MOTM

1)    motm licensed woggle bug
2)    roland / juno filter
3)    scale quantizer
4)    clock source with optional daughter module (see below)
5)    2u panel stacked with LEDs that flash in time with the clock source
6)    pong videogame interface (i'm working on this)

erm can't think of any more, my curry has just turned up...

apologies to paul s for the incoming erm, 'discussion'
cheers
paul b

At 10:35 PM +0000 12/17/01, sikorsky wrote:
>
>1)    motm licensed woggle bug

I remember seeing a mock-up of an motm panel.
Perhaps Blacet will offer the Woggle Bug in kit form.

>2)    roland / juno filter

why??

>3)    scale quantizer

I'd rather see a sequencer first.  Until then, the mini-wave does 8-bit
quantizing.

>4)    clock source with optional daughter module (see below)

You mean with a BPM display??

>5)    2u panel stacked with LEDs that flash in time with the clock source

Most folks just get a tree :)

>6)    pong videogame interface (i'm working on this)

Talk to Hux Flux ;)

>erm can't think of any more, my curry has just turned up...
>
>apologies to paul s for the incoming erm, 'discussion'

I'm sure it's just background noise at this point...

so is a Paul S. bobble-head doll out of the question?

-----Original Message-----
From: mark@... [mailto:mark@...]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 7:36 PM
To: sikorsky
Cc: MOTM List
Subject: Re: [motm] xmas motm list to santa


At 10:35 PM +0000 12/17/01, sikorsky wrote:
>
>1)    motm licensed woggle bug

I remember seeing a mock-up of an motm panel.
Perhaps Blacet will offer the Woggle Bug in kit form.

>2)    roland / juno filter

why??

>3)    scale quantizer

I'd rather see a sequencer first.  Until then, the mini-wave does 8-bit
quantizing.

>4)    clock source with optional daughter module (see below)

You mean with a BPM display??

>5)    2u panel stacked with LEDs that flash in time with the clock source

Most folks just get a tree :)

>6)    pong videogame interface (i'm working on this)

Talk to Hux Flux ;)

>erm can't think of any more, my curry has just turned up...
>
>apologies to paul s for the incoming erm, 'discussion'

I'm sure it's just background noise at this point...







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

> 
> so is a Paul S. bobble-head doll out of the question?
> 

Dart board target, maybe.

Paul S.

hello all,
> >1)    motm licensed woggle bug
> I remember seeing a mock-up of an motm panel.
> Perhaps Blacet will offer the Woggle Bug in kit form.

i also remember a mock up somewhere, so maybe this was a veiled attempt to
get interest on that module up again

> >2)    roland / juno filter
> why??

i loved my juno 6, but hated it for a complete lack of control options (and
i am no keyboard player), it was my first ever (owned) synth and now i've
sold it - so it's a love story really - but i do like that filter, i've sold
all my synths on the basis that they're either crap or i can replace them
with modules - i'll be able to realise this when the CS filter shows up next
year, if a roland juno filter shows up, and when i work out how to emulate
the sample & hold on an SH101, so classic synth questions to the list:

the roland juno filter was different to the roland SH / MC / TB filter
wasn't it..?
is the CS filter similar to the CS5 filter or were they totally different
beasts..?
was the SH101 sample and hold quantized to the nearest semi-tone..?

> >3)    scale quantizer
> I'd rather see a sequencer first.  Until then, the mini-wave does 8-bit
> quantizing.

been there done that (done an entire gig of that so that i didn't have to
tune the sequencer up), but it's a crying shame to use the mini-wave purely
as a quantizer - i guess that means i need to buy another :-)

> >4)    clock source with optional daughter module (see below)
> You mean with a BPM display??

i suppose i meant uLFO really, though a good midi to clock trigger would be
nice, the dopefer one is shite and i've still not built the blacet one
yet...

> >6)    pong videogame interface (i'm working on this)

> Talk to Hux Flux ;)

who are they..?

cheers
paul b

I'll second this.  The Roland filters have a very unique sound.  Even the variations
between the Roland analog products seem to have a basic character of the filter that
seems unique to Roland.  I posted a short review awhile back about the two kinds of
System 700 filters.  They have a unique sound that is not like any of the current
MOTM filters.  Paul has mentioned the importance of filters on the character of a
synth...  This is another one of those "characters".  Now when folks are talking
about Roland filters, they usually mean the TB-303.  I don't know that I would be
that specific.  I think there is something to the character of Roland filters that
applies to all of them.  That would be the "essence" that MOTM should be looking to
provide...IMHO.

