200e

The data I'm finding on the internets isn't cutting it.
Any deeper/more exhaustive information out there on 200e modules?

Cheers.

There aren't any nagging questions I have, I am just looking to go deeper into the fibers of 
this machine.  A small instance is in the FAQ. The question of what the resolution of each 
ADC and DAC is answered, but not in depth.  What is the exhaustive answer to that question?  
Does the manual provide more insight into each module?  Perhaps those with deeper 
knowledge of the 200e should expound on the wiki article.

I have a thirst to know what I'm working with.  
There ARE reasons for the chosen resolutions.  
One reason is to "accurately represent underlying perceptual parameters."
From what I know, to perceive involves understanding and getting a grasp of something.  So, 
what/whose are these perceptual parameters? Are they my own parameters or that of the 
200e?  If they are my parameters, why can't I represent them according to my own perception 
of them via user selected resolutions? (Assign my own bit-rate and sample-rate the way my 
perception of my parameters deems worthy in any given situation.)  If they are the 200e's 
own parameters, then who decided how the 200e should perceive them?  And why does that 
person have the decision and not me? I guess I do have some nagging questions.

you could call Don, I am sure he'd be happy to answer any questions





--- On Sun, 8/24/08, onycha.hazel <thomas.buckler@gmail.com> wrote:

From: onycha.hazel <thomas.buckler@gmail.com>
Subject: [200e] looking for more exhaustive information about 200e modules.
To: 200e@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, August 24, 2008, 10:44 AM










    
            The data I'm finding on the internets isn't cutting it.

Any deeper/more exhaustive information out there on 200e modules?



Cheers.




      

    
    
	
	 
	
	








	


	
	


      

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

On Aug 24, 2008, at 10:44 AM, onycha.hazel wrote:
> The data I'm finding on the internets isn't cutting it.
> Any deeper/more exhaustive information out there on 200e modules?


I think the Wikipedia entry, flawed as it is, has the most info.

What questions do you have?

-C

Chris Muir
cbm@well.com	
http://www.xfade.com

how is it flawed?

"the resolutions were chosen to try and match the sensitivity of the human nervous system to 
various parameters. For example, humans are very sensitive to pitch, so a higher resolution 
DAC might be used to drive an output that was intended to control pitch, e.g. 225e Note 
buss."

I think you are incorrect on this one.  The quote reads, "Their characteristics are selected to 
enable accurate representation of underlying perceptual parameters."   Perhaps it means that 
the DAC and ADC resolutions are chosen based on the needs a user has, of representing any 
conceived sound.  So basically, if I want to make a sound that resembles a dorsal fin coming 
into contact with a human face, the Buchla 200e has the ability to represent that accurately.  
So basically, they are my perceptual parameters.

On Aug 24, 2008, at 11:08 AM, amnesia wrote:
> how is it flawed?


Well, it reads like some of the authors had never seen, much less  
used, a 200e.

-C

Chris Muir
cbm@well.com	
http://www.xfade.com

there is so much misinformation on the web.. be it here, on wikipedia
etc.. I again suggest that if you have serious questions you go to the
source for answers.. call Don, email Ezra..even those of us here with
systems and experience using the system probably suffer from
misunderstanding of the technology or specific design choices... we
are  not the people to ask.



talk to the Buchlas.. I am sure they are the ones to answer your questions.



ezra: ezra.buchla@gm**l.com (figure it out)

don:  510 528 4446












--- On Sun, 8/24/08, onycha.hazel <thomas.buckler@gmail.com> wrote:

From: onycha.hazel <thomas.buckler@gmail.com>
Subject: [200e] Re: looking for more exhaustive information about 200e modules.
To: 200e@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, August 24, 2008, 11:25 AM










    
            There aren't any nagging questions I have, I am just looking to go deeper into the fibers of 

this machine.  A small instance is in the FAQ. The question of what the resolution of each 

ADC and DAC is answered, but not in depth.  What is the exhaustive answer to that question?  

Does the manual provide more insight into each module?  Perhaps those with deeper 

knowledge of the 200e should expound on the wiki article.




