There's a Simple Wave Folder on the Wave Multiplier PCB? Oh, now there
is! I have an older board.
Adam, there has been a Stooge panel for the CGS-29 Wave Multiplier for
some time now. It has seven pots.. In addition to the four pots shown
on the schematic there are three attenuators, on the Offset CV, Folds
CV, and one of the PWM inputs. Ken's alternative diagram shows yet
three more pots: SQ IN LAG, TRI IN LEVEL, MANUAL PW. Note that the
"Offset CV" mixes with the Triangle and Square inputs, as well as with
the Offset pot voltage, which means that this is another signal input
and is not limited to "offset cv". If I were labelling the Stooge
panel, I would have used the term "TRI IN 2" instead of "Offset CV, as
these inputs are interchangeable. I don't see the need for both that
pot AND the Triangle input pot. The SQ IN LAG would add some adjustment
to the low pass filter on the square input, but I don't know how
important that is. The Stooge panel does not have a MANUAL PW pot, but
it does have a second PWM input jack where you could plug in a bias
voltage that would serve the same purpose. Since the pulse output is a
secondary output of this module, it seems to me it does not warrant the
MANUAL PW pot.
I'm happy with the choices made by the Stooge panel designer, whoever
that was, except for the lable "Offset CV". But, if I were to do it
again, and including the Simple Wave Folder?
I think I would use a 2U panel almost like the Stooge panel. I would
replace the PWM depth pot with two jacks for the outputs of the Simple
Wave Folder. As Ken points out, you don't need an pot for the Simple
Wave Folder. Just connect its input to pin 14 of IC4. That way, all of
your input and CV controls apply to it.
-Richard Brewster
Adam Schabtach wrote:
is! I have an older board.
Adam, there has been a Stooge panel for the CGS-29 Wave Multiplier for
some time now. It has seven pots.. In addition to the four pots shown
on the schematic there are three attenuators, on the Offset CV, Folds
CV, and one of the PWM inputs. Ken's alternative diagram shows yet
three more pots: SQ IN LAG, TRI IN LEVEL, MANUAL PW. Note that the
"Offset CV" mixes with the Triangle and Square inputs, as well as with
the Offset pot voltage, which means that this is another signal input
and is not limited to "offset cv". If I were labelling the Stooge
panel, I would have used the term "TRI IN 2" instead of "Offset CV, as
these inputs are interchangeable. I don't see the need for both that
pot AND the Triangle input pot. The SQ IN LAG would add some adjustment
to the low pass filter on the square input, but I don't know how
important that is. The Stooge panel does not have a MANUAL PW pot, but
it does have a second PWM input jack where you could plug in a bias
voltage that would serve the same purpose. Since the pulse output is a
secondary output of this module, it seems to me it does not warrant the
MANUAL PW pot.
I'm happy with the choices made by the Stooge panel designer, whoever
that was, except for the lable "Offset CV". But, if I were to do it
again, and including the Simple Wave Folder?
I think I would use a 2U panel almost like the Stooge panel. I would
replace the PWM depth pot with two jacks for the outputs of the Simple
Wave Folder. As Ken points out, you don't need an pot for the Simple
Wave Folder. Just connect its input to pin 14 of IC4. That way, all of
your input and CV controls apply to it.
-Richard Brewster
Adam Schabtach wrote:
>Greetings, all--
>
>I'm about to start building a CGS Wave Multiplier, and I'm wondering about
>the pots labeled as "Optional" in the hookup diagram. I would be very happy
>to hear opinions from other Wave Multiplier users as to whether these
>optional parts are useful, essential, extraneous, etc. I think I'm going to
>end up putting the module on a 3U MOTM-sized panel, because I intend to also
>build the Simple Wave Folder which Ken has cunningly tucked onto one end of
>the Wave Multiplier PCB. ("Two! Two! Two modules in one!" oops, now I'm
>dating myself...) Hence I should have enough space for all of the optional
>pots--which suggests that I should just put them in, I suppose.
>
>Thanks in advance for any opinions offered.
>
>--Adam
>
>--
>Adam Schabtach
>www.studionebula.com
>
>
>
>