   Eric


> > >2)    roland / juno filter
> > why??
> 
> i loved my juno 6, but hated it for a complete lack of control options (and
> i am no keyboard player), it was my first ever (owned) synth and now i've
> sold it - so it's a love story really - but i do like that filter, i've sold
> all my synths on the basis that they're either crap or i can replace them
> with modules - i'll be able to realise this when the CS filter shows up next
> year, if a roland juno filter shows up, and when i work out how to emulate
> the sample & hold on an SH101, so classic synth questions to the list:
> 
> the roland juno filter was different to the roland SH / MC / TB filter
> wasn't it..?
> is the CS filter similar to the CS5 filter or were they totally different
> beasts..?
> was the SH101 sample and hold quantized to the nearest semi-tone..?
> 



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com

alt-mode schrieb:
> I'll second this.  The Roland filters have a very unique 
> sound.  Even the variations 
> between the Roland analog products seem to have a basic 
> character of the filter that 
> seems unique to Roland.  I posted a short review awhile 
> back about the two kinds of 
> System 700 filters.  They have a unique sound that is not 
> like any of the current 
> MOTM filters.  
> Paul has mentioned the importance of 
> filters on the character of a 
> synth...  This is another one of those "characters".  Now 
> when folks are talking 
> about Roland filters, they usually mean the TB-303.  I 
> don't know that I would be 
> that specific.  I think there is something to the 
> character of Roland filters that 
> applies to all of them.  That would be the "essence" that 
> MOTM should be look

Let me offer a slightly different conclusion:

We have a variety of filters from Roland, OTA filters with
opamp buffers, OTA filters with FET buffers, Transistor ladder
filters, Diode ladder filters, integrated quad OTA / quad buffer
filters, and they *all* have "that Roland Sound"! If this is
true (and I'm not the one to decide this), then you definitely have
to look for an important factor which contributes to "that Roland 
Sound", *other* than the filter circuit.

It may be other parts of the signal chain: VCO, VCA, fixed HPFs
from AC coupling, fixed LPFs from bandwidth limiting, the opamps
they used, and so on. It may be the choice of input and output
level of a filter. In the Juno6, you have ONE oscillator going
into the VCF at a FIXED level. A self oscillating filter output
will go into the VCA at a FIXED level. In a single-VCO 
configuration, it's even hard to tell distortion (VCF or VCA
overdrive) from the linear filter function, because there is no
2nd VCO to change the degree of distortion.
These are just examples for things that can easily have an influence
of what is perceived as the "character" of an instrument, or even
as the character of a family of instruments from the same
manufacturer. (And this has *nothing* to do with the VCF circuit 
that is used !)

Let me make this clear: *Maybe* the Roland filter chip, which has a 
very 
similar block structure as the SSM2040, has some yet unknown feature
which is responsible for a special sound. It's not entirely impossible:
Before I learned of the SSM2040's internal circuit, I also thought
"just another ota filter". So it's *possible* that the Roland chip
holds a similar (but different) secret. But is it *likely* ? I think
it's *unlikely* that it has a secret which it also *shares* with all 
the other (discrete and disclosed) Roland filter circuits.  

JH.

At 6:28 AM +0000 12/18/01, sikorsky wrote:
>
>i loved my juno 6, but hated it for a complete lack of control options (and
>i am no keyboard player), it was my first ever (owned) synth and now i've
>sold it - so it's a love story really - but i do like that filter, i've
>>sold all my synths on the basis that they're either crap or i can replace
>>them with modules - i'll be able to realise this when the CS filter shows
>>up next year,

Let's hope the SEM filter shows up first, so I can order my second batch of
modules!!  If someone really wants to develop a Roland filter clone, I have
a couple of spare IR3109 chips.  I could lend them one so that they could
reverse engineer it.

>if a roland juno filter shows up, and when i work out how to emulate

I'd much rather see a Juno 60 chorus "clone".  Imho, that was its best
feature.  Unfortunately, BBD chips are getting scarce.

>the roland juno filter was different to the roland SH / MC / TB filter
>wasn't it..?

The filter in the Juno 60 is the same as the SH101 and MC202.  The TB-303
is completely different.

>was the SH101 sample and hold quantized to the nearest semi-tone..?

