Xpantastic!

yes use ramp for quick pulse
On Monday, March 31, 2014 12:32 PM, Omar <holografique@...> wrote:
 
  
well, when you define "snappy" as being the problem, that won't have anything to do with the characteristics of the oscillators. that has everything to do with the response time of the decay on the ADSR when routed to the filter cutoff. so yes, try using one of the RAMP generators to modulate the filter cutoff instead of one of the ENV. 

otherwise, yes, you don't get quite the same low end "bottom" on an Xpander as you do on a Minimoog. but that's the beauty of these machines, they each excel in their own areas and what provides a wider range of "color" for writing. personally I find the Xpander great for bass sounds, particularly for more aggressive "grittier" bass sounds when using the 1-pole or 2-pole LP filter settings. from there it all eventually comes down to your programming and how it is mixed in your track. 

On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 2:47 PM, <leo-666@...> wrote:

 
>  
>Ramp routed straight to the filter ? Very interesting.
>Gotta try it soon.
>And to my ears the problem also is the fact that xpander has weaker soundung oscillators than a discrete old moog of course, and maybe weaker than some other CEM based synths. I noticed it when listening to a raw waves of the xpander. They are not that ground shaking, But yeah, pad and evolving possibilities beats all other synths.

i know you can route multiple things to the same VCA and maybe by doing this you can trick it into moving faster than the normal VCA setting allows?
 
i remember this conversation happening on AH or something...

z


NEW ALLIANCE EAST!!!!

--------------------------------------


New Alliance East - Mastering

New Alliance East - Facebook

X :::: B :::: S


On Monday, March 31, 2014 3:36 PM, robert hall <rbhall7ice@...> wrote:
 
  
yes use ramp for quick pulse
On Monday, March 31, 2014 12:32 PM, Omar <holografique@...> wrote:
 
  
well, when you define "snappy" as being the problem, that won't have anything to do with the characteristics of the oscillators. that has everything to do with the response time of the decay on the ADSR when routed to the filter cutoff. so yes, try using one of the RAMP generators to modulate the filter cutoff instead of one of the ENV. 

otherwise, yes, you don't get quite the same low end "bottom" on an Xpander as you do on a Minimoog. but that's the beauty of these machines, they each excel in their own areas and what provides a wider range of "color" for writing. personally I find the Xpander great for bass sounds, particularly for more aggressive "grittier" bass sounds when using the 1-pole or 2-pole LP filter settings. from there it all eventually comes down to your programming and how it is mixed in your track. 

On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 2:47 PM, <leo-666@...> wrote:

 
>  
>Ramp routed straight to the filter ? Very interesting.
>Gotta try it soon.
>And to my ears the problem also is the fact that xpander has weaker soundung oscillators than a discrete old moog of course, and maybe weaker than some other CEM based synths. I noticed it when listening to a raw waves of the xpander. They are not that ground shaking, But yeah, pad and evolving possibilities beats all other synths.

I have looked at doing this, but increasing the micro speed is not all.  The analog multiplexer circuit ultimately determines the update
rate of each parameter eg..  env attack etc...,  which in turn limits the speed of the mod souces.  So.. the resistor/capacitor values in each mux circuit (one per voice) would have to be changed along with the code. I would hate to hack up my M12 that much. There is an AKAI out there 
that I believe has the same CEM chip set. It might be a better victim.      
 
BTW   Putting a a sharp, short  evelope to the FM at the beginning of the sound can add some snap or bite to a bass patch.  Learned this from an artical by Wendy Carlos.
 
 
Best Regards
 
Karl 
 
 
 
 

________________________________
 From: Tony Cappellini <cappy2112@...>
To: xpantastic@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, April 1, 2014 5:28 PM
Subject: Re: [xpantastic] Re: How to make snappy bass on Xpander ?
  
  
PeWe>>Components and software inside Xpander(M12 are as fast as they are and you cannot make ´em faste. >>Use the machine for what it can do excellent and use other gear for the tasks where Xpander/M12 fail.Welllllll, Hitachi makes a pin & instruction compatible 6809 replacement (6309) that runs at 4MHZ, but itwould require a partial rewrite of the firmware. (I'm not sure if it is the exact same model as the 6809 (B vs E) though). Additionally, there is another mode in the 6309 that has a few "extra" instructions which enable some operations
to be even faster. But this would cause more of an incompatibility until the FW is re-written. However, if any of you are tired of the Xpander/M12's current limitations, a challenge awaits ye.... ;-)
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 11:41 PM, PeWe <ha-pewe@...> wrote: 
 
>  
> That´s why I said "fuget it" ...  Components and software inside Xpander(M12 are as fast as they are and you cannot make ´em faster. Use the machine for what it can do excellent and use other gear for the tasks where Xpander/M12 fail.  Am 31.03.2014 22:59, schrieb leo-666@...: 
>  
>>But I heard that the xpander's processor acts quicker if less routings are enabled.
>>It's logical cause the processor is so vintage.
>>I even saw somebody wrote that applying one envelope a
              several times to the same destenation helps.

>>But I tried this and did not noticed a quicker responce.  
>> 
>