MOTM

S&H Correlation is typically implemented as a lag circuit prior to the
sample and hold.  This restricts the range of S&H over time, or correlation.

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: motm@yahoogroups.com [mailto:motm@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
> strohs56k
> Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 5:57 PM
> To: motm@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [motm] Re: Another thought
> 
> 
> Am I wrong on this or did someone state that the "source of
> uncertainty" works by feeding noise into a S&H and mixing a portion of
> the S&H output back into the input.  This is the "correlation" knob
> and the more feedback the less of a step that occurs when the S&H is
> clocked.  Right?  As such, I don't see how you can "split up" these
> modules if this features is to be included.  It seems like we end up
> with several modules with the same basic circuitry inside and so we
> pay for the expensive AD/DA converters several times over.
> 
> Of the features talked about thus far, I think the high resolution
> converters and multiple outputs are very desirable.  (Seems like 4
> outputs is about right.)  If the big selling point is "no droop" on
> the S&H outputs it seems very desirable that we can process pitch CVs
> in addition to noise sources.
> 
> Other features that seem useful to me are the clock polarity switch
> and the correlation knob to feed some of the output back to the input.
>  Could a second switch choose which S&H output the feedback comes
> from?  (Say, first tap or last tap.  Or if we end up with 3 outputs, a
> 3 position switch could select between the three taps?)  Would it make
> much difference which tap the feedback comes from?
> 
> Most people seem to think the noise source does not needed to be
> included in this module.  I think I agree.  Seems like a really high
> quality S&H with those few extras makes the most sense.
> 
> seth
> 
>