MOTM

Here is a quick update of module status:

MOTM-420 2-pole VCF [MS-20 type]

PC board went off to the fab today! Will start shipping near June 14th.
You will need more heat-sink compound for this as well as the MOTM-410
filter.

No metal cans this time! Has 2 trims (1V/Oct and Resonance Amount).

Has HP, LP and Notch. Just to prevent some *potential* email questions, the
notch is
only 6dB so the effect is *slight* compared to the HP and LP. The HP with
high Q will
call dogs from miles away. Feed it a narrow pulse and your tweeters will fry
like bacon in the skillet.

Only a 6/10 in complexity.


MOTM-410 Triple Resonator with VC LFO [PS-3100 type]

Well, after extensive bench testing I decided the LEDs interacted too much
with the Vactrols. Sorry Rocket,
blinking lites are history. So the 2U layout on the website will be it.
Download the MP3 file if you get a chance.

As far a having individual sensitivity settings: it turn out that you can
emulate this quite well by setting where each
filter's initial frequency is, *relative to* the input. You can set them way
up high (6Khz) so that they have no effect
on the sound. So, this is analogus to sensitivity settings. I *know* it's
not exactly the same, but it will do. I have
messed with the breadboard for several days, and the sounds you can get are
stunning. Running a signal with a little
white noise added can really made huge "swirling" sounds.

The pcb will be dense: *as dense* as the VCOs. It is rated a 9/10
complexity. Warn your family & friends accordingly!

MOTM-320 VC LFO

Breadboard is running. Needs some range tweaking, but is looking good. Dual
LED looks pretty cool.

Rated about a 7/10 in complexity (there are LOTS of transistors to get mixed
up!).


Which module you guys want after the 420: the 410 or the 320?

Paul S.

>
>Which module you guys want after the 420: the 410 or the 320?
>

I'll vote for the 410 first.... the preview sample was just too good....


...jp

> Which module you guys want after the 420: the 410 or the 320?

Ultimately, do what is easiest for you Paul. The 410 did get a lot of us
hopping though!

> analog sequencer/quantizer and some kind of clock div or other
> clock procesor,allso i'm looking for the preamp.

I don't think we will see the sequencer (everybody wants Mo' ass!) until the
very end of this year or the beginning of next year. I am interested in a
clock divider and a lag processor; although I am not that sure everything
they can do for me.

Paul, what can we expect after the summer trilogy???

--Todd

Hi People:

First: I prefer to have controls labeled as to what they actually do
(objectively) rather than how they sound (subjectively). So if Q,
REGENERATION or RESONANCE isn't appropriate, my vote is for: MIX, RATIO,
DEPTH or (last choice) WET & WILD.

As for the next line of modules, I'd like to know what Paul has close to
being ready production, either prototyped, interesting clone ideas or designs
ideas.(????) Of course I'm still waiting for the Moog filter, but I'm
thinking that three filters so close together might be too many at once. Any
possibility with VCFs with VCQ?

BTW, I had planned not to get the 410 filter for a while, but after hearing
that MP3....

JB

In a message dated 5/24/99 12:09:19 PM, synth1@... writes:

>Which module you guys want after the 420: the 410 or the 320?

>
>As for the next line of modules, I'd like to know what Paul has close to
>being ready production, either prototyped, interesting clone ideas or

designs

>ideas.(????) Of course I'm still waiting for the Moog filter, but I'm
>thinking that three filters so close together might be too many at once.

Any

>possibility with VCFs with VCQ?

What is on the NEWS page is what will be out between June 15 and July 15,
approx.

After that, probably a rash of 1U modules:

a) triple pre-amp
b) envelope follower
c) VC lag (if it will fit)
d) dual reversing atten/voltage source/8 power connectors for daisy chaining
e) clock divider (mostly d*****l)

Then 2 more filters (Moog and SEM) and THEN work on Baby MOAS Sequencer.

I am against VC-Q in general because it severly degrades CV feedthrough. I
may do
Thomas Henry's 3320-based LP/All-pass filter with VC-Q. The CEM chips are
trimmed
by zener-zap to minimize CV feedthrough, and I have access to 12,000 of
them!


