MOTM

Good Day All

I'm curious about what is available in a DADSR Envelope Generator.  A
VC EG would be nice, (hey, how about a VC DADSR?!?!) but some of the
sounds I would like to generate require a delay for seconday
VCO/VCF/VCA controls in order to create additional morphing in the sounds.

Are there any DADSR's anyone has used and liked (VC or otherwise)?

Are there any DADSR's from the DIY community that I should check out?
 (I can handle a soldering iron pretty well.  I'm not afraid to buy
parts and stuff boards.  Perf board and breadboarding is something I'm
getting to...)

For that matter, what about AR and/or DAR EG's.

I do want to stick to equipment that operates on +/-15v (+5v is okay
as well).

Larry T.

Larry--

Paul will probably never release a DADSR EG (aka HADSR).  The basic philosophy
of MOTM is to break functionality into smaller units for increased versatility.

What is on the books is a gate/trigger delay unit.  Old Crow has finished the
digital portion and he is just waiting for Paul to get to it.  What I know
about it sounds pretty nice!  Maybe next year....?

The VC EG has been discussed many times here and at length, but not recently. 
The bottom line is that the usefulness of VC certain stages has very little
practical usage.  Several hybrid designs were proposed.

Cheers!
Shemp

--- "Larry T." <larry@...> wrote:
> I'm curious about what is available in a DADSR Envelope Generator.  A
> VC EG would be nice, (hey, how about a VC DADSR?!?!) but some of the
> sounds I would like to generate require a delay for seconday
> VCO/VCF/VCA controls in order to create additional morphing in the sounds.
> 
> Are there any DADSR's anyone has used and liked (VC or otherwise)?
> 
> Are there any DADSR's from the DIY community that I should check out?
>  (I can handle a soldering iron pretty well.  I'm not afraid to buy
> parts and stuff boards.  Perf board and breadboarding is something I'm
> getting to...)
> 
> For that matter, what about AR and/or DAR EG's.
> 
> I do want to stick to equipment that operates on +/-15v (+5v is okay
> as well).



		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush

>The VC EG has been discussed many times here and at length, but not recently. 

Actually, I brought it up 3 days ago ☺

>The bottom line is that the usefulness of VC certain stages has very little
>practical usage.  

I don't agree.  Esp Release,decay & attack cv would be absolutely invaluable to the music I (and others) do.  Right now, the only way I have to do this is through my nord or waldorf.  I'd much rather do it in the analogue domain, but alas I cannot.   Sustain CV would in effect give us another (limited) cv VCA (and I could always use another VCA), esp one with a slew to it, as a vc EG would do.

I've needed a vc EG (and some cheap oscillators) so many times hat I've considered selling off my MOTM (!)and buying another brand, as I really cannot afford to build 2 modulars right now.  Obviously my pref is to keep my motm, but right now the only way to expand it's capabilities is to go to something else.

> The basic philosophy
>of MOTM is to break functionality into smaller units for increased >versatility.

Sure, but if this is the case, then the smaller units should be inexpensive, or this philosophy makes no sense at all.

Perhaps I have this all wrong & the philosophy is that MOTM is not meant to be someone's "only" modular...?

Paul

> The bottom line is that the usefulness of VC certain stages has very little
> practical usage.  Several hybrid designs were proposed.


I'm sorry, I was going to stay out of this but....

I have two VC DADSR's (Modcan EG O4A's). In looking at most of the 
patches I've been creating lately, there are very few that do NOT use VC 
control of at least one EG parameter.

If I had to break it down:

%60 of the time:	Either attack or decay
%30 of the time: 	Sustain level or release
%10 of the time: 	Delay Time

Of course, everybody patches differently, but to me, it's *so* important 
to be able to have control over these parameters to bring some variance 
into the sound. A harder struck percussion sound is going to attack and 
decay differently than a softly struck one, for example.

I know Paul usually goes "....Yawn" whenever this discussion comes up 
(check the archives), but I personally find VC control of EG parameters 
to be extremely useful.

-- 
Les Mizzell

The Blacet EG1 is VC on all stages plus a VC time base in steps.

Stooge panels may not be available for this but maybe a Schaffer type
would suffice. If you want a basic kit for this, just ask. Typically, we
take $20 off the normal kit price.

I ocassionally get the idea to make one or two MOTM style modules
available but the "normal" products are consuming about 110% of my time
as it is.......

Maybe Paul would like to liscense the design?

--
Regards,
--/////--
John Blacet
Blacet Research
http://www.blacet.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
For Product Announcements, Specials, Hot Deals, join our mailing List:
http://www.blacet.com/mailform2.html

>...I personally find VC control of EG parameters
>to be extremely useful.

