Wiardgroup

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "gcmci <gchang@e...>" <gchang@e...> wrote:
> Dr.,
> 
> Thanks for your insights on this - I have been wondering about whether 
> or not this made a difference, or my memory of the SOU was a little bit 
> fuzzy.  I remember how broad and smooth that you could make the SOU, 
> and I have been trying to recreate this ever since I started to play 
> with the 'Bug.
> 
> What a quality problem, huh?  Playing around with my Bug....
> 
> Gary
>
Hi Gary,
i, too, have a soft spot in hy heart (head?) for the contours of the SOU. I have a dodecamodule on permanent loan to a local college electronic music lab and i'm familiar with the SOU's loopy, 'graceful' sort of character. 
i believe the SOU was a source of inspiration for the Wbug but the similarity is very abstract when you get down to resistors and capacitors. Under the hood, the Wbug design is very unique (and unusually original by today's standards) and IMHO the comparisons with an SOU are blown a bit out of proportion. My take on it is that the Wbug's smooth CV out  makes the same kind of unexpected leaps that the SOU does but it's glide from voltage to voltage is more abrupt especially on wide intervals. 
If i might suggest something-
try running the smooth CV out through some outboard lag processing. i think that a simple passive RC-type lag circuit might even give better results than an active type despite it's range limitations. The SOU's jumps sound closer to linear than logarithmic (to my battered ears anyway!)
at any rate it's always fun to yammer on about those 'pokey old Buchla gadgets'
;']

best,
-doc