MOTM

This was on some other lists but in case no one has seen this.

http://www.cs80.com/ne_proj.html

I'm pretty excited.  I would love to see a a vco and vcf end up as a 
MOTM module.  

I would love to see some of JH's Korg clone stuff end up as modules 
too.

Larry

Wow, that's a very impressive reverse engineering job! Go Crow!

--mikes

On Mar 4, 2004, at 11:22 AM, leitner6 wrote:

> This was on some other lists but in case no one has seen this.
>
> http://www.cs80.com/ne_proj.html
>
> I'm pretty excited.  I would love to see a a vco and vcf end up as a
> MOTM module.
>
> I would love to see some of JH's Korg clone stuff end up as modules
> too.
>
> Larry
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor  
> ---------------------~-->
> Create your own personalized LAUNCHcast Internet Radio station. Rate  
> your favorite Artists, Genres, and Moods. Skip songs. Click here!
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/ekrq7C/BARHAA/n1hLAA/VpLolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ~->
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

Interesting Stuff!
If you have access to a surface grinder, you can shave off the epoxy 
a few ten thousandths of an inch at a time.  You can definitely read 
part numbers and see color code through a very thin layer of epoxy 
(even if it is black.) I'm not sure which method is more 
destructive.  If you use the surface grinder it helps to take 
pictures because obviously if you miss something it is gone for 
good.  But it does work.  I reverse engineered some synth stuff back 
in the 70s that way.

Is Crow's and other people's intention making a sort of GX1 clone 
available in the future? or is it just the simple intention to 
reproduce some important GX1 parts for existing not working 
instruments? I read the word "production" somewhere and this sounds 
interesting though.
Enrico (Sicily)

It is not my intention to make a clone GX1.  Building the mechanical
parts of such a machine would take far too long, for me at least, to
justify such a project.  More realistic would be to convert say an EX-2
into a sort of GX-2, and that would still be a huge project.

  I am determining the designs of the original submodules mainly out of 
interest in whether the discrete circuits were the ancestors of the custom 
chip set Yamaha made for the CS line.  Of secondary interest is making 
spare parts for instruments that used them (SY1/2, CSY1/2, GX1).

  It is not hard to adapt the design to be a panel module, so if enough 
folks were interested I was going to make one.  I'd like it to be MOTM 
but Paul has enough to do as it is.  Perhaps if I gave him a turn-key 
design that used, say, the same panel layout as a 490 module, so that the 
only effort he would need to provide is silkscreen of a different model 
number and switch legend, and have a hole drilled for a mode select switch 
(HP/LP).

  That is all up to him, though.  Talking about making modules is easy.  
Producing them is not so easy.

Crow
/**/

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004, edibennardo wrote:

> Is Crow's and other people's intention making a sort of GX1 clone 
> available in the future? or is it just the simple intention to 
> reproduce some important GX1 parts for existing not working 
> instruments? I read the word "production" somewhere and this sounds 
> interesting though.
> Enrico (Sicily)

We all know there's a forthcoming MOTM480 (CS80 filter)and I remember 
Chris working on a VCADSR MOTM880, this is a good starting point for 
a line of modules with CS80 in mind, and though the monophonic 
modular way is not the most obvious approach to recreate CS80 
features and feel, I guess there may be interest around CS80 based 
modules. Any thoughts? Is the 880 still a possible future project?
Enrico (Sicily)


