SynthModules

im getting ready to start on my modular...and in doing so i have 
taken notice of the difference in price between the MOTM kits and the 
synth.com units.

are the MOTM units really that much better? ... i took a look at a 
few modules ..like the ring modulators for both... the MOTM is more 
than 2x the price ...but it also has a ton of controls where as the 
synth.com unit has none.

then there are biggies like the VCO $329(motm) v.s. $160(synth.com)

by no means am i trying to be cheap ... im just trying to get some 
opinions ... and some insite from people that have a bit more 
experience and or hands on with these units!


also any thoughts on the paia 9700 ???

any info would be helpful!!!


thanks in advance

> im getting ready to start on my modular...and in doing so i have
> taken notice of the difference in price between the MOTM kits and the
> synth.com units.

This isn't really the best forum for this question; perhaps the group name
(SynthModules) is a little confusing. But I'll answer, anyway!


> are the MOTM units really that much better? ... i took a look at a
> few modules ..like the ring modulators for both... the MOTM is more
> than 2x the price ...but it also has a ton of controls where as the
> synth.com unit has none.

Quality? Let's look at signal-to-noise. According to the Synthsizers.com
FAQ, the dotcom VCA has "a signal to noise ratio of 82db (CD quality is
around 96db)." The MOTM-190 has a dynamic range of "better than 100dB."
That's a very big difference.

Features and price difference? The MOTM-190 is 2 VCAs or a ring mod+VCA. The
dotcom Q116 is only a ring mod (which can presumably be used as a VCA). The
MOTM-190 is more like a Q116 plus a Q108, but it's very hard to compare
modules because there always seems to be an extra feature on one or the
other. The BLEND control on the MOTM can avoid the need for a mixer, for
example. The dotcom Q108 has an inverted output, which can be handy.

MOTM is more expensive than dotcom, period. But MOTM modules tend to pack
more functions into each module, which helps to reduce the size and cost of
the total synth  (fewer modules = less cabinetry and  fewer power
connections).

If you are not too hung up on the appearance, you can mix & match dotcom,
MOTM, and other modules. There are power connectors to make this fairly
easy. Choose your cabinet carefully, though; for example, dotcom and MOTM
use different rack mounting brackets. The dotcom wood cabinets -- which use
wood screws for module mounting -- will accept both formats (except for one
row of one of the slanted cabinets, I forget the details).

> also any thoughts on the paia 9700 ???

A completely different animal, IMHO.

I'm on the verge of getting one of these:
    http://www.synthesizers.com/system-entry1.html
But you can rest assured that I'll eventually have MOTM modules, too. Along
with my MOTMized PSIM-1.
--
john

John's analysis is very good.  The differences for me were the
signal-to-noise ratio and the MOTM community.  Many folks have made
some fine music with the .com synth, but it was not for me.  I had a
mix of .com and MOTM and was frustrated by the noisiness of the .com,
which I sold to a very happy buyer.

If price is truly not a concern, I would go with the MOTM.

