MOTM

I think I'll make it a MOTM thing and not a 19" rack thing to start with.

Every start chiming in with features/knobs/jacks.

It will be 12-stages mono or 2x6 stages stereo.

VC'd LFO
VC'd  resonance
VC'd wet/dry mix level <<<now that's cool!!

Any other stuff?

Paul S.

synth1@... writes:

>>I think I'll make it a MOTM thing and not a 19" rack thing to start with.<<

Excellent.

>>Every start chiming in with features/knobs/jacks.
It will be 12-stages mono or 2x6 stages stereo.
Any other stuff?<<

The one thing missing from almost all phasers that I would like to see on the 
MOTM is negative feedback/resonance.  It seems like such a simple thing, I 
don't know why it is overlooked all the time.  Could be a switch or dual 
negative and positive operating knob.  With negative feedback you can get 
really unique hollow sounding phaser sounds.

>>VC'd LFO<<

Onboard LFO is a nice touch for a modular phaser.  I would be nice to bring 
the output of the LFO to the panel, so other things can be synced to it.  
That would also give people another LFO even when not using the phaser.

-Elhardt

>I think I'll make it a MOTM thing and not a 19" rack thing to start with.
>
>Every start chiming in with features/knobs/jacks.
>
>It will be 12-stages mono or 2x6 stages stereo.
>
>VC'd LFO
>VC'd  resonance
>VC'd wet/dry mix level <<<now that's cool!!
here in the UK, the Mutron Bi-Phase is very very sought after (a band i know
even went as far afield as Australia to get one - via the net of course). a
second hand unit can fetch \ufffd500 ($800..?). For ultimately selling the phaser
as a standalone, maybe the some bi-phasey features should be looked at -
i'll try and quantify this in the studio today - just a thought
cheerspaulb

Paul Schreiber wrote:
> 
> From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
> 
> I think I'll make it a MOTM thing and not a 19" rack thing to start with.
> 
> Every start chiming in with features/knobs/jacks.
> 
> It will be 12-stages mono or 2x6 stages stereo.
> 
> VC'd LFO
> VC'd  resonance
> VC'd wet/dry mix level <<<now that's cool!!
> 
> Any other stuff?
> 
Yes, but I'm not sure what to call it. If you look at a schem of
the univibe, it uses caps for each filter stage that are multiples
of ten, rather than the same value for each stage. I think this
contributes to it's unique sound.

I had a discussion with Jeurgen some time ago about how one could 
have a "spread" voltage input by simply having different resistors 
for the frequency input of each stage and applying a voltage to them.
This is bypassing normal frequency input to the exponential converter.

This would give you VC pole spread. No phasor in existence has
this feature (that I'm aware of), and it would allow a whole new
pallet of non-typical phasor sounds. 

Now if I could get standard phasor functionality AND univibe type
sounds from a MOTM-quality module, I would be in heaven.

Thomas "waiting for March when his stock options can be sold so he
can buy lot's o' MOTM."
Cygnus Solutions (soon to be RedHat)

Ditto! I used to get wild flanging sounds with neg. feedback from my old
Deltalab DL-4.

Dave Bradley
Principal Software Engineer
Engineering Animation, Inc.
daveb@...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Elhardt@... [mailto:Elhardt@...]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 1999 1:08 AM
> To: motm@onelist.com
> Subject: Re: [motm] Phaser size
>
>
> From: Elhardt@...
>
> The one thing missing from almost all phasers that I would like
> to see on the
> MOTM is negative feedback/resonance.
>
> I would be nice to bring
> the output of the LFO to the panel, so other things can be synced to it.

In a message dated 11/30/99 4:51:17 PM, daveb@... writes:

>Ditto! I used to get wild flanging sounds with neg. feedback from my old
>Deltalab DL-4.

Well, I guess negative feedback is the way to go (whatever that is?) -- 
though with the three + Stooges on this list, I'd imagine Paul would've had 
enough negative feedback by now. I've never used a phaser in a modular 
setting. For me a phaser has one input for a guitar and a few knobs on the 
front which do some things. 

But it might be interesting to see about some kind of VC waveshape on the LFO 
since I know there has been a lot of talk about different types of waveshapes 
for phasers creating a more or less intense phase sound. I remember JH had a 
lot to say about this when it came up.

JB

Make sure it can do *everything* Bob "MFer" Moog's can do and then add
everything that makes it worthy of having the MOTM brand on it!

The Old Fart needs a good kick in the ass IMNSHO.

How does the MOTM design vary from the MFer design?

--Shemp

> I think I'll make it a MOTM thing and not a 19" rack thing to start with.
>
> Every start chiming in with features/knobs/jacks.
>
> It will be 12-stages mono or 2x6 stages stereo.
>
> VC'd LFO
> VC'd  resonance
> VC'd wet/dry mix level <<<now that's cool!!
>
> Any other stuff?

