Analogue-sequencer

hi guys,

I was reading about the P3 and was wondering why pots were chosen to
control the P3 (those are pots, right ?). When loading a pattern,
wouldn't it be easier that the result of turning a knob just gave a
INC/DEC (endless rotary encoders), instead of an absolute value ? 

...but maybe the OS and the way the P3 is structured doesn't allow this ?

just a question...

> I was reading about the P3 and was wondering why pots were chosen to
> control the P3 (those are pots, right ?). When loading a pattern,
> wouldn't it be easier that the result of turning a knob just gave a
> INC/DEC (endless rotary encoders), instead of an absolute value ? 
> 
> ...but maybe the OS and the way the P3 is structured doesn't 
> allow this ?

I chose pots over encoders for two reasons.
The first is feel.
Typical rotary encoders only have maybe 24 or 36 pulses per rotation. So if
you are dealing with values with a range of 128, it could take you 5 turns
of the knob to get from one end of the range to the other.
It's possible to use an acceleration algorithm, where if you move the knob
more quickly it takes bigger steps through the values, but that breaks the
relationship between rate of knob movement and rate of value change -
meaning you can't make rapid tweaks of values by touch alone, you have to
look at the display to see what the new value will be.
Second reason was cost. The encoders you'll find in the less expensive midi
fader and knob boxes about are not expensive, but then they are not designed
for regular tweaking. The manufacturers have things like car stereo volume
controls in mind when they build these things, and they are spec'ed
accordingly. You wouldn't want your P3 knobs flickering and ghosting after 6
months of regular use.
Decent quality encoders that will last for years cost upwards of 2 or 3 ukp
each - roughly 10 times the price of the pots used.
So my personal preference is for pots, by a fair margin.

Cheers,
Colin f

Ok, Colin,

the reasons you give for preferring pots all seem to make sense.

Indeed, most encoders are cheap sh*t, like the encoders on my yamaha
A4000 sampler. They have rendered the control panel almost useless.
contact spray doesn't help, so i'll probably solder some new ones

When your pots are turned, is there an option to limit the note range
you can cover with one knob turn ?, let's say three octaves, so you
get some more precision



--- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com, "Colin f" <colin@c...> wrote:
>  
> > I was reading about the P3 and was wondering why pots were chosen to
> > control the P3 (those are pots, right ?). When loading a pattern,
> > wouldn't it be easier that the result of turning a knob just gave a
> > INC/DEC (endless rotary encoders), instead of an absolute value ? 
> > 
> > ...but maybe the OS and the way the P3 is structured doesn't 
> > allow this ?
> 
> I chose pots over encoders for two reasons.
> The first is feel.
> Typical rotary encoders only have maybe 24 or 36 pulses per
rotation. So if
> you are dealing with values with a range of 128, it could take you 5
turns
> of the knob to get from one end of the range to the other.
> It's possible to use an acceleration algorithm, where if you move
the knob
> more quickly it takes bigger steps through the values, but that
breaks the
> relationship between rate of knob movement and rate of value change -
> meaning you can't make rapid tweaks of values by touch alone, you
have to
> look at the display to see what the new value will be.
> Second reason was cost. The encoders you'll find in the less
expensive midi
> fader and knob boxes about are not expensive, but then they are not
designed
> for regular tweaking. The manufacturers have things like car stereo
volume
> controls in mind when they build these things, and they are spec'ed
> accordingly. You wouldn't want your P3 knobs flickering and ghosting
after 6
> months of regular use.
> Decent quality encoders that will last for years cost upwards of 2
or 3 ukp

> each - roughly 10 times the price of the pots used.
> So my personal preference is for pots, by a fair margin.
> 
> Cheers,
> Colin f

> the reasons you give for preferring pots all seem to make sense.

Coincidentally, I was visitng a local music shop yesterday, and they had a
Korg microControl in.
The encoders on that have no acceleration - 4 turns needed to get from 0 to
127.
I tried flicking the encoders round at high speed, and got random changes in
value - including sudden changes in the opposite direction.
Ouch.
 
> Indeed, most encoders are cheap sh*t, like the encoders on my yamaha
> A4000 sampler. They have rendered the control panel almost useless.
> contact spray doesn't help, so i'll probably solder some new ones

If there's space in there, I'd have a look to see if you can replace the
stock encoders with good quality ones.
The best encoders are optical, but they can be very pricey (Moog Source used
optical - that's why they still mostly work after decades).
The Nord Modular G2 uses good quality Spectrol encoders - the ones that cost
3 quid each...

> When your pots are turned, is there an option to limit the note range
> you can cover with one knob turn ?, let's say three octaves, so you
> get some more precision

You can specify the note range over 4 ranges, which are not exact numbers of
octaves, but powers of 2.
i.e. 16, 32, 64, 128 notes.
The range is set in pattern edit, and is stored per track.

Cheers,
Colin f

> >The Nord Modular G2 uses good quality Spectrol encoders - 
> the ones that cost
> >3 quid each...
> 
> Does that include the LED collar? I'd happily pay an extra £100 to
> have those in the P3. And just think of the cool things you could do
> with the LEDs... 8)

I think the LED collar is on the main PCB, with the encoder shaft passing
through it.
I find them a bit lacking in granularity, but the Nord does back them up
with LCD.