Mike

--- In SynthModules@yahoogroups.com, "john mahoney" <jmahoney@g...> wrote:
> > im getting ready to start on my modular...and in doing so i have
> > taken notice of the difference in price between the MOTM kits and the
> > synth.com units.
> 
> This isn't really the best forum for this question; perhaps the
group name
> (SynthModules) is a little confusing. But I'll answer, anyway!
> 
> 
> > are the MOTM units really that much better? ... i took a look at a
> > few modules ..like the ring modulators for both... the MOTM is more
> > than 2x the price ...but it also has a ton of controls where as the
> > synth.com unit has none.
> 
> Quality? Let's look at signal-to-noise. According to the Synthsizers.com
> FAQ, the dotcom VCA has "a signal to noise ratio of 82db (CD quality is
> around 96db)." The MOTM-190 has a dynamic range of "better than 100dB."
> That's a very big difference.
> 
> Features and price difference? The MOTM-190 is 2 VCAs or a ring
mod+VCA. The
> dotcom Q116 is only a ring mod (which can presumably be used as a
VCA). The
> MOTM-190 is more like a Q116 plus a Q108, but it's very hard to compare
> modules because there always seems to be an extra feature on one or the
> other. The BLEND control on the MOTM can avoid the need for a mixer, for
> example. The dotcom Q108 has an inverted output, which can be handy.
> 
> MOTM is more expensive than dotcom, period. But MOTM modules tend to
pack
> more functions into each module, which helps to reduce the size and
cost of
> the total synth  (fewer modules = less cabinetry and  fewer power
> connections).
> 
> If you are not too hung up on the appearance, you can mix & match
dotcom,
> MOTM, and other modules. There are power connectors to make this fairly
> easy. Choose your cabinet carefully, though; for example, dotcom and
MOTM
> use different rack mounting brackets. The dotcom wood cabinets --
which use
> wood screws for module mounting -- will accept both formats (except
for one
> row of one of the slanted cabinets, I forget the details).
> 
> > also any thoughts on the paia 9700 ???
> 
> A completely different animal, IMHO.
> 
> I'm on the verge of getting one of these:
>     http://www.synthesizers.com/system-entry1.html
> But you can rest assured that I'll eventually have MOTM modules,
too. Along

> with my MOTMized PSIM-1.
> --
> john

--- Mubo <mubo144@yahoo.com> wrote:
> im getting ready to start on my modular...and in doing so i have 
> taken notice of the difference in price between the MOTM kits and
> the synth.com units.
> 
> are the MOTM units really that much better? ...

--LH--
First let me say that the dot com modules are fine and a good value
for the price.  Roger packs a lot of bang into his buck.

Howwever, they are significantly different than MOTM and hence the
price difference.  

Dot com = cheap import jacks.
MOTM = Swithccraft 112A (industry quality stabdard)
Dot com = 87 cent carbon pots
MOTM = $6 sealed conductive plastic pots.
Dot com = pots and jacks "plug" onto PCB
MOTM = all hand soldered

I could go on a long time about the differences, but I think you will
see that while both are good in their own way, the MOTM modules use a
higher quality part in all cases. 

And, the designs are all more featured.  For example:
Look at the dot com pedal interface, now look at the MOTM pedal
interface.  2 completely different modules when features are
compared.  To get control with the dot com like you have on the MOTM,
you have to buy a module with attenuators.  The you still do not get
the gate extractor.

Think about inovative design.
Dot com filters = 2
MOTM filters = 6 and growing.

So, my opinion is obvious.  But, I will also say that you get your
moneys worth with both of them.  It just depends on what you want to
buy.

For me, I love building.  I love getting schematics and theory of
operation docs.  You do not even get a schematic with dot com.  And,
If I want to modify my MOTM module somewhat (which I sometimes do), I
have everything I need to do so. If you have any desire to do any DIY
work, MOTM kits will help you get started in that direction.

Now, I think Andrew also mentioned Blacet.  I love John's stuff.  I
own a lot of it.  But, I personally do not like the small frac rack
format.  So, all of mine are converted to the larger MOTM format.

If you like the small frac frack format, Blacet is some really good
stuff.  He deliverys a big value for the buck since it is cost less
to produce modules in that size format.

Good luck in your decision.
Larry Hendry

http://www.wiseguysynth.com
(support site for the MOTM format)


	
		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

> Quality? Let's look at signal-to-noise. According to the 
Synthsizers.com
> FAQ, the dotcom VCA has "a signal to noise ratio of 82db (CD 
quality is
> around 96db)." The MOTM-190 has a dynamic range of "better 
than 100dB."
> That's a very big difference.

It might be useful to note that signal to noise ratio is different 
than the noise floor. The noise floor is the actual hiss (thermal 
noise).

Signal to noise ratio is the ratio between the test sine signal 
peak and the next lowest signal peak. This is usually the second 
harmonic distortion. A second harmonic distortion of -82 dB is 
approx. a THD of 0.005% or as good as virtually all audiophile 
hi-fi gear.