That's a very good question!!  My SH-101 schematics are very hard to read.
If anyone has a better copy of the LFO section I want to see it.  I tried
to do the external clock mod to the LFO, but unfortunately the Nova Mod
documentation is sheer and utter crap.  Almost all of the other mods it
contains were cooked up eight years ago by Todd Sines, myself, and others,
but a synced LFO would be great!!  As I'm sure you've already noticed, the
S&H is already synced to an external clock.

Anyway, from what I can tell, the "random" on an SH101 does not use a true
sample & hold circuit, ie. it doesn't seem to sample noise voltages with a
cap.  It uses a "random" output from the DA converter, but I don't know how
random these voltages are.  It is quite possible that they are quantized to
the nearest semitone.

>> >4)    clock source with optional daughter module (see below)
>> You mean with a BPM display??
>
>i suppose i meant uLFO really, though a good midi to clock trigger would be
>nice, the dopefer one is shite and i've still not built the blacet one
>yet...

Yes, if it were 1976, MOTM would be Mercedes, and Doepfer would be AMC :)
There are a number of Kenton products that convert MIDI clock to
arpeggiator clock.  I also use the 707 or 909 with a Garfield Dr. Click.
Still, I would love a pulse divider module with the ability to do odd
divisions.  I was going to put it next to my SEM filter ;)

I have no idea about the uLFO.  I spent quite a bit a time suggesting
various configurations, but I haven't heard the results.  As it stands now,
the 300, 310, and 320 are all fine clock sources.

>> >6)    pong videogame interface (i'm working on this)
>
>> Talk to Hux Flux ;)
>
>who are they..?

They are a psy-trance band that are quite fond of using video game noises.

At 7:35 PM +0100 12/18/01, jhaible@... wrote:
>
>>I think there is something to the
>> character of Roland filters that
>> applies to all of them.  That would be the "essence" that
>> MOTM should be look
>
>Let me offer a slightly different conclusion:
>
>We have a variety of filters from Roland, OTA filters with
>opamp buffers, OTA filters with FET buffers, Transistor ladder
>filters, Diode ladder filters, integrated quad OTA / quad buffer
>filters, and they *all* have "that Roland Sound"! If this is
>true (and I'm not the one to decide this), then you definitely have
>to look for an important factor which contributes to "that Roland
>Sound", *other* than the filter circuit.

I completely agree, and I would say that all of them do not have "that
Roland Sound", unless you want to make the silly semantic argument that
everything Roland has a Roland sound.

>Let me make this clear: *Maybe* the Roland filter chip, which has a
>very similar block structure as the SSM2040, has some yet unknown feature
>which is responsible for a special sound. It's not entirely impossible:
>Before I learned of the SSM2040's internal circuit, I also thought
>"just another ota filter". So it's *possible* that the Roland chip
>holds a similar (but different) secret. But is it *likely* ? I think
>it's *unlikely* that it has a secret which it also *shares* with all
>the other (discrete and disclosed) Roland filter circuits.

It's more than unlikely that it shares this secret with all other Rolands
-- I think it's downright impossible.  However, the IR1309 might have a
unique quality which is responsible for a special sound.  In fact, it's is
very likely.  The question is: is it different enough to make a "clone"
worthwhile??  I can't answer that question.  Yet, if you would like to try,
I have an IR3109 chip, and Juno 60, MKS-80, SH-101, and MC-202 schematics
that I can send you.

> It's more than unlikely that it shares this secret with all other Rolands
> -- I think it's downright impossible.  However, the IR1309 might have a
> unique quality which is responsible for a special sound.  In fact, it's is
> very likely.  The question is: is it different enough to make a "clone"
> worthwhile??  I can't answer that question.  Yet, if you would like to
try,
> I have an IR3109 chip, and Juno 60, MKS-80, SH-101, and MC-202 schematics
> that I can send you.

Thanks, I have a Juno 6 and use it all the time.
The filter sounds ok to me, but I think it's actually the chorus that sets
the juno apart from many other synths.

