MOTM

Of course, the MOTM version is DIFFERENT than Moog's and Oakley's. How
so???! Errr...NOT TELLING.

Just have to trust me...have the Filter Gods (JH/PTS) ever dissappointed :)

As far as a NEW filter:

this is like asking "Invent a new musical genre, one that has never been
heard of before." The Moog filter
was PURE LUCK, based on the fact Moog was shooting for a 100% transistor
filter because it was CHEAP
(he bought 250,000 surplus transistors from TI for 4 cents each).

Filters are based on mathematical polynomials. You aren't going to get a
'new' polynomial. What you get
are different ways to implement them. 95% of the time, it's the parts
themselves that make a difference. The
SEM filter is not 'invented', it's a 'cookbook' filter designed 'badly' but
it turns out it sounds great. LUCK.

Actually, the Moog ladder is the ONLY TRUELY UNIQUE FILTER in a synth. Other
are 'clever' (SSM2040),
others are 'insightful' (MS-20, the untimate is trying to be cheap) and
others cheesy beyond belief (TB-303).

Would I love to 'invent' a filter? Well, sure! Wouldn't you love to get a
Grammy or headline WMC?

Lastly, Moog filters are in demand. I was asked this 40 times at NAMM.
Synth.com is working on one. So, from
a pure MARKETING (gasp! there's that awful word again!) standpoint it needs
to be in the lineup.

Paul S.

> this is like asking "Invent a new musical genre, one that has never been
> heard of before." The Moog filter

i was afraid you'd say that...

> Actually, the Moog ladder is the ONLY TRUELY UNIQUE FILTER in a synth. Other
> are 'clever' (SSM2040),
> others are 'insightful' (MS-20, the untimate is trying to be cheap) and
> others cheesy beyond belief (TB-303).

so what about just tinkering around with stuff to find a sound, like these
sounds were "found"? i'd love to do this myself, but i've come to the
conclusion that my skill in electronics is more or less limited to
assembling motm kits. :)

> Lastly, Moog filters are in demand. I was asked this 40 times at NAMM.
> Synth.com is working on one. So, from
> a pure MARKETING (gasp! there's that awful word again!) standpoint it needs
> to be in the lineup.

agh. okay. :)

bleep.
out.

At 10:27 AM -0500 08/23/01, Paul Schreiber wrote:
>
>Of course, the MOTM version is DIFFERENT than Moog's and Oakley's. How
>so???! Errr...NOT TELLING.
>
>Just have to trust me...have the Filter Gods (JH/PTS) ever dissappointed :)

It would have to be noticeably different, otherwise you are going to get
all of these people complaining that it doesn't sound exactly like the Moog
filter.  This is because the various Moog filters sound different, and no
one "clone" can be made to sound exactly like all of them.  Even Mini Moogs
vary amongst themselves.  I'm guessing this due to the availability of
different parts over the years or different tolerances in transistor
matching when they were built.  Nevermind the coloration of the VCA
following the VCF when patching the Mini Moog as a "stand alone" filter.

>Filters are based on mathematical polynomials. You aren't going to get a
>'new' polynomial. What you get
>are different ways to implement them. 95% of the time, it's the parts
>themselves that make a difference.

You obviously know much more about this than I do, but looking at filters
as an end-user, it seems that existing filter designs may be improved
significantly by adding new controls such as variable mode, variable slope,
variable width, switchable feedback paths, VC resonance, etc.

> You obviously know much more about this than I do, but looking at filters
> as an end-user, it seems that existing filter designs may be improved
> significantly by adding new controls such as variable mode, variable slope,
> variable width, switchable feedback paths, VC resonance, etc.
> 
I think Mark has made one of the best suggestions about filters that I've
seen in a while, especially from a user's standpoint.  These would all be
very useful, IMHO.  One of the things that appealed to me about Serge
before I decided to go MOTM was the Serge variable slope filter.  The
'feedback' input on the Oakley ladder filter is a very nice option.  VC
control of the filter type on the anticipated motm SEM would be very nice
(as may already be in progress).

