my head and not keeping up with everything,
> > but i have to ask... at what point will you stop modding the P-800 and
> > just design a DIY kit that we can assemble, starting with a printed and
> > drilled board? now that you're looking at new DCOs, i'd say the time has
> > come ;)
> >
> > among other things, you can really get the UI right, from the start...
> > like having a 2x16 char LCD, and 4-6 front-panel knobs that are
> > user-assignable, per patch.
> >
> > i'm still waiting for a rack-mount kit for my EX-800, but if you come up
> > with your own DIY kit that's "inspired" by the P-800 (and its
> > modifications), and available with an option for a rack-kit, then i may
> > just sell my EX-800.
> >
> > --
> > ...atom
> >
> > ________________________
> > http://atom.smasher.org/
> > 762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
> > -------------------------------------------------
> >
> > "Today every inhabitant of this planet must contemplate the
> > day when this planet may no longer be habitable. Every man,
> > woman and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles,
> > hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut
> > at any moment by accident or miscalculation or madness."
> > -- John F. Kennedy
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> ...atom
>
> ________________________
> http://atom.smasher.org/
> 762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> "A world in which it is wrong to murder an individual
> civilian and right to drop a thousand tons of high
> explosive on a residential area does sometimes make
> me wonder whether this earth of ours is not a loony
> bin made use of by some other planet."
> -- George Orwell
>

Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

2012-10-23 by Alex Drinkwater

I've gotta say, I think this might be pushing the idea of 'modding' a bit far. You're getting into the kind of territory where you may as well just design a new synth from scratch. The major problem with adding more and more features to the existing Poly/EX-800 is going to be the the UI. It's already got to the point where you need to have the reference sheet from the back of the manual always to hand in order to edit the sounds, and a whole raft of new options isn't going to make that situation any better. This isn't in any way a criticism of Mike's excellent work- it's just that user interface design has come on a long way since the mid 80s, and the limited controls on offer on the original hardware looks more and more creaky the more functionality is crammed into the box.

Also, I have to say I actually quite like the oscillators.They may be far from technically perfect, but they have a lo-fi charm of their own. Upgrading the osc.s is surely going to highlight the single filter, too. To fix that, you'd need to implement per-voice filtering, and then you literally have remade the entire audio path, and you really would be better off designing a new synth from the ground up, without being hobbled by 25-year-old hardware.

Sorry to be so discouraging.

a|x

From: k9k9dog <domgoold@...>
To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, 23 October 2012, 17:43
Subject: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

a DCO mod sounds like a reasonable idea, if kept
within reasonable bounds: if the project has got this
far and you think it is possible to implement finer
DCOs, where you can have pulse width modulation and
cross modulation, better and maybe more waveforms,
why not?(you'd also want pitch envelope, osc sync,
and maybe a tracking bias)
but then, that's as far as you can go! maybe take it
a bit in the direction of a jx3p (or esq1?)..

atom: racking kit for ex800? do you want the dimensions
of the rack ears so you can make your own?