Cheers,
Colin f

So, could i use those nifty encoders with LED collars (you mean the
ones like on the Nord Lead 3...?) on the P3 ? I just wonder. I really
wouldn't mind paying what they cost. 

Colin, would the software of the P3 have to be adapted for that or not
at all ?


--- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com, Enrico Cosimi
<ecosimi@c...> wrote:
> 
> >I think the LED collar is on the main PCB, with the encoder shaft
passing
> >through it.
> 
> no, no: the LED collar is integral part of the Spectrol encoder;
b.t.w. the
> leds are bipolar/bicolor permitting red or green when needed (i.e.
on the

> morph range for parameters)
> 
> all the best
> 
> enrico cosimi 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 10:33:27 -0000, "Colin f" <colin@colinfraser.com>
wrote:

>I tried flicking the encoders round at high speed, and got random changes in
>value - including sudden changes in the opposite direction.
>Ouch.

I even used to get this happen with my Waldorf encoders... 8(
 
>If there's space in there, I'd have a look to see if you can replace the
>stock encoders with good quality ones.
>The best encoders are optical, but they can be very pricey (Moog Source used
>optical - that's why they still mostly work after decades).
>The Nord Modular G2 uses good quality Spectrol encoders - the ones that cost
>3 quid each...

Does that include the LED collar? I'd happily pay an extra £100 to
have those in the P3. And just think of the cool things you could do
with the LEDs... 8)

Paul
---
Paul Nagle - SoftRoom Music - www.softroom.co.uk
          Bogus Focus Records - www.BogusFocus.com

> So, could i use those nifty encoders with LED collars (you mean the
> ones like on the Nord Lead 3...?) on the P3 ? I just wonder. I really
> wouldn't mind paying what they cost. 
> 
> Colin, would the software of the P3 have to be adapted for that or not
> at all ?

Both the software and hardware would need significant alteration.
Maybe next time...

Cheers,
Colin f

>I think the LED collar is on the main PCB, with the encoder shaft passing
>through it.

no, no: the LED collar is integral part of the Spectrol encoder; b.t.w. the
leds are bipolar/bicolor permitting red or green when needed (i.e. on the
morph range for parameters)

all the best

enrico cosimi 


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

> but when we get ultra small plasma display technology... heh 
> heh... just
> think of the knobs in live, just hardware... glowing hardware... :)
> 
> probably will never happen...

There's a high-end mixing desk (can't remember who makes it...) that has a
front panel consisting of a full colour, hi-res TFT display, with holes
through it, and real knobs.
The display changes dynamically as different functions are assigned to the
knobs.
It looks amazing, and costs significantly more than my car.
Maybe when PLED technology gets cheaper it'll be possible - Epson are
working on inkjet printing of the polymers needed for PLED displays, so in
theory you will be able to print a custom display using layers of conductive
and semi-conducting, light-emitting inks.
Still a long way from the high-street though.

Cheers,
Colin f

Paul,

> Does that include the LED collar? I'd happily pay an extra £100 to
> have those in the P3. And just think of the cool things you could do
> with the LEDs... 8)

I doubt it, last time I checked those were around £10 each..
so you'd add £320 to cost of your P3, not mention the extra bits needed to drive
them.

Paul

On 15 Feb 2005 at 16:08, Colin f wrote:
> There's a high-end mixing desk (can't remember who makes it...) 
that has a
> front panel consisting of a full colour, hi-res TFT display, with 
holes
> through it, and real knobs.
> The display changes dynamically as different functions are assigned 
to the
> knobs.
> It looks amazing, and costs significantly more than my car.

That's a Studer Vista 7

Great Swiss engineering :->)

Andy <--(was a Studer engineer for 11 years)
---

Andy Wilson
http://www.techman.synth.net
andy@techman.synth.net

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005, Colin f wrote:

> I think the LED collar is on the main PCB, with the encoder shaft passing
> through it.
> I find them a bit lacking in granularity, but the Nord does back them up
> with LCD.

that's the problem with using LED collars for something like a
sequencer... you've got a huge range of values (0-128) where even the
smallest increment is significant, making the low-res LED collars
essentially useless. this is why in my own playings-around with the design
of a possible P4, there is a big-ass display over each row of knobs and a
sensible knob-mode algorithm (which is a fancy way of saying "idea about
how knob-turning should affect values," because it's not like i've
programmed anything... heh).

but when we get ultra small plasma display technology... heh heh... just
think of the knobs in live, just hardware... glowing hardware... :)

probably will never happen...

bleep.
out.

---
http://leichenfeld.iuma.com
http://thirdwavecollective.com

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005, Colin f wrote:

> > probably will never happen...
>
> There's a high-end mixing desk (can't remember who makes it...) that has a
> front panel consisting of a full colour, hi-res TFT display, with holes
> through it, and real knobs.
> The display changes dynamically as different functions are assigned to the
> knobs.

so if the future is now, i wanna know one thing... where's my damn rocket
car????

(also with integrated TFT displays, of course...)

:)

bleep.
out.

---
http://leichenfeld.iuma.com
http://thirdwavecollective.com