MOTM

In terms of audio signals, Z-plane filters, etc., the term "morphing" does
have some merit, but those are more complex, multi-dimensional signals, not
simple summations. A control voltage is just a level at a particular point
in time, so it seems strange to refer to a varying CV as 'morphing.' Is an
EG "morphing" it's output? I guess technically, "morph" just means "form,"
so one could argue that it does, but it seems odd to apply that term to such
a simple process. The whole point of voltage-controlled synthesis is the
ability to alter voltages in real time, so by that definition, they're *all*
morphing.

Any time you feed more than one CV into the summer of a module, say the CV
inputs to a filter, and controlling the strengths of those cvs
independantly, you're getting the same effect.

I apologize if it sounds like I'm beating a dead horse, but I'm just trying
to understand what I'm missing. Personally, while I intend to buy at least
one of every MOTM module, ad infinitum, I don't share the ravenous interest
in the Dual VCA/Panner that most others on this list do, and I feel like I'm
just missing something that everyone else understands better. The selectable
slope is cool, sure, and the greater precision. But in general there's an
understanding out there that there's "nothing like it" in the MOTM line, and
that confuses me.

With regards to the term "morphing," I just know that if I saw that as an
advertized feature and it turned out that it was just doing a simple
cross-fade between two analog voltages, I'd be let down, because that term
is applied to more sophisticated processes in other areas. Again, that's
assuming that I'm not missing something here.

>>>>And finally you can do a crossfade for each and every CV, rather than
simple switching. That means a dual VCA for *each* parameter. I think
there is good reason to call this "morphing".

JH:

This is a really good point. (I had a patch editor for my old Yamaha TX81Z
that allowed you to "blend" all of the parameter values between two patches
by a percentage (or randomize) to come up with a "new" sound, and it was
actually useful. They didn't call it "morphing" but it's the same idea. The
sound you get from modulating between all of the parameter values of two
patches is differnt from just blending the two output waveforms. That's just
mixing.)

I agree with all of your points, and that makes everything much more clear.