MOTM

Hey there buddy-- I didn't notice you piping up when I mentioned slapping a
basically free attenuator on the VCEG!  What's this nonesence about speaking
only when feeling strongly?  ;)

(To pump the idea again, it solves a niche need between having strictly
knobby attenuator and having the full controls on the VCA!  Isn't that
keen?!?  Don't you want one?!?  And you don't have to think of it as just
for audio signals-- attenuate anything with it!  Yea!  ;)

--PBr

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	jwbarlow@... [SMTP:jwbarlow@...]
> Sent:	Monday, February 28, 2000 4:16 PM
> To:	motm@onelist.com
> Subject:	Re: [motm] Help with joystick
> 
> John (I was hoping that the volume of list traffic would stay high with
> all 
> the new people starting to chime in, but it appears listmembers only speak
> up 
> when they feel strongly about a certain feature on a proposed module -- in
> 
> that spirit, anyone who likes VC sustain on a VCEG is a wuss!) Barlow
>

Did you say free attenuators? Send me a bunch!

OK, I've looked at this a couple of times, and I have no idea what you're 
talking about. Could you say it in English this time <grin>.

BTW, The reason I think VC sustain is the least useful of all the 
time/voltage domains under VC (should be included, but can lose features like 
an attenuator more quickly than the others): 
If, for example, VC sustain is a one to one relationship (1V CV input 
produces a 1V increase in the output of sustain), you can get a very similar 
(possibly more useful) effect by merely summing your CV source with the 
output of your EG and using that sum to control your....

Bring it on, you wusses!
JB
Hey, you gonna send me a 1U to drill for mults?


In a message dated 2/29/2000 4:01:28 PM, PaulBr@... writes:

>Hey there buddy-- I didn't notice you piping up when I mentioned slapping
>a
>basically free attenuator on the VCEG!  What's this nonesence about speaking
>only when feeling strongly?  ;)
>
>(To pump the idea again, it solves a niche need between having strictly
>knobby attenuator and having the full controls on the VCA!  Isn't that
>keen?!?  Don't you want one?!?  And you don't have to think of it as just
>for audio signals-- attenuate anything with it!  Yea!  ;)
>

Hmmm, in English?  That's difficult, I'm much more fluent in C...

Well, the idea for a built in atteunator on the VCEG is this:  One possible
usage for a EG is shaping the amplitude of another signal via a VCA.  Well,
we have a VCA already, but its got a few extra features such as the DC
offset and ring-mod.  If I just want to shape the amplitude of a signal, it
seems a little overkill to use a whole 'nuther module when the functionality
can easily be tacked onto the EG.  (I mentioned the knobby version because
that's the ultra easy version, just a pot, but its controlled by hand.)
This also has the effect of encouranging the use of many, many EGs, because
you need fewer parts to use them effectively.

OTOH... many modules already come with VC control, so maybe the extra
shaping attenuation isn't so useful.  <shrug>

Reguarding the VC sustain... if you sum the output of the EG with the CV
source, then you are fluctuating the EG output at all times... having a
dedicated VC sustain would allow the level to fluctuate only during the
sustain period (or so I would imagine).  Imagine using an LFO for the VC
sustain... you would get your normal attack, decay, a warbled sustain, then
release.  If you sum the LFO with the EG output, you get a warbled
everything.

Now, I'm not passionate about the subject, so I imagine I could go either
way.  But it seems to me that even with a VS sustain, you can still sum the
EG output, and get the extra neato-factor.  Of course, I suspect that's what
the whole argument was about to begin with, but I was a little swamped when
those e-mails can around... ;P

Reguarding the multi... D'oh!  I'll have Paul S. ship you one...  thanks!!!

--PBr

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	jwbarlow@... [SMTP:jwbarlow@...]
> Sent:	Wednesday, March 01, 2000 7:40 PM
> To:	motm@onelist.com
> Subject:	Re: [motm] VCEG again!
> 
> Did you say free attenuators? Send me a bunch!
> 
> OK, I've looked at this a couple of times, and I have no idea what you're 
> talking about. Could you say it in English this time <grin>.
> 
> BTW, The reason I think VC sustain is the least useful of all the 
> time/voltage domains under VC (should be included, but can lose features
> like 
> an attenuator more quickly than the others): 
> If, for example, VC sustain is a one to one relationship (1V CV input 
> produces a 1V increase in the output of sustain), you can get a very
> similar 
> (possibly more useful) effect by merely summing your CV source with the 
> output of your EG and using that sum to control your....
> 
> Bring it on, you wusses!
> JB
> Hey, you gonna send me a 1U to drill for mults?
> 
>

In a message dated 3/2/2000 12:48:10 PM, PaulBr@... writes:

>Well, the idea for a built in atteunator on the VCEG is this:  One possible
>usage for a EG is shaping the amplitude of another signal via a VCA.  Well,
>we have a VCA already, but its got a few extra features such as the DC
>offset and ring-mod.  If I just want to shape the amplitude of a signal,
>it
>seems a little overkill to use a whole 'nuther module when the functionality
>can easily be tacked onto the EG.  

<snip>

>OTOH... many modules already come with VC control, so maybe the extra
>shaping attenuation isn't so useful.  <shrug>


I guess you mean an output attenuator on the EG. Yes, these are very useful, 
but as you say, many VC inputs already have an attenuator which should make 
this redundant.

>Reguarding the VC sustain... if you sum the output of the EG with the CV
>source, then you are fluctuating the EG output at all times... having a
>dedicated VC sustain would allow the level to fluctuate only during the
>sustain period (or so I would imagine).  Imagine using an LFO for the VC
>sustain... you would get your normal attack, decay, a warbled sustain,
>then
>release.  If you sum the LFO with the EG output, you get a warbled
>everything.

This is one of the better examples of this kind of use -- though for this 
particular example I'd prefer to use some sort of pre LFO gated "delay." But 
it does show that VC sustain has good uses beyond what one (I) normally 
thinks of.

OK, so I'm a wuss too!
John Wuss Barlow

Hi All !

Changing sustain on an eg does change the basic shape of the eg, the 
peak becomes more prominent ...  

Just adding a voltage merely shifts the same shape up, possibly going 
over max modulation in some cases .

Looks like a full featured VCEG (with full attenuators) will be 3u 
wide .  Better keep all inputs (7) and lose the attenuators, then it 
would fit in 2u .  (not forgetting delay and peak ;-) )

One VC thing that has not been mentioned is the use of feedback .  
Changes shape of attack and delay quite a bit .

Bye for now .


Keep 'em oscillating :)


Hugo
=

In a message dated 00-03-03 01:27:17 EST, you write:

<< 
 One VC thing that has not been mentioned is the use of feedback .  
 Changes shape of attack and delay quite a bit .
  >>



hugo,
i`ve used this in the past with serge dsg modules functioning as ar/ad e.g.`s 
-  a very useful feature for warping the shape of the env. segments. adding 
in ( i believe it was ) the output to itself with negative bias ( through the 
reversible attenuator ) gives a great convex shape that works well with 
flanging / phasing / filtering. if i recall correctly, craig anderton used a 
similar sort of ideas in the old paia hyperflange device ( although he did it 
with a vco - hmmm, another possibly useful idea / thing to try..... ).
best,
dave v.