MOTM

#1: May it has an issue, but you are NOT HELPING by spewing "It's fatally flawed". THINK first.
OK, it has an issue with attack below a certain point.

#2: I will look into this. It will be next week. In the meantime, PLEASE don't spew this
everywhere. Well, OK do, torpedo MOTM and end it for everyone. I am SERIOUS! Stuff like this, in
the "wrong hands" WILL cause panic and end it. Is that what you want?

#3: Like I've said 10 times: use a MOTM-820. Repeat for #11: use a MOTM-820 for now. Because all
you need are "organ" envelopes, which are A-R (no S or D). Sustain "level" is then CV MOD of the
'110. This is a "work around" but a SOLUTION.

#4: Is there an "easy fix"? Maybe, maybe NOT. Even the "easiest" fix is unsoldering and
resoldering parts. This may not be so "easy" to some people. Then what? I have over 300 EGs in
the field. The only solution that would make financial sense is a board-level (or for some
smaller subset of assembled users, unit-level) replacement at my cost + postage. This is for the
people that would request it, as for 4 years the "fatal flaw" has elluded everyone.

This would of course delay EVERYTHING: the new VCAs, the 500 series, the 480. If say I need to
replace 100 EGs, then I would guess 2 full months to redesign, test, kit and ship. Why does this
sound bad to me?

Paul S.

-----> I made in my sequencer a gate out and invert gate out , and I connect the
> gate out to the GATE jack on the 800 and the inverted gate out to the TRIG
> jack and the result is a full ADSR .
> I must say that now when it is full ADSR you can fill how amazing this
> envelope is compared to other manufactures.
>

I think that in 99.999% of cases, the MOTM-800 is just fine. Does it have an issue at ATTACK=0?
Yes, and I have 3 different "easiest" solutions to try. I just ordered parts from Mouser to test.
Let's not yell FIRE! in the theater just yet :)

Paul S.

Just one thought:
Not all of the "vintage" envelopes work as we would expect it, either.
Nobody complains about a Minimoog envelope going above its nominal
peak level with fast repeated triggers. Most people consider it a "feature",
even though it is originally a design flaw.

Personally I grew up with "flawless" CEM and SSM envelopes, and
that's how I like them as a standard. And I *think* MOTM should have
something like this in the future (I have a discreet circuit for this, which
is also in the core of the VCLAG, so I guess it's just a matter of time
until there will be a fully VC ADSR which also fits the SSM/Curtis
standard. Not speaking for Paul here - just my own thoughts.)

But this does *not* mean that anything which is different from CEM / SSM
standards is useless. Look at the early Korg envelopes for instance !
No standard ADSR at all (and hard to get a typical ADSR envelope
out of it, too), so it was long frowned upon. Now people start to realize
that it also has benefits, like fast switching from a (useful !) percussive
setting to a useful sustained setting. (Only that Korg called it "singing"
rather than sustained.) Took me decades until I found it usefull. Kitaro
knew better from the start - that's why he hoarded stacks of Minikorgs
and 800DV's. (;->)

Not to fuel more discussion (as I said, I'm all for a "standard" VCADSR
as a future module, so you would be running into open doors ...), just
to say that I'm sure the current MOTM envelopes are good and useful
even though you have found some unexpected behaviour. I'd try to make
creative use of it - that's how the best of art is often created.

JH.

(no, I have not designed it, and no, I have not followed all of this
discussion either, so maybe it's just worthless thoughts, but anyway.)



-----Urspr\ufffdngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Paul Schreiber <synth1@...>
An: <Elhardt@...>; <motm@yahoogroups.com>
Gesendet: Freitag, 10. Mai 2002 14:54
Betreff: [motm] MOTM-800 EG


> #1: May it has an issue, but you are NOT HELPING by spewing "It's fatally
flawed". THINK first.
> OK, it has an issue with attack below a certain point.
>
> #2: I will look into this. It will be next week. In the meantime, PLEASE
don't spew this
> everywhere. Well, OK do, torpedo MOTM and end it for everyone. I am
SERIOUS! Stuff like this, in
> the "wrong hands" WILL cause panic and end it. Is that what you want?
>
> #3: Like I've said 10 times: use a MOTM-820. Repeat for #11: use a
MOTM-820 for now. Because all
> you need are "organ" envelopes, which are A-R (no S or D). Sustain "level"
is then CV MOD of the
> '110. This is a "work around" but a SOLUTION.
>
> #4: Is there an "easy fix"? Maybe, maybe NOT. Even the "easiest" fix is
unsoldering and
> resoldering parts. This may not be so "easy" to some people. Then what? I
have over 300 EGs in
> the field. The only solution that would make financial sense is a
board-level (or for some
> smaller subset of assembled users, unit-level) replacement at my cost +
postage. This is for the
> people that would request it, as for 4 years the "fatal flaw" has elluded
everyone.
>
> This would of course delay EVERYTHING: the new VCAs, the 500 series, the
480. If say I need to
> replace 100 EGs, then I would guess 2 full months to redesign, test, kit
and ship. Why does this

