Wiardgroup

Dr.,

Thanks for your insights on this - I have been wondering about whether 
or not this made a difference, or my memory of the SOU was a little bit 
fuzzy.  I remember how broad and smooth that you could make the SOU, 
and I have been trying to recreate this ever since I started to play 
with the 'Bug.

What a quality problem, huh?  Playing around with my Bug....

Gary



--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "drmabuce <drmabuce@y...>" <
drmabuce@y...> wrote:
> --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "gcmci <gchang@e...>" <gchang@e...> wrote:
> > Dr Mabuse,
> > 
> > 	I understand that Grant chose to sample a noise modulated sawtooth 
> > wave, rather than the noise modulated sine wave found in the Buchla SOU 
> > circuit.  Have you done any mods regarding this sampled waveform?
> > 
> > gary chang
> 
> Hi Gary,
>     (BTW I thought the painting was VERY beautiful)
> ;'>
>     Yes, I've tried: white & pink noise, random freq & amplitude sines at audio & sub audio ranges, the 'dirty' tri-wave from a homebrew version of a partial SOU circuit, and even radio signals...  but IMHO the effect was fairly pallid, definitely not enough magic to justify an on-board mod (to me anyway). The production Wbug (#6 standard) has a patch point(J22) and a jumper (JP1) that allow the user to send an alternative waveform into the sample/hold, So, there is certainly plenty of opportunity for more experiments. 
>     From my view, it was one of those things that LOOKED like it would set the world afire on the schematic. But, in practice, it just didn't bear out the theory.
>     I'm only guessing but I'd bet that Grant put a lot of time into experimenting with various schemes to feed interesting stuff into that point on the circuit himself.
> 
>     Screwing around with widely disparate freq ranges on the 2 4046 PLL's yielded a lot more of my kind of fun!
>    
> alea iacta est,
> -doc