 Jeff

We're on all this, hee hee hee.

Paul S.


>
> It would have to be noticeably different, otherwise you are going to get
> all of these people complaining that it doesn't sound exactly like the
Moog
> filter.  This is because the various Moog filters sound different, and no
> one "clone" can be made to sound exactly like all of them.  Even Mini
Moogs
> vary amongst themselves.  I'm guessing this due to the availability of
> different parts over the years or different tolerances in transistor
> matching when they were built.  Nevermind the coloration of the VCA
> following the VCF when patching the Mini Moog as a "stand alone" filter.
>
> >Filters are based on mathematical polynomials. You aren't going to get a
> >'new' polynomial. What you get
> >are different ways to implement them. 95% of the time, it's the parts
> >themselves that make a difference.
>
> You obviously know much more about this than I do, but looking at filters
> as an end-user, it seems that existing filter designs may be improved
> significantly by adding new controls such as variable mode, variable
slope,

> variable width, switchable feedback paths, VC resonance, etc.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Actually, under close mathematical analysis, the Moog IS variable-slope. Hee
hee.

Paul S.

On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Paul Schreiber wrote:

> Actually, under close mathematical analysis, the Moog IS variable-slope. Hee
> hee.
> 
Yes, I recall JH mentioning something about this lately (?).  I
interpreted Mark's comment as having some explicit voltage control over
parameters he mentioned - my interpretation, not his explicit comment.
Jeff

Seconded!  The more VC control the better.  Something like what is 
described below would be absolutely sick.

The MS-20 is still my current favorite filter, though - so much 
character.

--- In motm@y..., Jeffrey Pontius <jpont@k...> wrote:
> > You obviously know much more about this than I do, but looking at 
filters
> > as an end-user, it seems that existing filter designs may be 
improved
> > significantly by adding new controls such as variable mode, 
variable slope,
> > variable width, switchable feedback paths, VC resonance, etc.
> > 
> I think Mark has made one of the best suggestions about filters 
that I've
> seen in a while, especially from a user's standpoint.  These would 
all be
> very useful, IMHO.  One of the things that appealed to me about 
Serge
> before I decided to go MOTM was the Serge variable slope filter.  
The
> 'feedback' input on the Oakley ladder filter is a very nice 
option.  VC
> control of the filter type on the anticipated motm SEM would be 
very nice

> (as may already be in progress).
> 
>  Jeff

>>Synth.com is working on one. So, from a pure MARKETING (gasp! there's that 
awful word again!) standpoint it needs to be in the lineup.<<

When I saw this come up out of nowhere I immediately thought the timing has 
something to do with all the talk on the Synth.com board.  Sure enough.

>>so what about just tinkering around with stuff to find a sound, like these 
sounds were "found"?<<

I expected when this came up that a bigger deal would be made of it then 
should be.  Not sure what you are expecting from something that is supposed 
to filter higher frequencies from a sound.  If anything, doing a Moog filter 
would give an opportunity to include some features we don't have on the 
current filters, like an overdrive knob.  Access to the feedback path would 
also be nice (Oakley type), but if need be the same thing can be done with 
external patching.

However, as somebody who has a Moogerfooger filter anyway, I'm more desperate 
a LP/BP/HP/Notch multimode filter.  That's currently the weak link in the 
MOTM filter lineup.