--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, The Old Crow <oldcrow@o...> wrote:
> 
>   It is not my intention to make a clone GX1.  Building the 
mechanical
> parts of such a machine would take far too long, for me at least, to
> justify such a project.  More realistic would be to convert say an 
EX-2
> into a sort of GX-2, and that would still be a huge project.
> 
>   I am determining the designs of the original submodules mainly 
out of 
> interest in whether the discrete circuits were the ancestors of the 
custom 
> chip set Yamaha made for the CS line.  Of secondary interest is 
making 
> spare parts for instruments that used them (SY1/2, CSY1/2, GX1).
> 
>   It is not hard to adapt the design to be a panel module, so if 
enough 
> folks were interested I was going to make one.  I'd like it to be 
MOTM 
> but Paul has enough to do as it is.  Perhaps if I gave him a turn-
key 
> design that used, say, the same panel layout as a 490 module, so 
that the 
> only effort he would need to provide is silkscreen of a different 
model 
> number and switch legend, and have a hole drilled for a mode select 
switch 
> (HP/LP).
> 
>   That is all up to him, though.  Talking about making modules is 
easy.  
> Producing them is not so easy.
> 
> Crow
> /**/
> 
> On Mon, 8 Mar 2004, edibennardo wrote:
> 
> > Is Crow's and other people's intention making a sort of GX1 clone 
> > available in the future? or is it just the simple intention to 
> > reproduce some important GX1 parts for existing not working 
> > instruments? I read the word "production" somewhere and this 
sounds 
> > interesting though.
> > Enrico (Sicily)

Based on what I heard of the samples of the filters, I'd buy one.  
Especially in the 490 form factor!

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, The Old Crow <oldcrow@o...> wrote:
> 
>   It is not my intention to make a clone GX1.  Building the 
mechanical
> parts of such a machine would take far too long, for me at least, 
to
> justify such a project.  More realistic would be to convert say an 
EX-2
> into a sort of GX-2, and that would still be a huge project.
> 
>   I am determining the designs of the original submodules mainly 
out of 
> interest in whether the discrete circuits were the ancestors of 
the custom 
> chip set Yamaha made for the CS line.  Of secondary interest is 
making 
> spare parts for instruments that used them (SY1/2, CSY1/2, GX1).
> 
>   It is not hard to adapt the design to be a panel module, so if 
enough 
> folks were interested I was going to make one.  I'd like it to be 
MOTM 
> but Paul has enough to do as it is.  Perhaps if I gave him a turn-
key 
> design that used, say, the same panel layout as a 490 module, so 
that the 
> only effort he would need to provide is silkscreen of a different 
model 
> number and switch legend, and have a hole drilled for a mode 
select switch 
> (HP/LP).
> 
>   That is all up to him, though.  Talking about making modules is 
easy.  
> Producing them is not so easy.
> 
> Crow
> /**/
> 
> On Mon, 8 Mar 2004, edibennardo wrote:
> 
> > Is Crow's and other people's intention making a sort of GX1 
clone 
> > available in the future? or is it just the simple intention to 
> > reproduce some important GX1 parts for existing not working 
> > instruments? I read the word "production" somewhere and this 
sounds 
> > interesting though.
> > Enrico (Sicily)

> I would love to see some of JH's Korg clone stuff end up as modules 
> too.
> 
> Larry


Which one in particular?
The Resonator is available already, and the MS-20 filter, too.
I really tend to look at the PS-3100 VCF as a "subset" of the
MS-20's functionality. Biggest difference is that the PS
VCF's don't self oscillate, so they could use a smaller
circuit. All that extra stuff in the MS-20, opamp, diode
limiter etc. is just to get a pleasant behavior at high
resonance and self oscillation. Speaking of the Korg-35
version of the MS-20, that is.
(Paul and I decided to use the later, OTA-based version
of the MS-20, because they sound sooo much alike, only the
OTA version has less CV feedthru problems, but this won't
bring it further from the PS-3100 in _sound_)

So I would say with a MOTM-410 and MOTM-420 you have the 
best part of my Korg Clone suff already. You might
want to add a little noise to a MOTM-420's input to really
get that PS-3100 feeling. (;->)

The PS-3200 VCADSR is pretty unique as well, but also quite
limited. You certainly want a "normal" VCADSR in MOTM format
first.

JH.


(kicked off the MOTM list for some unknown reason - see
it even happens to me! - I'll change my yahoo settings
such that I can get mail regularly again.)