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Atom Smasher <atom@...> wrote:
>
> > great to hear from you. I sent you an email about a week ago but I think
> > your antispam rules are a bit too strict.
> ==============
>
> i just looked for it, and can't find it anywhere. if you can re-send it,
> make sure it goes to "atom@...". thanks...
>
>
> >
> > Anyway, I hope you're doing well and great to hear from you!
> >
> > I don't have a lot of time on my hands these days so I am not sure which way I am going to go.
> >
> > We have:
> >
> > 1) the unfinished rack project.
> > 2) some unfinished software features in HAWK.
> > 3) a desire for more control over DCO's
> >
> > I am not sure which way to go to be honest.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> > _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
> > From: Atom Smasher <atom@...>
> > To: "korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com" <korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 11:58 AM
> > Subject: Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...
> >
> > Â i've been lurking since i hit my head and not keeping up with everything,
> > but i have to ask... at what point will you stop modding the P-800 and
> > just design a DIY kit that we can assemble, starting with a printed and
> > drilled board? now that you're looking at new DCOs, i'd say the time has
> > come ;)
> >
> > among other things, you can really get the UI right, from the start...
> > like having a 2x16 char LCD, and 4-6 front-panel knobs that are
> > user-assignable, per patch.
> >
> > i'm still waiting for a rack-mount kit for my EX-800, but if you come up
> > with your own DIY kit that's "inspired" by the P-800 (and its
> > modifications), and available with an option for a rack-kit, then i may
> > just sell my EX-800.
> >
> > --
> > ...atom
> >
> > ________________________
> > http://atom.smasher.org/
> > 762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
> > -------------------------------------------------
> >
> > "Today every inhabitant of this planet must contemplate the
> > day when this planet may no longer be habitable. Every man,
> > woman and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles,
> > hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut
> > at any moment by accident or miscalculation or madness."
> > -- John F. Kennedy
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> ...atom
>
> ________________________
> http://atom.smasher.org/
> 762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> "A world in which it is wrong to murder an individual
> civilian and right to drop a thousand tons of high
> explosive on a residential area does sometimes make
> me wonder whether this earth of ours is not a loony
> bin made use of by some other planet."
> -- George Orwell
>

------------------------------------

Feel free to upload into the files section any sysex dumps and tape dumps of patches that you may have but please discuss (with the entire group) the posting of other files *before* posting them. This helps us to keep redundant information from showing up everywhere and also allows us to constantly improve the format and structure of the documentation. We talk about the HAWK-800 quite a bit but we also discuss and help owners of the original Poly-800 models. So don't be shy if you haven't got the HAWK-800.Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/korgpolyex/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/korgpolyex/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
korgpolyex-digest@yahoogroups.com
korgpolyex-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
korgpolyex-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: New mod...

2012-10-23 by bimmerfan222

> Sorry to be so discouraging.

I dont think you're being discouraging.. just making sense.

Can it be done with cheap parts, yea.. but not without a good chance of many many hours programming those parts.

Unless you just buy something like this-

http://mutable-instruments.net/shruthi1

It's a monosynth using a PIC and a analog filter.

This one is like above, but uses the Korg NJM2069 filter our Poly's have..

http://www.vacoloco.net/synths/zira/

Both are built by the same guy. They have copies of the original PPG Wave 2.2 and Woldorf wavetables. Which are probably the nicest sounds you can get.
They also do the 80's arcade/computer bleeps too (like the poly)... via "bit crushing" I believe.

Point is, it's already done and in a kit.. can it be modified for the HAWK, yea.. but you'd have to buy/create 6-8 of them to get those extra voices.

He has open source code on it evidently.. but I'm not sure if the pic he used is available anymore.. it'd probably have to be altered.

To me there is no quick easy solution to changing the DCO's for something that is a significant improvement.

It's either-

a quick cheapo swap out that's going to sound about the same as what's in there now

go the PIC route and do alot of programming... or

drop the idea and do something else, like add an extra Filter in the mix.. making DCO's 1-4 have one filter and DCO 5-7 with Noise going to the other filter... then do some code magic to get some wild modulations going between them.
The filter mod seems to me to be the quickest/cheapest mod that would pack the most punch for the $$$ and development time.

Dont't get me wrong tho.. if I could make my Poly800 sound like a PPG Wave 2.2, I'd be very tempted to shell out a couple hundred to make it happen.. but if it's going to be much more than that, I might as well be buying a newer synth that can do a nice emulation of it and have two synths instead of one.

-Blaine

Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

2012-10-24 by Ullrich Peter

Correction: The Shruthi and Zira are NOT built by the same guy!

The Zira is developed by Paul Maddox (Great Britain) and the Shruthi from Olivier Gillet (France)

Ciao
Peter

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com [mailto:korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com] Im Auftrag von bimmerfan222
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 24. Oktober 2012 01:09
An: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
Betreff: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

> Sorry to be so discouraging.

I dont think you're being discouraging.. just making sense.

Can it be done with cheap parts, yea.. but not without a good chance of many many hours programming those parts.