Paul S.

> From: Paul Schreiber <synth1@...>
> After that, probably a rash of 1U modules:
>
> a) triple pre-amp
> b) envelope follower
> c) VC lag (if it will fit)
> d) dual reversing atten/voltage source/8 power connectors for daisy

chaining

> e) clock divider (mostly d*****l)
>
> Then 2 more filters (Moog and SEM) and THEN work on Baby MOAS Sequencer.

Sound great. I have 2 questions:

1. What happened to the mixer?

2. I don't know what a VC lag is. One of you modular savy MOTMer's
describe its function for me.

Thanks,
Larry Hendry

At 03:14 PM 5/24/99 -0500, you wrote:

>Which module you guys want after the 420: the 410 or the 320?

analog sequencer/quantizer and some kind of clock div or other
clock procesor,allso i'm looking for the preamp.

thanx
Gur Milstein

AND a mixer in there somewhere!

VC lag is portamento whose time is set by a control voltage.

Paul S.

-----Original Message-----
From: J. Larry Hendry <jlarryh@...>
To: motm@onelist.com <motm@onelist.com>
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 12:57 AM
Subject: Re: [motm] New modules Status

>From: "J. Larry Hendry" <jlarryh@...>
>
>> From: Paul Schreiber <synth1@...>
>> After that, probably a rash of 1U modules:
>>
>> a) triple pre-amp
>> b) envelope follower
>> c) VC lag (if it will fit)
>> d) dual reversing atten/voltage source/8 power connectors for daisy
>chaining
>> e) clock divider (mostly d*****l)
>>
>> Then 2 more filters (Moog and SEM) and THEN work on Baby MOAS Sequencer.
>
>Sound great. I have 2 questions:
>
>1. What happened to the mixer?
>
>2. I don't know what a VC lag is. One of you modular savy MOTMer's
>describe its function for me.
>
>Thanks,
>Larry Hendry
>
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>What do lizards and rock music have in common?
>http://www.onelist.com
>They both have communities at ONElist. Find yours today!
>

> From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
>
> AND a mixer in there somewhere!
>
> VC lag is portamento whose time is set by a control voltage.

Excellent !!
LH

> Then 2 more filters (Moog and SEM) and THEN work on Baby MOAS Sequencer.
>

SEM! SEM! SEM!

> 2. I don't know what a VC lag is. One of you modular savy MOTMer's
> describe its function for me.
>

Technically, a lag processor introduces an RC time constant into the input
signal. It is mostly used to process control voltages.

A SIMPLE lag processor would have a single knob to control both rise and
fall time. It might allow voltage control of the rise and fall time also.

A BETTER lag processor would have separate controls and CV inputs for rise
and fall time. Add triggering capability and you have the Serge Universal
Slope Generator, an extremely flexible module which JW described in detail
in a post on 3/7/99.

A STUDLY lag processor has separate rise and fall controls, AND allows you
to vary the response from linear to exponential (as in the Emu design).

Here's a few things you can do with one:
1. Add portamento to any stepped CV as Paul mentioned - sample & hold and
sequencer outputs, for instance.
2. Turn a gate signal into an ASR envelope generator (that's why you want
separate rise and fall times and exponential response ability).
3. Modify LFO waveforms on the fly, similar to the symmetry control planned
for the 320.
4. Use as a crude audio filter. Probably not that effective on VCOs, but it
works well for filtering white and pink noise into darker varieties, and for
making slow random signals even slower.

They are a lot more versatile than you'd think at first glance.

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

Thanks for the tips Dave. I like your description variation of Good,
Better, Best.
Larry H.