Analog to digital converters have a noise floor fixed by the math 
of 6 dB per bit (hence 96 dB for 16 bit).

Based on my measurements at Wiard, the noise floor of a TL074 
is about equal to the self noise of a 24 bit converter. An LM837 is 
about -15 dB below the same 24 bit converter. But the signal to 
noise ratio is -60 dB or so because the THD is 0.02% (second 
harmonic at -60 dB). This is plenty good enough for prime time!

The major source of hiss noise will come from the A to D inputs 
of the digital compositing system you use, rather than the analog 
equipment.

--- In SynthModules@yahoogroups.com, "grantrichter2001" 
<grichter@a...> wrote:
> 
> > Quality? Let's look at signal-to-noise. According to the 
> Synthsizers.com
> > FAQ, the dotcom VCA has "a signal to noise ratio of 82db 
(CD 
> quality is
> > around 96db)." The MOTM-190 has a dynamic range of 
"better 
> than 100dB."
> > That's a very big difference.
> 

I should also mention power supplies. Your signal to noise ratio 
can not be any better than the power supply. Those 82 dB and 
100 dB specs are measured with a single module on the power 
supply, using minimum cable length. A 100 dB S/N ratio with a 3 
foot power cable can become a 82 dB S/N with a 6 foot power 
cable.

And if you add a VCO to the same supply, your S/N can go down 
to 40 or even 30 dB depending on the oscillator, power supply 
and wiring scheme.

The thing to do is to sort your modules by how much power 
supply noise they generate. Connect just a VCA to the power 
supply, set it to unity gain, add gain (20 - 30 dB) in the monitor 
system till you can hear the noise floor of the VCA itself. Then 
connect the different modules in the system one at a time to the 
same power supply and note any modules that cause a raise in 
the noise floor of the VCA (like VCOs will do).

Then put the quietest modules on one supply and the noisy 
ones on their own seperate supply.

You will need to do this with any brand of modular for best signal 
to noise performance.

Grant,

I would respectfully disagree with your definition of signal to noise 
ratio. The inclusion of the second order harmonic is only appropriate 
for determining the THD of the circuit when a signal is applied, whether 
that be steady state or transient. The definition of signal to noise is 
the ratio between the power of of the signal at a certain point in the 
circuit to the power of the noise floor (only) which would exist there 
if the signal were removed. This by definition would exclude any 
harmonic distortion created by the circuit with respect to the input signal.

Regards, Scott E,
===================================================
grantrichter2001 wrote:

>
> > Quality? Let's look at signal-to-noise. According to the
> Synthsizers.com
> > FAQ, the dotcom VCA has "a signal to noise ratio of 82db (CD
> quality is
> > around 96db)." The MOTM-190 has a dynamic range of "better
> than 100dB."
> > That's a very big difference.
>
> It might be useful to note that signal to noise ratio is different
> than the noise floor. The noise floor is the actual hiss (thermal
> noise).
>
> Signal to noise ratio is the ratio between the test sine signal
> peak and the next lowest signal peak. This is usually the second
> harmonic distortion. A second harmonic distortion of -82 dB is
> approx. a THD of 0.005% or as good as virtually all audiophile
> hi-fi gear.
>
> Analog to digital converters have a noise floor fixed by the math
> of 6 dB per bit (hence 96 dB for 16 bit).
>
> Based on my measurements at Wiard, the noise floor of a TL074
> is about equal to the self noise of a 24 bit converter. An LM837 is
> about -15 dB below the same 24 bit converter. But the signal to
> noise ratio is -60 dB or so because the THD is 0.02% (second
> harmonic at -60 dB). This is plenty good enough for prime time!
>
> The major source of hiss noise will come from the A to D inputs
> of the digital compositing system you use, rather than the analog
> equipment.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Be sure to check out the primary Web site at:
> http://www.SynthModules.com
>
>
>
> *Yahoo! Groups Sponsor*
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Yahoo! Groups Links*
>
>     * To visit your group on the web, go to:
>       http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SynthModules/
>        
>     * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>       SynthModules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       <mailto:SynthModules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>        
>     * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>

Now that is interesting. I will have to try this. I know that one has to 
be careful about mixing analog and digital circuits to the supplies, but 
if the VCOs and the VCAs segregated make that much of a difference, it 
would certainly be an audible one and worth the time to perform some 
experimentation.