Unless you just buy something like this-

http://mutable-instruments.net/shruthi1

It's a monosynth using a PIC and a analog filter.

This one is like above, but uses the Korg NJM2069 filter our Poly's have..

http://www.vacoloco.net/synths/zira/

Both are built by the same guy. They have copies of the original PPG Wave 2.2 and Woldorf wavetables. Which are probably the nicest sounds you can get.
They also do the 80's arcade/computer bleeps too (like the poly)... via "bit crushing" I believe.

Point is, it's already done and in a kit.. can it be modified for the HAWK, yea.. but you'd have to buy/create 6-8 of them to get those extra voices.

He has open source code on it evidently.. but I'm not sure if the pic he used is available anymore.. it'd probably have to be altered.

To me there is no quick easy solution to changing the DCO's for something that is a significant improvement.

It's either-

a quick cheapo swap out that's going to sound about the same as what's in there now

go the PIC route and do alot of programming... or

drop the idea and do something else, like add an extra Filter in the mix.. making DCO's 1-4 have one filter and DCO 5-7 with Noise going to the other filter... then do some code magic to get some wild modulations going between them.
The filter mod seems to me to be the quickest/cheapest mod that would pack the most punch for the $$$ and development time.

Dont't get me wrong tho.. if I could make my Poly800 sound like a PPG Wave 2.2, I'd be very tempted to shell out a couple hundred to make it happen.. but if it's going to be much more than that, I might as well be buying a newer synth that can do a nice emulation of it and have two synths instead of one.

-Blaine

------------------------------------

Feel free to upload into the files section any sysex dumps and tape dumps of patches that you may have but please discuss (with the entire group) the posting of other files *before* posting them. This helps us to keep redundant information from showing up everywhere and also allows us to constantly improve the format and structure of the documentation. We talk about the HAWK-800 quite a bit but we also discuss and help owners of the original Poly-800 models. So don't be shy if you haven't got the HAWK-800.Yahoo! Groups Links

The information contained in this e-mail message is privileged and
confidential and is for the exclusive use of the addressee. The person
who receives this message and who is not the addressee, one of his
employees or an agent entitled to hand it over to the addressee, is
informed that he may not use, disclose or reproduce the contents
thereof, and is kindly asked to notify the sender and delete the e-mail
immediately.

Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

2012-10-24 by Alex Drinkwater

I was just going to say that. I've built a number of Mutable Instruments products, and I can vouch for the fact they're very cool. Mike, if you are going to go ahead with the new oscillators, Olivier used PICs, and releases the firmware for all his products as open-source, so it would be well worth having a look, if you haven't already done so.

a|x

From: Ullrich Peter <peter.ullrich@...>
To: "korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com" <korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 24 October 2012, 7:51
Subject: Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

Correction: The Shruthi and Zira are NOT built by the same guy!

The Zira is developed by Paul Maddox (Great Britain) and the Shruthi from Olivier Gillet (France)

Ciao
Peter

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com [mailto:korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com] Im Auftrag von bimmerfan222
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 24. Oktober 2012 01:09
An: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
Betreff: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

> Sorry to be so discouraging.

I dont think you're being discouraging.. just making sense.

Can it be done with cheap parts, yea.. but not without a good chance of many many hours programming those parts.

Unless you just buy something like this-

http://mutable-instruments.net/shruthi1

It's a monosynth using a PIC and a analog filter.

This one is like above, but uses the Korg NJM2069 filter our Poly's have..

http://www.vacoloco.net/synths/zira/

Both are built by the same guy. They have copies of the original PPG Wave 2.2 and Woldorf wavetables. Which are probably the nicest sounds you can get.
They also do the 80's arcade/computer bleeps too (like the poly)... via "bit crushing" I believe.

Point is, it's already done and in a kit.. can it be modified for the HAWK, yea.. but you'd have to buy/create 6-8 of them to get those extra voices.

He has open source code on it evidently.. but I'm not sure if the pic he used is available anymore.. it'd probably have to be altered.

To me there is no quick easy solution to changing the DCO's for something that is a significant improvement.