      

    
    
	
	 
	
	








	


	
	


      

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

On Aug 24, 2008, at 11:25 AM, onycha.hazel wrote:

> There aren't any nagging questions I have, I am just looking to go  
> deeper into the fibers of
> this machine. A small instance is in the FAQ. The question of what  
> the resolution of each
> ADC and DAC is answered, but not in depth. What is the exhaustive  
> answer to that question?
>
I have no idea. In practice, it hasn't proven to be something I need  
an answer to, FWIW. There seems to be an appropriate resolution for  
most outputs, at least the way I use it.

> Does the manual provide more insight into each module?
>
Not much. The manual is fairly sketchy, more like a first draft/ 
outline than a complete manual.

> Perhaps those with deeper
> knowledge of the 200e should expound on the wiki article.
>
Yeah, I've been meaning to try and find time to revisit the Wikipedia  
entry. Most of the edits I've done on it are minor error corrections.

-C

Chris Muir
cbm@well.com	
http://www.xfade.com

On Aug 24, 2008, at 12:14 PM, onycha.hazel wrote:

> Are they my own parameters or that of the 200e?


I think all "accurately represent underlying perceptual parameters."  
is trying to say is that the resolutions were chosen to try and match  
the sensitivity of the human nervous system to various parameters. For  
example, humans are very sensitive to pitch, so a higher resolution  
DAC might be used to drive an output that was intended to control  
pitch, e.g. 225e Note buss.

-C

Chris Muir
cbm@well.com	
http://www.xfade.com

On 24 Aug 2008, at 21:19, onycha.hazel wrote:

> "the resolutions were chosen to try and match the sensitivity of the  
> human nervous system to
> various parameters. For example, humans are very sensitive to pitch,  
> so a higher resolution
> DAC might be used to drive an output that was intended to control  
> pitch, e.g. 225e Note
> buss."
>
> I think you are incorrect on this one. The quote reads, "Their  
> characteristics are selected to
> enable accurate representation of underlying perceptual parameters."  
> Perhaps it means that
> the DAC and ADC resolutions are chosen based on the needs a user  
> has, of representing any
> conceived sound. So basically, if I want to make a sound that  
> resembles a dorsal fin coming
> into contact with a human face, the Buchla 200e has the ability to  
> represent that accurately.
> So basically, they are my perceptual parameters.
>
>

excellent!


>

On Aug 24, 2008, at 1:19 PM, onycha.hazel wrote:

>  So basically, if I want to make a sound that resembles a dorsal fin  
> coming
> into contact with a human face, the Buchla 200e has the ability to  
> represent that accurately.
> So basically, they are my perceptual parameters.


I wish I could be a fly on the wall for any conversation you have with  
Don regarding this.

-C

Chris Muir
cbm@well.com	
http://www.xfade.com

I sense a forum contest....


> So basically, if I want to make a sound that resembles a dorsal fin  
> coming
> into contact with a human face, the Buchla 200e has the ability to  
> represent that accurately.




Richard Lainhart
http://www.otownmedia.com
http://www.downloadplatform.com/richard_lainhart
http://www.vimeo.com/rlainhart
http://www.airglowmusic.com






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

Wonder what would have happened if Jerry Hunt had built and sold electronic instruments...


--- On Sun, 8/24/08, Chris Muir <cbm@well.com> wrote:

> From: Chris Muir <cbm@well.com>
> Subject: Re: [200e] Re: looking for more exhaustive information about 200e modules.
> To: 200e@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sunday, August 24, 2008, 5:20 PM
> On Aug 24, 2008, at 1:19 PM, onycha.hazel wrote:
> 
> >  So basically, if I want to make a sound that
> resembles a dorsal fin  
> > coming
> > into contact with a human face, the Buchla 200e has
> the ability to  
> > represent that accurately.
> > So basically, they are my perceptual parameters.
> 
> 
> I wish I could be a fly on the wall for any conversation
> you have with  
> Don regarding this.
> 
> -C
> 
> Chris Muir
> cbm@well.com	
> http://www.xfade.com