Thanks for the tip, Grant

Scott E.
======================================================
grantrichter2001 wrote:

>
> The thing to do is to sort your modules by how much power
> supply noise they generate. Connect just a VCA to the power
> supply, set it to unity gain, add gain (20 - 30 dB) in the monitor
> system till you can hear the noise floor of the VCA itself. Then
> connect the different modules in the system one at a time to the
> same power supply and note any modules that cause a raise in
> the noise floor of the VCA (like VCOs will do).
>
> Then put the quietest modules on one supply and the noisy
> ones on their own seperate supply.
>
> You will need to do this with any brand of modular for best signal
> to noise performance.
>
>

Take a look at this:

http://www.eserviceinfo.com/downloadsm/8699/spectralab_4.32.
html

My reference is the Spectralab software which calulates it from 
the FFT. About.com defines signal to noise ratio this way:

http://stereos.about.com/cs/glossaryandtools/g/sn_ratio.htm

--- In SynthModules@yahoogroups.com, "Scott E." 
<yahudinyhwh@s...> wrote:
> Grant,
> 
> I would respectfully disagree with your definition of signal to 
noise 
> ratio. The inclusion of the second order harmonic is only 
appropriate 
> for determining the THD of the circuit when a signal is applied, 
whether 
> that be steady state or transient. The definition of signal to 
noise is 
> the ratio between the power of of the signal at a certain point in 
the 
> circuit to the power of the noise floor (only) which would exist 
there 
> if the signal were removed. This by definition would exclude 
any 
> harmonic distortion created by the circuit with respect to the 
input signal.
> 
> Regards, Scott E,
> 
==================================================
=
> grantrichter2001 wrote:
> 
> >
> > > Quality? Let's look at signal-to-noise. According to the
> > Synthsizers.com
> > > FAQ, the dotcom VCA has "a signal to noise ratio of 82db 
(CD
> > quality is
> > > around 96db)." The MOTM-190 has a dynamic range of 
"better
> > than 100dB."
> > > That's a very big difference.
> >
> > It might be useful to note that signal to noise ratio is different
> > than the noise floor. The noise floor is the actual hiss 
(thermal
> > noise).
> >
> > Signal to noise ratio is the ratio between the test sine signal
> > peak and the next lowest signal peak. This is usually the 
second
> > harmonic distortion. A second harmonic distortion of -82 dB 
is
> > approx. a THD of 0.005% or as good as virtually all 
audiophile
> > hi-fi gear.
> >
> > Analog to digital converters have a noise floor fixed by the 
math
> > of 6 dB per bit (hence 96 dB for 16 bit).
> >
> > Based on my measurements at Wiard, the noise floor of a 
TL074
> > is about equal to the self noise of a 24 bit converter. An 
LM837 is
> > about -15 dB below the same 24 bit converter. But the signal 
to
> > noise ratio is -60 dB or so because the THD is 0.02% 
(second
> > harmonic at -60 dB). This is plenty good enough for prime 
time!
> >
> > The major source of hiss noise will come from the A to D 
inputs
> > of the digital compositing system you use, rather than the 
analog
> > equipment.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Be sure to check out the primary Web site at:
> > http://www.SynthModules.com
> >
> >
> >
> > *Yahoo! Groups Sponsor*
> > ADVERTISEMENT
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
> >
> >     * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> >       http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SynthModules/
> >        
> >     * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >       SynthModules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >       
<mailto:SynthModules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject
=Unsubscribe>
> >        
> >     * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! 
Terms of

> >       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >

> It might be useful to note that signal to noise ratio is different
> than the noise floor. The noise floor is the actual hiss (thermal
> noise).