It's either-

a quick cheapo swap out that's going to sound about the same as what's in there now

go the PIC route and do alot of programming... or

drop the idea and do something else, like add an extra Filter in the mix.. making DCO's 1-4 have one filter and DCO 5-7 with Noise going to the other filter... then do some code magic to get some wild modulations going between them.
The filter mod seems to me to be the quickest/cheapest mod that would pack the most punch for the $$$ and development time.

Dont't get me wrong tho.. if I could make my Poly800 sound like a PPG Wave 2.2, I'd be very tempted to shell out a couple hundred to make it happen.. but if it's going to be much more than that, I might as well be buying a newer synth that can do a nice emulation of it and have two synths instead of one.

-Blaine

------------------------------------

Feel free to upload into the files section any sysex dumps and tape dumps of patches that you may have but please discuss (with the entire group) the posting of other files *before* posting them. This helps us to keep redundant information from showing up everywhere and also allows us to constantly improve the format and structure of the documentation. We talk about the HAWK-800 quite a bit but we also discuss and help owners of the original Poly-800 models. So don't be shy if you haven't got the HAWK-800.Yahoo! Groups Links

The information contained in this e-mail message is privileged and
confidential and is for the exclusive use of the addressee. The person
who receives this message and who is not the addressee, one of his
employees or an agent entitled to hand it over to the addressee, is
informed that he may not use, disclose or reproduce the contents
thereof, and is kindly asked to notify the sender and delete the e-mail
immediately.

------------------------------------

Feel free to upload into the files section any sysex dumps and tape dumps of patches that you may have but please discuss (with the entire group) the posting of other files *before* posting them. This helps us to keep redundant information from showing up everywhere and also allows us to constantly improve the format and structure of the documentation. We talk about the HAWK-800 quite a bit but we also discuss and help owners of the original Poly-800 models. So don't be shy if you haven't got the HAWK-800.Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/korgpolyex/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/korgpolyex/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
korgpolyex-digest@yahoogroups.com
korgpolyex-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
korgpolyex-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [korgpolyex] New mod...

2012-10-24 by Paul Cunningham

Mike -- I still have my pristine unmodded Poly-800II and you have peaked my interest...

1) User-installable wavetables. Waldorf-style wavetable modulation.

2) User-installable multisamples. Some mellotrons through that filter would be fantastic!

3) Multiple oscillators per voice when using 8 (or more) voices.

4) Of course anything analog would be sweet, but you could definitely do better on the DCOs and cheaply!

Here are some other non-oscillator mods I'd get into:

4) MIDI synchable/tap tempo on the delay. Realtime effect controls.

5) Install keyboard from a Korg 707 for velocity and aftertouch.

On Oct 19, 2012, at 1:43 PM, Michael Hawkins wrote:

I am considering adding something new to the Poly-800.

I am thoroughly disappointed with the Poly-800 DCO's.

1) The square wave output is OK but the sawtooth is horrible. It's much more of a slightly saw-ish square.
2) the detuning is pathetic. The detune circuit doesn't actually detune in the true sense. It just moves the DCO's 5-7 out of phase with DCO's 1-4.
3) There's no adjusting the wave shape at all. The adding and removing of harmonics is extremely rudimentary.

Now is the time for people to make suggestions for what they might like if I added new oscillators.

Keep in mind...

1) cost - cheap, cheap, cheap - try to keep the kit under $100 probably closer to $50.
2) complexity - simple - the kit is for modder's with simple electronic skills.
3) low time to develop - the full blown solution would be to use an FPGA to create waveforms. Sorry, not going that route because I don't have the time. Unless someone else can convince me that FPGA programming is going to be easy and require little time on my behalf.

Question: is anyone aware of a top octave generator still being manufactured that is similar to say the SGS M082 or the other various TG's that were widely used in the 80's? I can't find one but a simple design I have cooking would require a top octave generator.

Or, if anyone is aware of a low cost music synthesis chip I could use, please make suggestions.