> Technically, a lag processor introduces an RC time constant into the

input

> signal. It is mostly used to process control voltages.
>
> A SIMPLE lag processor would have a single knob to control both rise and
> fall time. It might allow voltage control of the rise and fall time also.
>
> A BETTER lag processor would have separate controls and CV inputs for

rise

> and fall time. Add triggering capability and you have the Serge Universal
> Slope Generator, an extremely flexible module which JW described in

detail

> in a post on 3/7/99.
>
> A STUDLY lag processor has separate rise and fall controls, AND allows

you

> to vary the response from linear to exponential (as in the Emu design).
>
> Here's a few things you can do with one:
> 1. Add portamento to any stepped CV as Paul mentioned - sample & hold and
> sequencer outputs, for instance.
> 2. Turn a gate signal into an ASR envelope generator (that's why you want
> separate rise and fall times and exponential response ability).
> 3. Modify LFO waveforms on the fly, similar to the symmetry control

planned

> for the 320.
> 4. Use as a crude audio filter. Probably not that effective on VCOs, but

it

> works well for filtering white and pink noise into darker varieties, and

for

> making slow random signals even slower.
>
> They are a lot more versatile than you'd think at first glance.
>
> Dave Bradley

In a message dated 5/24/99 6:53:20 PM, synth1@... writes:

>What is on the NEWS page is what will be out between June 15 and July 15,
>approx.

I guess we're all ready for these now -- especially for the VCFs, though
you'd think we'd be a bit more satiated with the VCOs.

>After that, probably a rash of 1U modules:
>a) triple pre-amp
>b) envelope follower
>c) VC lag (if it will fit)
>d) dual reversing atten/voltage source/8 power connectors for daisy chaining
>e) clock divider (mostly d*****l)

These all sound great! I'm interested in what your thinking of for both the
Lag and Divider modules.

>Then 2 more filters (Moog and SEM) and THEN work on Baby MOAS Sequencer.

>I am against VC-Q in general because it severly degrades CV feedthrough.
>I
>may do
>Thomas Henry's 3320-based LP/All-pass filter with VC-Q. The CEM chips are
>trimmed
>by zener-zap to minimize CV feedthrough, and I have access to 12,000 of
>them!

Bummer! I figgered there was a reason you'd not mentioned VCQ in the past.
VCQ is really powerful though so I'd like to see you look into the 3320 idea
-- I've been using some 3320s with their VCQ to great success.

And after all those modules....maybe... the fabulous MOTM Ribbon
controller????

JB

"JW," as my friends (i.e., Dave) call me, chiming in on the VC Lag idea.
Note: to make a STUDLY Lag processor which already has a VC (reversing
attenuator) input, you merely need to patch the output into the VC input and
vary the attenuator to go from Log through zero to Exponential. A switch
would be a benefit and a shape knob (as I've described) wouldn't be overkill
-- and yes, with a separate VC input for Rise and Fall times, it could beat
up a S(pl)erge DSG.

JB

In a message dated 5/25/99 7:13:58 AM, daveb@... writes:

>A SIMPLE lag processor would have a single knob to control both rise and
>fall time. It might allow voltage control of the rise and fall time also.

>A BETTER lag processor would have separate controls and CV inputs for rise
>and fall time. Add triggering capability and you have the Serge Universal
>Slope Generator, an extremely flexible module which JW described in detail
>in a post on 3/7/99.

>A STUDLY lag processor has separate rise and fall controls, AND allows
>you
>to vary the response from linear to exponential (as in the Emu design).

>These all sound great! I'm interested in what your thinking of for both the
>Lag and Divider modules.
>

The clock divider is "funny-looking" as in the simple form, has no pots
(only jacks) and switches.

You have an INput, that is set with a LM311 for 2.4V switchpoint (TTL
compatible). Then, probably
a little Xilinx pre-programmed 44 pin FPGA with symmetrical dividers from 2
to 10. A switch
to set outputs from 0-5V or +-5V (TTL mode or waveform mode). Or I could
get fancy and have
a symm/non-symm function. In non-symm, you get 1 pulse out only at the
divide rate. In symm, you get a 50%
duty cycle square wave at the divide rate.

So, it's like half of a '120 with individual outs.

The circuit is simple: a LM311, the Xilinx part (PLCC in a socket) and 2
quad op amps, 9 jacks, 1 switch. 1U wide.

The lag can be simple or complex, depending on price and the skill of the
designer.