Thanks for clarifying that, Grant!  (I had my doubts when I posted it, but
that didn't stop me. ;-)

I was poking around the Bergfotron site, yesterday. It has a chart
http://www.idg.se/personal/bergfors/bergfotron/VCA.htm which got me
wondering -- there are 2 SNR columns and some "attenuation" columns. Oops!
Then I looked at an Analog Devices VCA datasheet that had both SNR and
dynamic range specs, and I knew that a correction was in order.
--
john

My personal feeling is that calculating SNR and THD from a 24 
bit FFT is more accurate than a voltmeter. The FFT shows you its 
own error contribution, where the voltmeter does not.

Everybody uses a different method, there is hardly any way to 
compare such specifications accurately.

--- In SynthModules@yahoogroups.com, "john mahoney" 
<jmahoney@g...> wrote:
> > It might be useful to note that signal to noise ratio is different
> > than the noise floor. The noise floor is the actual hiss 
(thermal
> > noise).
> 
> Thanks for clarifying that, Grant!  (I had my doubts when I 
posted it, but
> that didn't stop me. ;-)
> 
> I was poking around the Bergfotron site, yesterday. It has a 
chart
> http://www.idg.se/personal/bergfors/bergfotron/VCA.htm which 
got me
> wondering -- there are 2 SNR columns and some "attenuation" 
columns. Oops!
> Then I looked at an Analog Devices VCA datasheet that had 
both SNR and
> dynamic range specs, and I knew that a correction was in 
order.
> --
> john

All very interesting indeed.  But when one analog modular synth adds
achingly audible hiss to my recordings and others do not, I dump the
noisy one...rightly or wrongly, I guess!

Mike


--- In SynthModules@yahoogroups.com, "grantrichter2001"
<grichter@a...> wrote:

> 
> My personal feeling is that calculating SNR and THD from a 24 
> bit FFT is more accurate than a voltmeter. The FFT shows you its 
> own error contribution, where the voltmeter does not.
> 
> Everybody uses a different method, there is hardly any way to 
> compare such specifications accurately.
> 
> --- In SynthModules@yahoogroups.com, "john mahoney" 
> <jmahoney@g...> wrote:
> > > It might be useful to note that signal to noise ratio is different
> > > than the noise floor. The noise floor is the actual hiss 
> (thermal
> > > noise).
> > 
> > Thanks for clarifying that, Grant!  (I had my doubts when I 
> posted it, but
> > that didn't stop me. ;-)
> > 
> > I was poking around the Bergfotron site, yesterday. It has a 
> chart
> > http://www.idg.se/personal/bergfors/bergfotron/VCA.htm which 
> got me
> > wondering -- there are 2 SNR columns and some "attenuation" 
> columns. Oops!
> > Then I looked at an Analog Devices VCA datasheet that had 
> both SNR and
> > dynamic range specs, and I knew that a correction was in 
> order.
> > --
> > john

I think the point of the whole discussion is that using unscientific 
terms like signal to noise ratio is misleading. The only way you 
can really tell anything about a synth is to buy it.

And the one you like today may be different from what one you 
like 10 or 20 years from now, as your tastes change and/or you 
become more experienced.

I used to like large format systems like Moog 900s. Now they 
look comical to me.

Here is a quote: "I used to be able to carry 10 times more than I 
could afford, now it's the other way around."

