Wiardgroup

(that's the funny thing about konkuro... all you have to do is invoke
his name)
;'> 
(puts on fake red plastic devil horns)
};'>

Hi Kwote
--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "kwote uno" <kwoter@...> wrote:
>
> So basically all digital aspects are used purely for control on your
modules
> and in no way affect the analog purity of the sound? 

 i think that the popularity of the waveform city/mini-wave and the
noise ring would disqualify Wiard from a high 'purity' ranking within
the discipline of analog eugenics*** because both designs cheerfully
report for duty in both the Audio and Digital range. 
 As for the description of the envelooper-
 Grant has clearly biased it's design toward sub-audio CV
applications. But i believe that it could easily be clocked at audio
rates (at least up into the bass range) thus yielding a signal with a
provenance of highly suspect purity.
C'est la guerre! (+ badly executed gallic shrug)
 Professor Richter's idea bucket draws often from Buchla's well and
one of the things i like most about that school of design was a
willingness to chase good ideas wherever they ran , with no regard for
the arbitrary border between 'analog' and 'digital' territory. ...
even within the same audio waveform !(vis-a-vis the MARF)

thus i confess to a fondness for impurity

(i wonder if there's a sentic gesture for 'impurity' ...other than the
trombone , of course)
};'>

(takes off cheesy devil horns , sits back down, and tries to be good)

-doc 

*** and what about the common square wave???
is it not suspiciously 'digital'?