I agree. I'm currently using UEG's as voltage controlled envelope 
generators. They have one control input to vary all the times, not as 
flexible as I'd like, but still quite useful.

> >The bottom line is that the usefulness of VC certain stages has very little
> >practical usage.  

Most of you must have read this as "all" stages and not certain stages as I
meant.  I am just trying to recall what all occurred in the thread.  I will buy
2 of them at least when it is released.  Has this been assigned a model number
yet?  MOTM-8?0

> > The basic philosophy
> >of MOTM is to break functionality into smaller units for increased
> >versatility.
> Sure, but if this is the case, then the smaller units should be inexpensive,
> or this philosophy makes no sense at all.

Inexpensive?  I didn't say anything about cost.  Ha!

> Perhaps I have this all wrong & the philosophy is that MOTM is not meant to
> be someone's "only" modular...?

I wish it could be!  Paul S. either needs to be independently wealthy or have
and extra 8 hours added to every day.  It is a lot closer now than it was 4 or
5 years ago.  Keep on chuggin'!

There are still 5 or 6 "meat and potatoes" modules still out there that have
not been released yet.  The Super EG is one of them and Paul is planning on
doing it at some point as far as I know.

Other basic modules still not released (but on the drawing board):

   * Triple Pre-Amp
   * VC EG
   * Evelope Follower (This is #1 in my mind.)
   * Trigger/Gate Delay (This is #2 for me.)
   * VCA w/ Pan/Fade (MOTM-130)

These are the main modules that need to be addressed.  Here are a few
(definitely not my entire list) others on my wish list:

   * Voltage Quantizer
   * Boolean Logic
   * CV Modifier
   * Enhanced I/O panel
   * Interpolating Scanner (MOTM-750)
   * Joystick
   * Ribbon Controller

I know everyone has their own needs and desires, so your list will of course
differ from mine.  And these modules have not fallen off of Paul's radar he
assures me.

--Shemp


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo

> There's a group of folks (not necessarily *here*) that have always
> insisted that the idea of VC envelopes *sounds* more useful than they
> really are in practice, but I can only think that these people are using
> envelope generators in a very limited, Mini-Moog style capacity. It's
> arguable in that context that you can get a touch-sensitive effect with
> a static envelope and VC of other parameters, such as LPF Cutoff
> Frequency. Or the *amount* of envelope modulation to Cutoff Frequency.


I find myself rarely using VC envelopes when I play manually, but I
often use VC on the Decay for sequencer lines.
Some Random S&H on Decay does *really* make your sequences more
alive.

With the MOTM system, you can emulate it like this:
Set the Decay on your (fixed) ADSR to a value that is about the shortest
variation
that you want for the sequencer line. Run the ADSR output thru the VCLAG,
with attack time of the VCLAG very short, and with S&H modulating the
decay time of the VCLAG.

Right, you need two modules for this, and it's a workaround, but it has the
advantage that you can really set a hard limit for the fastest decay time
that way.

JH.

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Paul Wagorn <pwagorn@...>
> Perhaps I have this all wrong & the philosophy is that MOTM is not meant
to be someone's "only" modular...?

It depends on your outlook and your need to have your modular completed
right now.  In that case, very few of the modulars on the market today could
be considered complete enough to be someone's only modular unless that
someone was not too picky.  While John Blacet has added many new and great
modules to his line, certainly it is not "complete."  Dot com has added
nothing but rehashed mixers in a long time. And, there are gaps in MOTM
land.  If you just want more variety of modules at this time, Doepfer seems
to have the best selection.  But, quanitiy and quality do not always go hand
in hand.

So, you just have to decide what you need. Many people make the music they
need not with just what is available in MOTM land or dot com land.  Sure,
they want more stuff, but work around what they do not have until hopefully
it becomes available.  Never in history have we have so many great modules
from such a variety of vendors as we do now.  So it seems we should focus on
what we do have rather than what we do not.

When I started buying MOTM, Paul sold only one module.  Sure, I built it.  I
looked at it and wondered when it would have friends.  I remember the 700 VC
switch was an early module.  But, I had nothing significant to switch with
it.  Now, the MOTM selection is better than ever.  But, as is the nature of
modular it will never be complete as there will always be something else
that one could use.  So, my position has been mix and match from various
vendors to get what you want.  I have supplemented my MOTM experience with
other, especially all the cool stuff that John Blacet makes.  I have John's
VC EG.  I will still buy the MOTM VC EG when it comes out because they are
bound to have a different feature set (no one implements like John).  But,
that might put me in the minority.  I cannot sell a panels for it.  You can
get them from Schaeffer.  But, I want to see the MOTM module version.  If I
make panels for any other VC EG at this point, I am lessening the
possibility that the MOTM version will be reality.