JH.

hello all,

> I'd much rather see a Juno 60 chorus "clone".  Imho, that was its best
> feature.  Unfortunately, BBD chips are getting scarce.

did this chorus end up becoming the roland dimension d..?
come to think of it, i did have the chorus two button down almost constantly
on my juno six

> Anyway, from what I can tell, the "random" on an SH101 does not use a true
> sample & hold circuit, ie. it doesn't seem to sample noise voltages with a
> cap.  It uses a "random" output from the DA converter, but I don't know
how
> random these voltages are.  It is quite possible that they are quantized
to
> the nearest semitone.

i only thought the SH101 sample & hold was quantized because from what i
remember it always sounded more 'musical' than my only other experience of
sample & hold which is the MOTM100/101

> Yes, if it were 1976, MOTM would be Mercedes, and Doepfer would be AMC :)
> There are a number of Kenton products that convert MIDI clock to
> arpeggiator clock.  I also use the 707 or 909 with a Garfield Dr. Click.
> Still, I would love a pulse divider module with the ability to do odd
> divisions.  I was going to put it next to my SEM filter ;)

don't ask me why i bought that little red box - it has a mind of it's own

> >> Talk to Hux Flux ;)
> They are a psy-trance band that are quite fond of using video game noises.

nooo, not video game noises - i was planning on using a pair of modules to
control the bats on a video-game and then project the whole thing on a video
screen. my trusty magnavox video-game died the morning of the last gig

cheers
paul b

OK, I generalized too much.  The "Roland Sound" that I'm thinking of comes from more
of the discrete designs.  The filters in the Jupiter-4 and the System 700 have
something about them that says "Roland" to me.  This is certainly different from
Moog, Arp, or SCI.  The Juno-106 has a taste of this character but it is a bit
different yet very identifiable.  I haven't spent enough time with a TB-303 to
classify it this way but I think most of us can pick it out when used obviously in a
tune.

I've got a good sequence for showing off a filter that I came up with to look at
Jurgen's questions about Moog filters.  Perhaps I need to try this on a few other
filters and post the results over the holidays...

  Eric


--- mark@... wrote:
> At 7:35 PM +0100 12/18/01, jhaible@... wrote:
> >
> >>I think there is something to the
> >> character of Roland filters that
> >> applies to all of them.  That would be the "essence" that
> >> MOTM should be look
> >
> >Let me offer a slightly different conclusion:
> >
> >We have a variety of filters from Roland, OTA filters with
> >opamp buffers, OTA filters with FET buffers, Transistor ladder
> >filters, Diode ladder filters, integrated quad OTA / quad buffer
> >filters, and they *all* have "that Roland Sound"! If this is
> >true (and I'm not the one to decide this), then you definitely have
> >to look for an important factor which contributes to "that Roland
> >Sound", *other* than the filter circuit.
> 
> I completely agree, and I would say that all of them do not have "that
> Roland Sound", unless you want to make the silly semantic argument that
> everything Roland has a Roland sound.
> 
> >Let me make this clear: *Maybe* the Roland filter chip, which has a
> >very similar block structure as the SSM2040, has some yet unknown feature
> >which is responsible for a special sound. It's not entirely impossible:
> >Before I learned of the SSM2040's internal circuit, I also thought
> >"just another ota filter". So it's *possible* that the Roland chip
> >holds a similar (but different) secret. But is it *likely* ? I think
> >it's *unlikely* that it has a secret which it also *shares* with all
> >the other (discrete and disclosed) Roland filter circuits.
> 
> It's more than unlikely that it shares this secret with all other Rolands
> -- I think it's downright impossible.  However, the IR1309 might have a
> unique quality which is responsible for a special sound.  In fact, it's is
> very likely.  The question is: is it different enough to make a "clone"
> worthwhile??  I can't answer that question.  Yet, if you would like to try,
> I have an IR3109 chip, and Juno 60, MKS-80, SH-101, and MC-202 schematics
> that I can send you.
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com

At 10:46 PM +0000 12/18/01, sikorsky wrote:
>
>> I'd much rather see a Juno 60 chorus "clone".  Imho, that was its best
>> feature.  Unfortunately, BBD chips are getting scarce.
>
>did this chorus end up becoming the roland dimension d..?

That's another good question!!  Which Roland stand-alone chorus is the most
similar to the chorus in the Juno??  While it's been a subject of much
discussion in the past, I'm yet to hear a definitive answer.

Regardless, Roland chorus boxes often command exorbitant vintage prices, so
if someone were to manufacture a clone, it could easily undersell that
market.  As a synth module, it could also have much better features for
voltage control.  Unfortunately, the BBD chips required may no longer be
available.
x
>i only thought the SH101 sample & hold was quantized because from what i
>remember it always sounded more 'musical' than my only other experience of
>sample & hold which is the MOTM100/101

It's possible, as the 101 doesn't actually have sample and hold -- no
sampling, no holding :)

>nooo, not video game noises - i was planning on using a pair of modules to
>control the bats on a video-game and then project the whole thing on a
>>video screen. my trusty magnavox video-game died the morning of the
>last gig

Were you able to program it to win?? :)