-Elhardt

------------------------------------------------------------
Actress CRYSTAL BERNARD Resources:
------------------------------------------------------------
Jen's Shrine to Crystal Bernard has moved. Make sure to update your links 
http://members.xoom.com/cbfan1/crystal_bernard.html  *  Buy Crystal Bernard 
CDs "Don't Touch Me There" and "Girl Next Door" at Amazon.com  *  "Is Crystal 
Bernard the Anti-Christ?" article by Herbert Moransky  *  
alt.clubs.fan.crystalbernard is now setup to keep track of weekly Wings 
re-runs  *  "Stalking Crystal Bernard" tips by Herbert Moransky. Also see a 
scan of my restraining order in the files section  *  Crystal Bernard's 
favorite old sitcoms, "I Love Lucy" (gag me) and "Faulty Towers" (she redeems 
herself here)  *  "Slumber Party Massacre II" possibly the best Crystal 
Bernard movie ever  *  Why Crystal Bernard is in #1 position on my Wife 
Candidate list  *  Crystal Bernard's hobby is racing cars and I will post 
next event soon  *  Crystal Bernard vital statistics, born in Garland TX, 
Sept 30, 1961, Height 5' 4"......  *  check out www.crystalbernard.com, sorry 
about slow loading page  *  Buy photos of Crystal Bernard at 
www.emerchandise.com only $5.95  *  
http://www.usatoday.com/life/health/doctor/lhdoc266.htm "Crystal Bernard 
Shows Girls the Ropes"  *  Excellent Crystal Bernard galleries here 
http://www.fortunecity.com/underworld/quake/215/bernard/  *  A Touch of 
Crystal: A Crystal Bernard Fan Page, is this the motherload of Crystal 
Bernard pictures?  *  Crystal Bernard filmography, interviews, and pictures 
at http://www.starpulse.com/Actresses/Bernard,_Crystal/  *  Order Crystal 
Bernard merchandise at 
http://homestead.juno.com/jerrywbernard/OrderBland.html  *  (posted Feb 2, 
99) -Does anyone have that picture of Crystal's left nipple? :Yes. Go to 
photos section and type in 
/actresses/nude/partial/breasts/nipples/left/cbernard  *  (posted Feb 3, 99) 
-Dude, I don't think that's her nipple. It looks like a doctored photo anyway 
 *  Crystal Bernard webring has lots of links 
http://www.bomis.com/rings/crystalbernard/  *  Search 
www.hard-to-find-actresses.com for Crystal Bernard  *  Join the Crystal 
Bernard fan club on her father's site, JerryWBernard  *  "Why I Still Love 
Crystal Bernard from Prison" by Herbert Moransky  *  (posted Jan 23, 01) 
-Found a Crystal Bernard TV schedule but is it out of date? 
http://www.tv-now.com/stars/crybern.html  *  Additional Crystal Bernard links 
and merchandise here: http://www.fansites.com/crystal_bernard.html  *  
(posted Jun 12, 01) -What? Crystal Bernard smokes?  :It's all right here. 
http://www.smokingcelebs.com/b/crystal.html  *  
http://www.fillies.com/thumbs/g/bernard_crystal/index.html  *  Unofficial 
Crystal Bernard Fan Club: http://www.laughingstar.com/Crystal_Bernard/  *  
Posted by ankletfan on February 28, 2000 at 05:58:20: -Hey, about celebrities 
dangling. Have you seen delicious Crystal Bernard dangling ?there's a pic 
from the movie "as good as dead" you can find at : 
http://members.xoom.com/capstars2/index.html  *  Crystal Bernard shows off 
her home: http://www.eonline.com/On/Homes/Popup/episode.bernard.html  *  Need 
info on Crystal Bernard's relationship with Debbie Reynolds  *  Crystal 
Bernard's favorite recent sitcoms, Mad About You & Seinfeld  *  Films Crystal 
Bernard has been in: http://www.videoaddicts.com/misc/crystalbernard.html

> When I saw this come up out of nowhere I immediately thought the timing
has
> something to do with all the talk on the Synth.com board.  Sure enough.

Well, it wasn't exactly "out of nowhere". JH has been working on it for
months.

Although some find it hard to believe, there is constant R&D going on for
new modules.
But introduction is Catch-22: introduce modules, get swamped, can't R&D.

So, it's a trade-off of backlog (current) versus backlog (the train's
a'comin'). I am making
good strides in the assembled backlog, so 'new' stuff starts getting
'physical' starting Monday.