The idea would be to disable the existing DCO's (under HAWK control) and enable an entirely new set of oscillators/sound generation to be injected into the audio path before the filter. I am not looking to spend much time on this. But I really would like to expand the Poly sound capabilities at the beginning of sound path.

Mike

Re: New mod...

2012-12-04 by 7yash

In addition... the Shruthi-1 uses an ATMEL, it's an AVR, not a PIC.

My thoughts: yes, the Osc system is too limited. I can recognize the oscs most of the time. The filter is amazing, so improving the oscs is the way to go.

This is, after all a paraphonic synth, so for realistic, cheap mods, it will stay this way, or else if you want a real polyphonic one, you can get a DW-6000 or DW-8000 (got a broken one for $75 that I resurrected), or a DSS-1.

Check out what this guy did - he stuck a Toshiba Libretto with some FM virtual synths connected to the MIDI-OUT and also the circuit board of an Alesis NanoVerb inside.

Sounds fantastic.

Something along this line would be awesome:

1. Use an Arduino-based, flexible OSC system, i.e. 3 to 4 Oscs with mixing, cross-mod, sync, Minimal FM, divide-down if necessary (to mimic the classic paraphonic string synths), and inject within the Filter

2. Stick in some additional multi-effects if possible

The best thing ever would be to have a full computer with tons of good VST through the filter.

Yash

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Ullrich Peter <peter.ullrich@...> wrote:
>
> Correction: The Shruthi and Zira are NOT built by the same guy!
>
> The Zira is developed by Paul Maddox (Great Britain) and the Shruthi from Olivier Gillet (France)
>
> Ciao
> Peter
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com [mailto:korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com] Im Auftrag von bimmerfan222
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 24. Oktober 2012 01:09
> An: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
> Betreff: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Sorry to be so discouraging.
>
>
> I dont think you're being discouraging.. just making sense.
>
>
>
> Can it be done with cheap parts, yea.. but not without a good chance of many many hours programming those parts.
>
> Unless you just buy something like this-
>
> http://mutable-instruments.net/shruthi1
>
> It's a monosynth using a PIC and a analog filter.
>
> This one is like above, but uses the Korg NJM2069 filter our Poly's have..
>
> http://www.vacoloco.net/synths/zira/
>
>
> Both are built by the same guy. They have copies of the original PPG Wave 2.2 and Woldorf wavetables. Which are probably the nicest sounds you can get.
> They also do the 80's arcade/computer bleeps too (like the poly)... via "bit crushing" I believe.
>
> Point is, it's already done and in a kit.. can it be modified for the HAWK, yea.. but you'd have to buy/create 6-8 of them to get those extra voices.
>
> He has open source code on it evidently.. but I'm not sure if the pic he used is available anymore.. it'd probably have to be altered.
>
> To me there is no quick easy solution to changing the DCO's for something that is a significant improvement.
>
> It's either-
>
> a quick cheapo swap out that's going to sound about the same as what's in there now
>
> go the PIC route and do alot of programming... or
>
> drop the idea and do something else, like add an extra Filter in the mix.. making DCO's 1-4 have one filter and DCO 5-7 with Noise going to the other filter... then do some code magic to get some wild modulations going between them.
> The filter mod seems to me to be the quickest/cheapest mod that would pack the most punch for the $$$ and development time.
>
> Dont't get me wrong tho.. if I could make my Poly800 sound like a PPG Wave 2.2, I'd be very tempted to shell out a couple hundred to make it happen.. but if it's going to be much more than that, I might as well be buying a newer synth that can do a nice emulation of it and have two synths instead of one.
>
>
> -Blaine
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Feel free to upload into the files section any sysex dumps and tape dumps of patches that you may have but please discuss (with the entire group) the posting of other files *before* posting them. This helps us to keep redundant information from showing up everywhere and also allows us to constantly improve the format and structure of the documentation. We talk about the HAWK-800 quite a bit but we also discuss and help owners of the original Poly-800 models. So don't be shy if you haven't got the HAWK-800.Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
> The information contained in this e-mail message is privileged and
> confidential and is for the exclusive use of the addressee. The person
> who receives this message and who is not the addressee, one of his
> employees or an agent entitled to hand it over to the addressee, is
> informed that he may not use, disclose or reproduce the contents
> thereof, and is kindly asked to notify the sender and delete the e-mail
> immediately.
>

Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

2012-12-04 by Gordon JC Pearce

On 04/12/12 02:03, 7yash wrote:

> Something along this line would be awesome:
>
> 1. Use an Arduino-based, flexible OSC system, i.e. 3 to 4 Oscs with
> mixing, cross-mod, sync, Minimal FM, divide-down if necessary (to
> mimic the classic paraphonic string synths), and inject within the
> Filter

You'd struggle to get four oscillators out of a 16MHz AVR, particularly
if you want them bandlimited (and you *do* want them bandlimited).

> 2. Stick in some additional multi-effects if possible
>
> The best thing ever would be to have a full computer with tons of
> good VST through the filter.

Why? If you're going down the softsynth route, do the filter on the
computer as well.

--
Gordonjcp MM0YEQ

Re: New mod...

2012-12-04 by bimmerfan222

> > The best thing ever would be to have a full computer with tons of
> > good VST through the filter.
>
> Why? If you're going down the softsynth route, do the filter on the
> computer as well.
>
> --
> Gordonjcp MM0YEQ
>

LOL.. yea.. just about might as well virtual filter it too.
But the Korg's filter can sound so fat and unique.

What he's saying above can easily be done by just running external audio thru the Poly 800's filter.

Re: New mod...

2012-12-05 by 7yash

No, a virtual filter wouldn't replace the existing Korg NJM with the FM mod and so on.

If going through a VST instrument, you would want the filter there to be fully open or disabled and use the Korg filter instead.

Or else combine the VST filter with normal use with a touch of the Korg Filter which would provide the analog VCF life to it.

Re: New mod...

2012-12-05 by 7yash

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Gordon JC Pearce <gordon@...> wrote:

> You'd struggle to get four oscillators out of a 16MHz AVR, particularly
> if you want them bandlimited (and you *do* want them bandlimited).

Then use a faster one or do as Olivier GIllet did with an Atmel and re-program using C++ instead of Processing on the Arduino.

> Why? If you're going down the softsynth route, do the filter on the
> computer as well.

No, that's besides the point: you already have a great filter in the Korg. We're modding an existing paraphonic whose limitation is the OSC sections - there's nothing wrong with the filter - it's a fantastic filter.

Re: [korgpolyex] Re: New mod...

2012-12-07 by gordon@gjcp.net

On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 12:18:03AM -0000, 7yash wrote:

> --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Gordon JC Pearce <gordon@...> wrote:
> > You'd struggle to get four oscillators out of a 16MHz AVR, particularly
> > if you want them bandlimited (and you *do* want them bandlimited).
>
> Then use a faster one or do as Olivier GIllet did with an Atmel and re-program using C++ instead of Processing on the Arduino.

The Arduino is programmed in C++. Processing is something completely different - Java-based, but sharing a similar-looking IDE.

Even in assembler, it's a struggle to generate more than two bandlimited oscillators on a 16MHz AVR8. They're just not fast enough. A better choice would be an ARM processer like maybe an STM32 - 32-bit processor, hardware arithmetic, more registers and the slowest ones clock up to 24MHz. They're even surface-mount so they're easier to work with than nasty messy through-hole parts.

> > Why? If you're going down the softsynth route, do the filter on the
> > computer as well.
>
> No, that's besides the point: you already have a great filter in the Korg. We're modding an existing paraphonic whose limitation is the OSC sections - there's nothing wrong with the filter - it's a fantastic filter.

The filter is okay, but nothing special - it's a plain ordinary four-pole OTA design. Switching between 12dB and 24dB per octave would have been nice to have as standard ;-)

I'd lay money down on most people who harp on about how incredible analogue filters are being unable to tell the difference between analogue and a semidecent digital implementation ;-)

--
Gordonjcp MM0YEQ