200e

hi matthew,

well, i was thinking of using the input CV (from the 225 in this case) going
into the stage selection input of the 249 as well as one of the
general-purpose external inputs (A,B,C,D). set each stage to sample the
external input for its output (or set it to whatever you want, really), set
each stage to interpolate its output and set the durations to whatever slew
times you like.

this gives you an arbitrary transfer function with the limitation that it
will only update when it receives a change of (10 / "range" parameter) volts
in the input. it is still very useful for modulating incoming performance
gestures in potentially very weird ways, and the illusion of continuity is
largely maintained.

the 250, on the other hand, does update its outputs continuously and so
would be a more effective solution.

for smoothing double-precision pitchbend messages, both of the ARF modules
are less than ideal because there are a couple of conversions along the way
which will degrade the precision by a couple of bits (other MIDI messages
should be unaffected). the 255 may be more suitable, being totally analog,
though i won't claim perfect linearity in its output.

eb

On 6/9/06, mritenburg <mritenburg@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>   Ezra,
>
> In a previous post you mentioned "the
> 225e's CV outputs can be arbitrarily shaped and smoothed by using a
> 255 lag processor, or a 249 or 250 with the right settings." Since the
> inputs A,B,C,D on the 249e are updated on each step and not continuous
> (unless I am missing someting), how would I achieve shaping and
> smooting of output from the 225e? I can see incrementing 249e stage
> addresses with 225e note-on output. I can also see using stage
> duration and interpolation to shape the transition of a CV across
> stages. However, in the case of pitchbend, I do not see how shaping or
> smoothing is achieved as inputs A,B,C,D are not continuously updated
> between MIDI note-on events from thge 225e (Again, unless I am missing
> something) You input on this matter is enlightening.
>
> Thank you for your response,
>
> Matthew Ritenburg
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]