MOTM

I wonder if this is a West Coast vs East Coast thing?  Moog vs 
Buchla (or Serge for that matter).  MOTM is East coast with each 
module dedicated (more or less) to a single function.  So if I 
understand correctly, each MOTM module would have low desity.  I 
like it that way, but that's just me.

Jurgen's idea for a utility module is very welcome.  I have long 
wanted something like this for my MOTM.

Mike

--- In motm@y..., "Richard Brewster" <pugix@n...> wrote:
> You are talking about micro modules.  The problem with them is 
they usually
> have zero functional density.  Comparators, inverters, 
attenuators, mixers,
> and so forth do not originate any signals, nor do they ordinarily 
have
> voltage-controllable parameters.  So unless you have a large 
studio with a
> lot of panel space to spare, it's better to integrate these 
processors into
> other modules, just like you see in most MOTM modules.
> 
> Here is an example of extremely high functional density.  I once 
built an
> Electronotes "multiphase waveform animator."  This module had only 
two panel
> jacks, in and out.  The input was a sawtooth wave.  Nine internal 
mutually
> detuned fixed-frequency VCOs drove nine parallel phase shifters, 
and all the
> outputs were mixed.  This produced an incredibly rich and active 
timbre that
> perfectly tracked the input frequency.  The functional density was 
9.  For
> two jacks of panel space there were 9 independent signal sources.  
The
> animator offered no voltage-controlled parameters at all.  Hmm...
> Actually, there were the nine phase shifters, too.  So maybe this 
could be
> considered 18 density!  That really was an amazing module.
> 
> I may need to rethink the quantification of a controllable 
parameter to
> include internally controlled ones, such as the 410 VCF.  It has 
three
> filters, each having VC frequency controlled by internal VCOs.  
This is
> similar to what I just described.  By this criterion, I'd have to 
increase
> the number of controllable parameters for the 410 from 3 to 5.  
Coming full
> circle, here is an argument for just the opposite of micro 
modules.  What if
> more modules contained internal LFOs?
> 
> Whatever direction these design considerations go would skew the 
resulting
> music in certain directions.  It would be a different sort of 
sound that
> contained, say dozens of LFOs whirring, as opposed, say to dozens 
of
> sequencers.  What it comes down to is that we as musicians will 
tend to
> select the kinds of modules that get us closer to the sounds we 
like.  And
> the less we know in advance what we will like, the more and varied 
modules
> we will want!
> 
> Richard
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jhaible" <jhaible@d...>
> To: <motm@y...>; "pugix" <pugix@n...>
> Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 10:55 AM
> Subject: Re: [motm] Functional density - or what to do while 
waiting for
> your MOTM modules
> 
> 
> > > Being an old Serge guy, I long for the Serge dual slewing 
module.
> > > Now, if Paul would make a very minor modification to the 820 
Lag
> > > Processor we would have this.  Put a comparator with big 
hysteresis
> > > on the output, so that when the output level reaches maximum 
(+5v)
> > > the comparator puts out a -6v.  Now the comparator will stay 
at -6v
> > > until the output goes all the way down to -5v, at which point 
it
> > > snaps back to +6v again.  So what, you say?  Well, now you now 
have a
> > > pulse output.  Patch that output into the lag input and now 
you have
> > > an LFO with a voltage-controllable waveshape.  Functional 
density
> > > goes up to 1.5.  But even better, I would like to see a micro 
Lag
> > > Processor/LFO, fitting into a 1U panel with six jacks and three
> > > pots.
> >
> > This is a good idea, but what about this: A sparate module with 
all kind
> > of auxiliary modules, comparators, inverters, logic functions. 
Then you
> > can route the VCLAG to a comparator, but you can also connect 
the ADSR
> > this way (only guessing here). And you could use the comparator 
for
> > other functions, like keyboard split, for triggering a ADSR from 
an
> > amplified audio signal, and so on.
> >
> > I would provide multiple jacks on the auxiliary module then 
(like, the
> > comparator having two input jacks in parallel), because you will
> > most likely use it together with another module.
> >
> > JH.
> >
> >
> >