MOTM

Thanks for that; it was well thought out and I'm considering all your
points...

Of course if any are implemented, it will be even longer before it's ready!!
;)


Tony



> -----Original Message-----
> From: media.nai@... [mailto:media.nai@...]
> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 9:39 AM
> To: Tony Karavidas
> Cc: motm@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [motm] Frequency shifter
>
>
>
> >There is some new info of the impending frequency shifter. The drawing on
> >the site is a mockup, but it does represent the current
> prototype. The big
> >change is the local quadrature oscillator is now uC based, but everything
> >else is still analog. The audio path is completely analog.
>
> That sounds good.  I'm all for increasing carrier suppression.
> That is the
> most important consideration.  I do not see why it would be necessary to
> use an analogue oscillator, as it's not meant to be heard.  While the
> entire thing could be done in DSP, I believe that keeping an all analogue
> signal path will improve both its sound quality and its resale
> value (since
> it cannot be duplicated in software).
>
> >The new changes from the unit at NAMM (besides the inclusion of a uC) is
> >through-zero shifting and the quadrature oscillator's two outputs are
> >available for general use.
>
> Imho, having at least one oscillator output is necessary in order to be
> able to tune the frequency shifter, and to do various parlour tricks.
> Having both outputs is even better as it can then be used as a stand-alone
> quadrature oscillator as well, which is a useful module in and of itself.
> Afaik, MOTM does not yet offer a self-resonating filter with separate
> outputs, which is the "traditional" way of generating sines in quadrature.
>
> So with the inclusion of through-zero shifting, this new hybrid
> seems to be
> a vast improvement over the previous design.
>
> >They also have output level controls
>
> I do not think that is necessary, and pots are expensive.
>
> >and LEDs that show the intensity of the oscillator.
>
> Yes, LED's could be useful to indicate activity at the beginning of the
> infrasonic range, and when using it as a quadrature oscillator.
>
> >All comments are welcome. The graphics are not set in stone yet. What you
> >see is a mockup.
>
> I agree that having controls for both initial and fine shift is very
> important -- imho, it would be nearly impossible to adjust the entire
> frequency range with only one knob.
>
> What scale is the CV input??  Perhaps two inputs, one exponential and one
> linear, would be much more useful, and more within the expectations of
> oscillator control used by the MOTM system.
>
> Also, if you wanted to make the oscillator uniquely useful in and
> of itself
> (whether or not it is being used with the frequency shifter), perhaps an
> input could be added so that it can be driven by the edge of an incoming
> pulse.  That way, everything from a quadrature LFO synced to an incoming
> clock, to exact shifting equal to the pitch of a 300, would be possible.
> No other module can do this, as I believe that it is simply not possible
> using analogue.
>
> Since the oscillator is already digital, it may be practical to add one or
> more features only possible in the digital realm.  Otoh, I have no idea
> whether this would be a simple matter of adding a jack and few lines of
> code, or a huge PITA.
>
> >About the schedule: It is still unclear as to a specific ship date (it's
> >getting close). I am wrapping up the SurfaceOne design and that
> is taking a
> >LOT of time. That's the cause of the snail's pace on this frequency
> >shifter.
>
> Don't worry, they say patience is a virtue, so we MOTM users are like
> saints compared the unwashed hordes clamoring over their 1/8" jacks :)
>
>
>