--- In SynthModules@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Marsh" 
<michaelmarsh@s...> wrote:
> 
> All very interesting indeed.  But when one analog modular 
synth adds
> achingly audible hiss to my recordings and others do not, I 
dump the
> noisy one...rightly or wrongly, I guess!
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> --- In SynthModules@yahoogroups.com, "grantrichter2001"
> <grichter@a...> wrote:
> > 
> > My personal feeling is that calculating SNR and THD from a 
24 
> > bit FFT is more accurate than a voltmeter. The FFT shows 
you its 
> > own error contribution, where the voltmeter does not.
> > 
> > Everybody uses a different method, there is hardly any way to 
> > compare such specifications accurately.
> > 
> > --- In SynthModules@yahoogroups.com, "john mahoney" 
> > <jmahoney@g...> wrote:
> > > > It might be useful to note that signal to noise ratio is 
different
> > > > than the noise floor. The noise floor is the actual hiss 
> > (thermal
> > > > noise).
> > > 
> > > Thanks for clarifying that, Grant!  (I had my doubts when I 
> > posted it, but
> > > that didn't stop me. ;-)
> > > 
> > > I was poking around the Bergfotron site, yesterday. It has a 
> > chart
> > > http://www.idg.se/personal/bergfors/bergfotron/VCA.htm 
which 
> > got me
> > > wondering -- there are 2 SNR columns and some 
"attenuation" 

> > columns. Oops!
> > > Then I looked at an Analog Devices VCA datasheet that had 
> > both SNR and
> > > dynamic range specs, and I knew that a correction was in 
> > order.
> > > --
> > > john

I should clarify that, by comical, I mean "You expect me to pick 
THAT up, with MY bad back????".

NOT that there is anything comical about people who like large 
format systems, make them or use them. OK?

--- In SynthModules@yahoogroups.com, "grantrichter2001" 
<grichter@a...> wrote:
> 
> I think the point of the whole discussion is that using 
unscientific 
> terms like signal to noise ratio is misleading. The only way you 
> can really tell anything about a synth is to buy it.
> 
> And the one you like today may be different from what one you 
> like 10 or 20 years from now, as your tastes change and/or you 
> become more experienced.
> 
> I used to like large format systems like Moog 900s. Now they 
> look comical to me.
> 
> Here is a quote: "I used to be able to carry 10 times more than I 
> could afford, now it's the other way around."
> 
> --- In SynthModules@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Marsh" 
> <michaelmarsh@s...> wrote:
> > 
> > All very interesting indeed.  But when one analog modular 
> synth adds
> > achingly audible hiss to my recordings and others do not, I 
> dump the
> > noisy one...rightly or wrongly, I guess!
> > 
> > Mike
> > 
> > 
> > --- In SynthModules@yahoogroups.com, "grantrichter2001"
> > <grichter@a...> wrote:
> > > 
> > > My personal feeling is that calculating SNR and THD from a 
> 24 
> > > bit FFT is more accurate than a voltmeter. The FFT shows 
> you its 
> > > own error contribution, where the voltmeter does not.
> > > 
> > > Everybody uses a different method, there is hardly any way 
to 
> > > compare such specifications accurately.
> > > 
> > > --- In SynthModules@yahoogroups.com, "john mahoney" 
> > > <jmahoney@g...> wrote:
> > > > > It might be useful to note that signal to noise ratio is 
> different
> > > > > than the noise floor. The noise floor is the actual hiss 
> > > (thermal
> > > > > noise).
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks for clarifying that, Grant!  (I had my doubts when I 
> > > posted it, but
> > > > that didn't stop me. ;-)
> > > > 
> > > > I was poking around the Bergfotron site, yesterday. It has 
a 
> > > chart
> > > > http://www.idg.se/personal/bergfors/bergfotron/VCA.htm 
> which 
> > > got me
> > > > wondering -- there are 2 SNR columns and some 
> "attenuation" 
> > > columns. Oops!
> > > > Then I looked at an Analog Devices VCA datasheet that 
had 

> > > both SNR and
> > > > dynamic range specs, and I knew that a correction was in 
> > > order.
> > > > --
> > > > john

I hope that this doesn't seem too far OT, but I have been biting my
tongue through this discussion about specs, and thought that I would
toss a few observations out....