> From: Elhardt@...
> >>VC'd LFO<<
> 
> Onboard LFO is a nice touch for a modular phaser.  I would be nice to
bring 
> the output of the LFO to the panel, so other things can be synced to it. 

> That would also give people another LFO even when not using the phaser.

OOooh... excellent comment !!   I love this list.  Ditto me for this
comment Paul.

LH

JWBarlow@... writes:

>>But it might be interesting to see about some kind of VC waveshape on the 
LFO since I know there has been a lot of talk about different types of 
waveshapes for phasers creating a more or less intense phase sound.<<

The thing about a phaser module, is that if you want to get really 
sophisticated with modulation, then you bypass the onboard LFO and patch in 
some other controlling source, like the 320 LFO.  You don't want to put too 
many obscure and never used features in the thing, otherwise you drive the 
price up, what was it, 300%.

-Elhardt

> From: Elhardt@...
> The thing about a phaser module, is that if you want to get really 
> sophisticated with modulation, then you bypass the onboard LFO and patch
in 
> some other controlling source, like the 320 LFO.  You don't want to put
too 
> many obscure and never used features in the thing, otherwise you drive
the 
> price up, what was it, 300%.

Hmmm... Internal LFO and the possibility of external modulation...   Will
the modulating source have much impact on overall sound?  Inquiring
minds.....  Concerning driving the price up, you are slightly confused. 
The 300% increase referred to the VC Lag processor. <grin>  I publicly
admit to being the responsible stooge who suggested the possibility of
another bi-colored LED (ala 320).

However, since then I have some to my senses and realized that any such
pleasure enhancing ridiculously priced feature should never be included in
a product whose primary focus is to make sound at the least possible cost
<sarcasm intended>  Sorry, I could not resist thinking that a 3 or 4 dollar
cost escalation would ever be a consideration for anyone spending this kind
of money on a synth.

But seriously, I agree, the bi-colored LED is excessive.  After all, we
were just blue-skying ideas anyhow.  That's what the list is all about.  I
for one appreciate that it is always done in "good" humor.  :)

But, I do not agree with the general concept that feature reduction because
of incremental cost increases should be an icon of MOTM design.  If MOTM
really means Mother of the Modulars, or Modular of the Millennium, then it
should be just that.  A few extra bucks here and there, even for seldom
used features, will be worth it when you stand there 5 years from now with
a patch cord in your hands going "why can't I ?"  After all, we are already
getting a superior price to performance ratio compared to competing
products. 

So, like my brother is Stoogedom once said, "Paul, Give me the studley
version."

LH

Again, I agree whole-heartedly. I may end up building/buying other modular
gear, but I'd rather have the option of NOT having to do so. More
features=more money? Fine by me.

David.

> But, I do not agree with the general concept that feature
> reduction because
> of incremental cost increases should be an icon of MOTM design.

I second that Stoogely remark!  Bigger is Better!  Paul is from Texas ain't
he after all!

If I want a whimpy synth I can call the old MFer Bob Moog!

More features!!!!  I want the best and am willing to pay for it!

--Shemp

> But, I do not agree with the general concept that feature
> reduction because
> of incremental cost increases should be an icon of MOTM design.  If MOTM
> really means Mother of the Modulars, or Modular of the Millennium, then it
> should be just that.  A few extra bucks here and there, even for seldom
> used features, will be worth it when you stand there 5 years from now with
> a patch cord in your hands going "why can't I ?"  After all, we
> are already
> getting a superior price to performance ratio compared to competing
> products.
>
> So, like my brother is Stoogedom once said, "Paul, Give me the studley
> version."

Sure. The LFO in the '410 "goes to zero" if the DEPTH is set to 0.

Paul S.

----- Original Message -----
From: David Bivins <dbivins@...>
To: <motm@onelist.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 1999 7:02 PM
Subject: RE: [motm] Phaser size


> From: "David Bivins" <dbivins@...>
>
> > Subject: [motm] Phaser size
> > From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
>
> > VC'd wet/dry mix level <<<now that's cool!!
>
> I just re-read this a bit ago, and I've already started using this feature
> in my head (yeah, I have brain phasing--don't you?). Let's please keep
this

> as a feature! Also (dumb question alert): if there's a built-in modulation
> source as suggested (the LFO) will it go to "0," in other words no
> modulation? Or would we have to send a fixed CV?
>
> Always only almost clear on the concept,
>
> David.
>
> >

> Subject: [motm] Phaser size
> From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>

> VC'd wet/dry mix level <<<now that's cool!!

I just re-read this a bit ago, and I've already started using this feature
in my head (yeah, I have brain phasing--don't you?). Let's please keep this
as a feature! Also (dumb question alert): if there's a built-in modulation
source as suggested (the LFO) will it go to "0," in other words no
modulation? Or would we have to send a fixed CV?

Always only almost clear on the concept,

David.