MOTM

> --- Original Message -----
> From: Paul Schreiber <synth1@...>
> JH and I are working on a smaller, cheaper dual VCA
> that does NOT pan/fade, that I could ship MUCH
> SOONER that the MOTM-130.

I certainly agree that a decent VCA of some nature ought to be high on the
list.  While new filters and additional LFOs are nice to have, we are
starving for VCAs out here in MOTM land. :)

Now time for some stupid Stooge Stuff.
I have a question about pan / fade mode.  Maybe I am missing something
obvious, but it seems like pan / fade would be a hugely easy feature to add
to and dual VCA panel space permitting.  Let me play "what if," and those
who know better can correct me.

What if the dual VCA had 3 inputs.  1 input dedicated to each VCA and one
that splits to both.
What is the dual VCA had 3 outputs.  1 output directly from each VCA and one
that is a mix of both
What if the dual VCA had +/- CV inputs for one of the VCAs (lets say the
second for discussion).  The inverted (-) CV for the second could be
normalled over from the first.  If you did jack into the second, the common,
but inverted CV would be disconnected from the second VCA. So, you would
need only one CV for pan or fade.

This arrangement adds what seems like very little circuitry and only 2 jacks
(mix in, mix out) to a dual VCA package.  Yet, depending on how you plug it,
you can have 2 separate VCAs, a fader, or a panner - no switch required.

To me this would be more useful than another "ordinary" ring modulator. The
next MOTM ring modulator shodul have something special.  What?  Hell, I
don't know.  I'm just a stooge.

> I know things are bogging down. I'm going AFAHP :)

We all think you are doing a wonderful job.  But, we really need VCAs. :)
You are forcing me to use a Synth.com VCA and it hurts. <snicker>

Larry (prepared to buy 2 dual VCAs - pan / fade featured please).