>>Then 2 more filters (Moog and SEM) and THEN work on Baby MOAS Sequencer.
>
>>I am against VC-Q in general because it severly degrades CV feedthrough.
>>I
>>may do
>>Thomas Henry's 3320-based LP/All-pass filter with VC-Q. The CEM chips are
>>trimmed
>>by zener-zap to minimize CV feedthrough, and I have access to 12,000 of
>>them!
>
>
>Bummer! I figgered there was a reason you'd not mentioned VCQ in the past.
>VCQ is really powerful though so I'd like to see you look into the 3320

idea

>-- I've been using some 3320s with their VCQ to great success.

I may have VC-Q on the Moog filter if it doesn't muddy up the sound too
much.

>
>And after all those modules....maybe... the fabulous MOTM Ribbon
>controller????

Errr......don't hold your breath.

Paul S.

On Tue, 25 May 1999 JWBarlow@... wrote:

> >I am against VC-Q in general because it severly degrades CV feedthrough.
> >I
> >may do
> >Thomas Henry's 3320-based LP/All-pass filter with VC-Q. The CEM chips are
> >trimmed
> >by zener-zap to minimize CV feedthrough, and I have access to 12,000 of
> >them!
>
> Bummer! I figgered there was a reason you'd not mentioned VCQ in the past.
> VCQ is really powerful though so I'd like to see you look into the 3320 idea
> -- I've been using some 3320s with their VCQ to great success.

If you really want that VCQ and aren't scared of a soldering iron,
3320-based VCF's are very easy to construct. Just follow the instructions
on the back of the box.. er.. the spec sheet...

I think VCQ is a nice option, but one not everybody will use. I agree with
Pauls observations about VCQ and c/v feedthrough. (in a pinch you can
create your own feedback loop from the VCF audio output through a VCA and
back into the VCF audio input)

later
Andrew


-| Andrew Schrock | aschrock@... |-

HI list.
yes yes yes i like it.

thanx
Gur Milstein



At 10:09 PM 5/25/99 -0500, you wrote:

>From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>

>
>You have an INput, that is set with a LM311 for 2.4V switchpoint (TTL
>compatible). Then, probably
>a little Xilinx pre-programmed 44 pin FPGA with symmetrical dividers from 2
>to 10. A switch
>to set outputs from 0-5V or +-5V (TTL mode or waveform mode). Or I could
>get fancy and have
>a symm/non-symm function. In non-symm, you get 1 pulse out only at the
>divide rate. In symm, you get a 50%
>duty cycle square wave at the divide rate.

In a message dated 5/25/99 7:03:08 PM, synth1@... writes:

>I may have VC-Q on the Moog filter if it doesn't muddy up the sound too
>much.

I'd especially like this, but of course I trust your judgment.

>The clock divider is "funny-looking" as in the simple form, has no pots
>(only jacks) and switches.
>You have an INput, that is set with a LM311 for 2.4V switchpoint (TTL
>compatible). Then, probably
>a little Xilinx pre-programmed 44 pin FPGA with symmetrical dividers from
>2
>to 10. A switch
>to set outputs from 0-5V or +-5V (TTL mode or waveform mode). Or I could
>get fancy and have
>a symm/non-symm function. In non-symm, you get 1 pulse out only at the
>divide rate. In symm, you get a 50%
>duty cycle square wave at the divide rate.
>So, it's like half of a '120 with individual outs.
>The circuit is simple: a LM311, the Xilinx part (PLCC in a socket) and
>2
>quad op amps, 9 jacks, 1 switch. 1U wide.

This sounds really good. On a similar note, I have used a module in the past
which was able to produce pulse division patterns from a pulse train (e.g.,
for 32 pulses divide by two, for the next 16 pulses divide by four, etc.) and
was an extremely powerful sequencing tool; the kind of thing Rocket Man would
enjoy I believe!

>>And after all those modules....maybe... the fabulous MOTM Ribbon
>
>>controller????

>Errr......don't hold your breath.

I've been holding my breath for that ladder filter!

Synth Peon
John Barlow

BTW, thanks to Larry for the great tip on using the divider to tune over a
wider range -- like all brilliant ideas, incredibly obvious, once I was told
about it.