Larry H

Noticed some mentioning trigger delay or EG Delay stage.  I posted sometime ago ways to accomplish different Doepfer module functions on MOTM since the MOTM doesn't have those functions.  I pointed to at least 2 or 3 ways to do a trigger delay.  Search the archives, probably for Doepfer in the title.  Also the Encore UEG can be set up to do a delay stage I believe.

Most of the major polysynths including my JP8, JP6 and Memorymoog have a limited form of VC-ADSR.  The decay portion (maybe release) can vary with the kybd voltage.  As you know, the note decay of all acoustic percussion and plucked string instruments gets shorter with higher pitches.  That's why those companies included it.

Also, there's nothing stopping you from setting up two EG's with two different settings and switching between the two using the MOTM VC Switch module.  Hit a key softly and get one type of envelope, hit a key hard and get another.

-Elhardt

I wanted a DADSR also so I just designed a dual trigger delay.  It 
only took two op amps and a handful of transistors.  I use it to
delay the trigger by 0.1 to 10 seconds.  It runs in one-shot or
retrigger mode.  One shot always completes a cycle where retrigger
will restart the cycle if another trigger is received.  I use it with
my MOTM-800 although it needed a mod to work correctly with a delayed
trigger (more on that if anyone is interested).  I did a
FrontPanelExpress panel for it and one of Paul's prototype boards.

Dave

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "Larry T." <larry@u...> wrote:

> Good Day All
> 
> I'm curious about what is available in a DADSR Envelope Generator.
> VC EG would be nice, (hey, how about a VC DADSR?!?!) but some of the
> sounds I would like to generate require a delay for seconday
> VCO/VCF/VCA controls in order to create additional morphing in the
> sounds.
> 
> Are there any DADSR's anyone has used and liked (VC or otherwise)?
> 
> Are there any DADSR's from the DIY community that I should check
> out?

This is a pretty darn resourceful group of folks. I'm proud of ye!

Moe

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "djbrow54" <davebr@e...> wrote:

> I wanted a DADSR also so I just designed a dual trigger delay.  It 
> only took two op amps and a handful of transistors.  I use it to
> delay the trigger by 0.1 to 10 seconds.  It runs in one-shot or
> retrigger mode.  One shot always completes a cycle where retrigger
> will restart the cycle if another trigger is received.  I use it with
> my MOTM-800 although it needed a mod to work correctly with a delayed
> trigger (more on that if anyone is interested).  I did a
> FrontPanelExpress panel for it and one of Paul's prototype boards.
> 
> Dave
> 
> --- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "Larry T." <larry@u...> wrote:
> > Good Day All
> > 
> > I'm curious about what is available in a DADSR Envelope Generator.
> > VC EG would be nice, (hey, how about a VC DADSR?!?!) but some of the
> > sounds I would like to generate require a delay for seconday
> > VCO/VCF/VCA controls in order to create additional morphing in the
> > sounds.
> > 
> > Are there any DADSR's anyone has used and liked (VC or otherwise)?
> > 
> > Are there any DADSR's from the DIY community that I should check
> > out?

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "djbrow54" <davebr@e...> wrote:
> I wanted a DADSR also so I just designed a dual trigger delay.  It 
> only took two op amps and a handful of transistors.

Oops ... correction.  two ICs (not op amps - that would really have 
been amazing ...)

Details at
http://home.earthlink.net/~dabr/davebr/MOTM/DJB-008%20Delay

> There's a group of folks (not necessarily *here*) that have always
> insisted that the idea of VC envelopes *sounds* more useful than they
> really are in practice...

Mapping velocity to attack is an essential element in probably 90% of the
patches I make... anyway, on synths that allow it and on the sampler. It's
absolutely *essential* for realistic percussive patches! And if your
controller is sensitive to aftertouch or release velocity, you'll need a
VCEG to take advantage of these. It seems to be a very basic module to me,
and it fairly blows my mind that there are synthesists who would find these
to be inutile in practice!

best,
- Scott
____________
http://www.red-noise.com
http://www.strawberryplanet.org

*** WOW ***!!

I thought 'Shock and Awe' was a phrase reserved for military actions
in desert countries!  But this forum blows everything away!!

I thought that I was asking a simple question and would get a few
answers.   I never expected to start such an interesting discussion
thread!  Thank you all for the info.  It looks like I'm going to have
to 'hack' together what I want from several vendors/modules at this
point.  I am absolutely blown away with the many options, and even
better questions that never occured to me!