NAMM actually is a great whip to get me going :)

Planning ahead: the last ship day of the year is Dec. 15th. Since NAMM is in
the middle of Jan.
don't expect much from Dec. 15th until I get back on Jan 22nd.

>

> would give an opportunity to include some features we don't have on the
> current filters, like an overdrive knob.  Access to the feedback path
would
> also be nice (Oakley type), but if need be the same thing can be done with
> external patching.

Both the MOTM-440 and MOTM-420 can be overdriven (it takes 2 or 3 inputs,
though). The
upcoming dual VCA has a different sort of overdrive.


>
> However, as somebody who has a Moogerfooger filter anyway, I'm more
desperate
> a LP/BP/HP/Notch multimode filter.  That's currently the weak link in the
> MOTM filter lineup.

MOTM-420 has 3 out of 4 :)

> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Actress CRYSTAL BERNARD Resources:
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>

GACK! I went to high school with her and her better-looking sister Robyn.

Paul S.

In a message dated 8/23/2001 7:02:37 PM, synth1@... writes:

>Well, it wasn't exactly "out of nowhere". JH has been working on it for
>months.

I'm sure I'm not the only one out here who remembers Paul planing to offer a 
ladder filter when MOTM was only a ping on synth diy -- it's the current MOTM 
filters that came "out of nowhere."

As far as useful features, I've found the TRIG IN input to the Serge VCFs to 
be very useful for triggering tuned percussion sounds from the filter (the 
filter briefly "rings" into oscillation when the TRIG IN goes high). I 
believe this is a rather easy circuit to implement in a VCF -- worth looking 
into.

Hows come I miss out on all the good votes -- but I wanted B or C pedal 
interfaces anyway.
JB

synth1@... writes:

>>Well, it wasn't exactly "out of nowhere". JH has been working on it for 
months.<<

I see.  But in all the anouncements of upcoming modules this is the first 
ever mentioned of this as far as I know.

>>Although some find it hard to believe, there is constant R&D going on for 
new modules.<<

I believe it because I was just wondering the other day what was happening 
with the MOTM Phaseshifter and that rackmount Vocoder that have been in 
development for a long time.

>>Both the MOTM-440 and MOTM-420 can be overdriven (it takes 2 or 3 inputs, 
though).<<

Yes, but when I accidently overdrive them (or at least the 440) it sounds 
awful.  It doesn't sound like the kind of overdrive you want.

>>MOTM-420 has 3 out of 4<<

Yes, but the outputs aren't available simultaneously.  And the Bandpass is 
one of the most useful.  It currently takes two 420s just to get a Bandpass 
filter so it's very wasteful or expensive, however you want to look at it.  
But I can wait.  I still have an "enemy" modular system that can hold me over 
on missing MOTM functions until they arrive.

-Elhardt

jwbarlow@... writes:

>>I'm sure I'm not the only one out here who remembers Paul planing to offer 
a ladder filter when MOTM was only a ping on synth diy -- it's the current 
MOTM filters that came "out of nowhere."<<

Not to beat this to death.  He had implied someday it would probably be done, 
BUT that was always followed by the comment that there are so many other ways 
to go with filters first (ie. SEM, Expander 15 mode) that there was no rush 
for yet another Moog filter.  So it was a surprise to see it pop up now.  
Also since many have said the 440 is about as close to the Moog filter 
without actually being it, that might also have had something to do with not 
being overly concerned about a Moog filter.  But if saying the MOTM has a 
Moog ladder filter actually helps in the marketing sense, I guess that's what 
matters.

-Elhardt

> Yes, but when I accidently overdrive them (or at least the 440) it sounds
> awful.  It doesn't sound like the kind of overdrive you want.

Are you sure there isn't anything else overdriven when you get that
"awful" sound ? (check input attenuators of modules after the 440 ...)
I still think the SSM2040-style filters can cope better with *heavy*
overdrive than the Moog ladder. The overdrive behaviour is
different, of course.

JH.