> sound bad to me?
>
> Paul S.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Hi.
I made in my sequencer a gate out and invert gate out , and I connect the
gate out to the GATE jack on the 800 and the inverted gate out to the TRIG
jack and the result is a full ADSR .
I must say that now when it is full ADSR you can fill how amazing this
envelope is compared to other manufactures.


thanx
Gur Milstein

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Schreiber <synth1@...>
To: Elhardt@... <Elhardt@...>; motm@yahoogroups.com
<motm@yahoogroups.com>
Date: \ufffd\ufffd\ufffd \ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd 10 \ufffd\ufffd\ufffd 2002 14:54
Subject: [motm] MOTM-800 EG


#1: May it has an issue, but you are NOT HELPING by spewing "It's fatally
flawed". THINK first.
OK, it has an issue with attack below a certain point.

#2: I will look into this. It will be next week. In the meantime, PLEASE
don't spew this
everywhere. Well, OK do, torpedo MOTM and end it for everyone. I am SERIOUS!
Stuff like this, in
the "wrong hands" WILL cause panic and end it. Is that what you want?

#3: Like I've said 10 times: use a MOTM-820. Repeat for #11: use a MOTM-820
for now. Because all
you need are "organ" envelopes, which are A-R (no S or D). Sustain "level"
is then CV MOD of the
'110. This is a "work around" but a SOLUTION.

#4: Is there an "easy fix"? Maybe, maybe NOT. Even the "easiest" fix is
unsoldering and
resoldering parts. This may not be so "easy" to some people. Then what? I
have over 300 EGs in
the field. The only solution that would make financial sense is a
board-level (or for some
smaller subset of assembled users, unit-level) replacement at my cost +
postage. This is for the
people that would request it, as for 4 years the "fatal flaw" has elluded
everyone.

This would of course delay EVERYTHING: the new VCAs, the 500 series, the
480. If say I need to
replace 100 EGs, then I would guess 2 full months to redesign, test, kit and
ship. Why does this
sound bad to me?

Paul S.






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

Paul Schreiber wrote:

>>#1: May it has an issue, but you are NOT HELPING by spewing "It's fatally 
flawed". THINK first. OK, it has an issue with attack below a certain point.<<

Sorry Paul, I really didn't want to stir up anything big here and maybe 
"fatally" was too much.  But this was a list where I thought we can talk 
openly about the MOTM, good or bad.  It was your comment "However, I don't 
forsee a reason to redesign. It *is* a cheap, simple circuit." that made me 
think you weren't going to address the problem.  It may be a cheap and simple 
circuit, but it's a necessary one.

Maybe you haven't read everything I've written clearly.  It's only problem #1 
that's a problem.  #2 and #3 I mentioned can be be solved by keeping the 
sustain level below 8 or it looks like by changing R9 if one desires.  #4 is 
just an observation when an EG is patched to the VCA.  I think it's the VCA 
starting to close down when the voltage gets low that I'm hearing and not the 
EG itself.

I'm not wanting a major redesign, but a possible optional and simple fix that 
those of us can do without any parts from you.  As for those who are making 
light of the whole thing by saying in future it may be something sought after 
and such, no, it's not something you want.  The output should never go above 
~4 to 5 volts.  Perhaps driving short fast release sounds from a sequencer, 
doing soundscape type effects, chaos patches, or maybe in a thousand other 
settings the envelopes are just fine and that's why strangely nobody else has 
come across it.  But to a keyboard player like me they are an issue.  I'm 
seeing it like 30% of the time.  And I need to patch velocity into my patches 
which will only aggrivate the situation.  It's just very frustrating to keep 
patching up sounds, that as soon as I start playing they change on me.


Graham Hunter writes:

>>2. Elhardt, if you have such a precise need, have you not investigated your 
other options?    Blacet? Wiard? Modcan?  Moog?  Serge?<<

It's not precission I need, just no voltages shooting up over 6v when 
playing.  For my current application I have others I can use.  The 800 bug is 
the only thing that bugs me about the MOTM, I love everything else.  Don't 
let me persuade any of you away from it.  I tried my one Synth.com ADSR and 
the problems it's giving me make the MOTM-800 look good.

-Elhardt

BTW, there is zero droop on the 800 sustain.  Tested with beating oscillator 
pitches and as long as I hold a note it holds steady.

-Elhardt