The one comment that I would like to make (and I am not trying to
start a war here) is that I don't think it makes sense to restrict
yourself an ANY one manufacturer.  And the beauty is that most of the
modular gear that is available uses compatible signal levels (as long
as you can deal with different signal connectors, power connectors,
and mounting requirements).  Even when there are overlapping modules,
there are often reasons to get different vendors modules in order to
expand you sonic pallet.  And when all else fails, there are the DIY
options that often will fill strange and unusual voids (that you may
not even know you have till you run into the circuit somewhere).

Thanks again to everyone (even if this thread has not yet run it's
full course).

Larry T. back to listening/lurking (for now)

Hey Larry -

I don't think this controversial at all!  Many, if not most of us 
have several manufacturers in our rigs.  My rig is dominated by MOTM 
because I believe MOTM to be the best quality.  But I also have 
modules from Oakley, Blacet, CGS, and Cyndustries.  All of these 
(except some of the Blacet) are in MOTM format.

The Stooges provide a great service with their panles.  This service 
enables many of the popular non-MOTM modules to be incorporated with 
ease and visual compatibility.  For other panels, I use Schaeffer, 
which also make high quality panels, but that don't match visually 
as well as Stooge panels.

If you'd like to see an example of a rig with all of these 
manufacturers, check out the cover of the current SynthTech catalog: 
upper left on the front page is my current setup.

Best,

Mike

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "Larry T." <larry@u...> wrote:
.
.
.
> 
> The one comment that I would like to make (and I am not trying to
> start a war here) is that I don't think it makes sense to restrict
> yourself an ANY one manufacturer.  And the beauty is that most of 
the
> modular gear that is available uses compatible signal levels (as 
long
> as you can deal with different signal connectors, power connectors,
> and mounting requirements).  Even when there are overlapping 
modules,
> there are often reasons to get different vendors modules in order 
to
> expand you sonic pallet.  And when all else fails, there are the 
DIY
> options that often will fill strange and unusual voids (that you 
may

> not even know you have till you run into the circuit somewhere).
> 
> Thanks again to everyone (even if this thread has not yet run it's
> full course).
> 
> Larry T. back to listening/lurking (for now)

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Marsh" <michaelmarsh@s...> wrote:

> If you'd like to see an example of a rig with all of these 
> manufacturers, check out the cover of the current SynthTech catalog: 
> upper left on the front page is my current setup.

 Do you think you could point us to a larger view (and maybe better
resolution) photograph? Would be lovely to see that setup somewhat bigger.

  :-) Michael.

You will fit in quite nicely here. :-)  Many of use mix and match.  While
most of my synth is MOTM, I would consider my synth incomplete without many
of my Blacet modules.  And, for real diversity, some of Ken Stone's PCBs are
great too. :-)
Best,
Larry H (the Stoogely one)

----- Original Message -----
From: Larry T. <larry@...>
The one comment that I would like to make (and I am not trying to start a
war here) is that I don't think it makes sense to restrict yourself an ANY
one manufacturer.  And the beauty is that most of the modular gear that is
available uses compatible signal levels (as long as you can deal with
different signal connectors, power connectors, and mounting requirements).
Even when there are overlapping modules, there are often reasons to get
different vendors modules in order to expand you sonic pallet.  And when all
else fails, there are the DIY options that often will fill strange and
unusual voids (that you may not even know you have till you run into the
circuit somewhere).

Your wish is my command!  Well, sort of.  This is the best I have at 
the moment.  I'll see if I can get a better shot over the weekend.  

In the files section...

Mike

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "tontaub" <egroups@b...> wrote:
> --- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Marsh" <michaelmarsh@s...> 
wrote:
> 
> > If you'd like to see an example of a rig with all of these 
> > manufacturers, check out the cover of the current SynthTech 
catalog: 
> > upper left on the front page is my current setup.
> 
>  Do you think you could point us to a larger view (and maybe better
> resolution) photograph? Would be lovely to see that setup somewhat 
bigger.
> 
>   :-) Michael.

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Marsh" <michaelmarsh@s...> wrote:
> Your wish is my command!  Well, sort of.  This is the best I have at 
> the moment.  

Wow - that's a fast response!  ;-)
I like that setup - looks well in use, not as many other shots you can
find on the web which look like done in presence of an observative
marketing department ;-)

> I'll see if I can get a better shot over the weekend.  

Would be great - a bit of showing off the MOTM test center. ;-)

   cheers, Michael.