1).  Although the mathematical dynamic range (not signal-to-noise) of
CD players is 96db (16 bits x 6db = 96db), no CD player actually plays
at that spec, due to error correction.  In fact, among pro 16 bit
products, only older technology, such as the NED Synclavier, which did
not employ error correction and was linear 16 bit, actually came
closer to the mathematically perfect 96db.  Most CD players actually
playback with around 14 bit resolution (84 db).

2).  Signal to noise in audio components has slowly edged its way to
quieter numbers, mostly due to functional necessity.  When people
recorded to 3 track analog tape and consoles had 8 channels, a
Telefunken Tube mic preamp with 50-something db s/n was fine;  it was
too noisy when 24 tracks became the state of the art, so discrete
component transitor technology emmerged (NEVE, Trident, API), which
had s/n in the 60-something db range.  Fast forward - Signal to noise
of today's PREMIERE audio components (Massenberg mic pre's, Daking
Limiters, Crane Song Compressors, etc., each costing $2,000 and up) is
around the 100-something db, designed for use in 48+ track 24 bit
recording (most of which muster about 20bits of dynamic range - about
120db).

What is significant to note is when you talk to designers of this
stuff (I have discussed this with Jeff Daking and George Massenberg),
they all talk about POWER SUPPLIES!  "What is the PSU range?"  (Most
of this high end stuff is +-24v, so discrete component transistors are
only used).  In the Class A stuff (single ended), only a +24v PSU is
used with $100 transformers converting to and from the balanced world.
 The basic core of their design world is their own personal design of
the discrete transistor op-amp.  Serge created such an op-amp in the
70's, based on the then-state-of-the-art DBX opamp.  It is what is
found in the UPAP, and all of the VCAs in the Serge.  But it only
+-12v, not +-24v.  There is a huge difference in performance, due to
the PSU.

The PSU is the key in isolating your synth from noise on the ground
pin of your studio.  It's implementation also directly effects how
quiet your system is.  

When I built my Wiard system, I had several discussions about this
with Grant, and decided to have two PSUs - one for the oscillators and
mixers, and one for the rest.  The result is a rock stable and quieter
system than when I used one PSU to power everything.  The single most
dramatic upgrade that you can do for improving your synthesizer system
is to upgrade your power supplies.  Module location (and therefore PSU
association became very important - if I put a noisy Woggle Bug on the
same supply as the Oscillators, the draw from the led display of the
constantly changing state of the Bug would effect the audio performance.

Sorry for the rant....

Gary

Mine never leaves the studio AND it doesn't hiss!

--- In SynthModules@yahoogroups.com, Larry Hendry <hendrysr@y...> wrote:

> --- grantrichter2001 <grichter@a...> wrote:
> > Here is a quote: "I used to be able to carry 10 times more than I 
> > could afford, now it's the other way around."
> 
> That's a great quote Grant.  I can assure that in my last gigging out
> band (this one was a duo), I ALWAYS considered weight as one of the
> most important of the technical specifications of the equipment I
> used. :-)  "Yes, I know thos egreat BIG cabinets sound nice, but thes
> JBL EONs (under 40 pounds) sound good enough to me."  :)
> 
> Larry H (whose big format modular is not a gigging tool)  It gets out
> of the house onces a year to travel to AHMW.
> 
> 
> 
> 		
> __________________________________ 
> Do you Yahoo!? 
> Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. 
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo

--- grantrichter2001 <grichter@asapnet.net> wrote:
> Here is a quote: "I used to be able to carry 10 times more than I 
> could afford, now it's the other way around."

That's a great quote Grant.  I can assure that in my last gigging out
band (this one was a duo), I ALWAYS considered weight as one of the
most important of the technical specifications of the equipment I
used. :-)  "Yes, I know thos egreat BIG cabinets sound nice, but thes
JBL EONs (under 40 pounds) sound good enough to me."  :)

Larry H (whose big format modular is not a gigging tool)  It gets out
of the house onces a year to travel to AHMW.



		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo