Behringer System 55

[KSS]

so could spend the time (and money) getting coils handwound.

moog Coils weren't hand wound. They were purchased from Allen Organ. Machines to wind toroid coils have been around for a very long time. At one point Mike Bucki ended up with the Allen winding machines and cores. There wee rumors that these were aquired by present day moog for their modular re-issues. But those coils were also purchased as made to order common stock variations from a supplier in SoCal.
----------------
Of course this has nothing to do with your correctly saying that moog were building low volume, high ticket items.

[SkyWriter]

Story time:
Took a tour of a multi-conductor cable winding plant in the late-70's once - bandaiding some comms gear at the time. Incredible machines. The cable feed assembly's were vertical rather than horizontal like this:



And they spun around like crazy, multiple orbits twisting pairs of wire, with other pairs, adding the drain wire and ground shields while the whole machine spun on it's axis. Lines of them. Amazing. Only reason to hand wind a coil back then was either high-precision or off-standard value use cases. They were standard components.

Kaleidoscopic!

[Hyberus]

so could spend the time (and money) getting coils handwound.

moog Coils weren't hand wound. They were purchased from Allen Organ. Machines to wind toroid coils have been around for a very long time. At one point Mike Bucki ended up with the Allen winding machines and cores. There wee rumors that these were aquired by present day moog for their modular re-issues. But those coils were also purchased as made to order common stock variations from a supplier in SoCal.
----------------
Of course this has nothing to do with your correctly saying that moog were building low volume, high ticket items.

Happy to stand corrected.

[SynthBaron]

so could spend the time (and money) getting coils handwound.

moog Coils weren't hand wound. They were purchased from Allen Organ. Machines to wind toroid coils have been around for a very long time. At one point Mike Bucki ended up with the Allen winding machines and cores. There wee rumors that these were aquired by present day moog for their modular re-issues. But those coils were also purchased as made to order common stock variations from a supplier in SoCal.
----------------
Of course this has nothing to do with your correctly saying that moog were building low volume, high ticket items.

I was trying to find a pic of those coil Allen coil winders that (IIRC) Phil Cirroco (CMS) bought at one point, but I found this on a forum post and thought it was interesting:

"I've observed a similar phenomenon with Allen analogs, notes tending to get too flat over time. This was once explained to me by someone at Allen as being due to the coil windings actually INCREASING in their inductance over time as the copper wires oxidize and increase in mass. The wires literally "grow" with time and thus pull the resonant frequency of the circuit downward."

[SkyWriter]

Gonna think about this inductor thing more.... copper and iron oxidation have different effects. We're these inductors tunable? Did they have ferro-resonant cores? Were they iron or ferrite core? Usually there was a ferro-magnetic slug you could use to change the inductance. Fwiw, 'mass' doesn't explain anything to me by itself.

In other news, looked closer at the pot mechanicals. Finally isolated what looks like the 'loose linkage' part of the pot's performance. Below are pictured the OEM pot on the left and the ALPHA on the right. Salient detail is the 'brass' colored tension collar for rotary resistance on the ALPHA to maintain rotary position, versus the color-less goop in the OEM pot. This explains the nudging*, and light touch on the OEM control - liquid viscosity only increase with motion (through the liquid - or goop in this case), small motions are frictionless, while gross motion is resisted, versus the more natural fixed resistance provided by the added cost of a mechanical component rather than squirt of goop.

Just noticed the press fit pin holes were on opposite corners. So much for swapping shafts :-) course, after this I wouldn't want that shaft anyway. Besides, I'm starting to think solid shaft is the best considering my next post on knobs.

I also, sectioned a 05A105 - the previous one pictured was the 05c503, where the splice is on the other side. Nobody asked :-) anyway, yup, the splice on the 'Forward' log pot was in the opposite position as the 'reverse' log pot. So, we nailed that one.

[SkyWriter]

Pictured are ( https://www.thonk.co.uk/shop/synth-pointer-knobs/ or https://synthcube.com/cart/knob-black- ... ver-center or https://modularaddict.com/parts/synthtech-knob )
Back row: Set screw, T18, D-shaft versions of a knob from Thonk that has three different shaft types.
Front row: Top of the knobs in the back row, bottom of OEM knob, top of OEM knob.

Ignoring the obviously poor plastic finish on the backs of the top row, the knob more closely approximates the moog knob of the same style - minus the skirt. It was available in all three shaft styles to cover availability problems. And the graspable part of the knob has the greatest diameter. The OEM knob's smaller diameter contributes again to poor value resolution - coupled with the goop resistance, and controls are pretty lackadaisical.

Here's most of the knobs populated. They somewhat obscure the vernier, but make control - especially with mechanical resistance - much more accurate. Much more accurate. I AM LICHEN THIS!

Since I'm going to be replacing every pot, I should have started with ditching all the knobs and going solid. They seem to be made the best, and there's a lot more variety there. But the biggest reason is the bushing depths are a little long, and the back of the knobs finish is rough, so you can't push the 'push-on' all the way on or they rub. A set screw to control the depth Is better than stuffing plugs into cheap knobs, or hoping the friction will still keep the knob on. Which it all seems to do OK! Just for completeness.

Well, I still have a couple of 960's and another 914 to do, so not much water under the bridge yet - pot replacement wise! :-)

[SkyWriter]

Speaking of 914. Got the rest of the knobs in. Had to do a T18/Solid shaft mixed breed. Eh, the important part is all the same.

Here's some shots. Before and after, in situ.

It's a lot more pleasant to use, and feedback is much easy to control.

[KSS]

Gonna think about this inductor thing more.... copper and iron oxidation have different effects. We're these inductors tunable? Did they have ferro-resonant cores? Were they iron or ferrite core? Usually there was a ferro-magnetic slug you could use to change the inductance.

Nope. here's a 914 pic from Dave Brown's excellent modularsynthesis.com site, showing the single and stacked toroid 'donuts'.. It's the fact that nobody really knew -or remembered?- the permeability for the cores that made a really good 907 or 914 clone so difficult. Mike Bucki -who had the OG parts and tools- had the answer but at the time didn't share it for competitive and other reasons.

Moog went with a different core style for the re-issues. Split-core, scramble wound like Carsten Tonemman<-sp? used for his analogmonster clone FFBs Here's a pic of the moog re-issue for comparison with the OG 914.

Fwiw, 'mass' doesn't explain anything to me by itself.

Agreed. That description SynthBaron quoted misses out the *much* more likely reason for any shift. Carbon Comp resistors. Those absolutely DO change over time, and their values can shift significantly. I'd trust that *far* more than copper oxidation increasing mass. Used othave an Allen organ in the next room, and it was sweet. Oh, and electrolytics drying up. And wax-paper caps changing with humidity. And..

[KSS]

@SkyWriter
I cannot express how much I appreciate your putting the real parts on display with educated explanations about the differences.
Earlier it was asked the difference in cost between a decent pot and the ones being used by uli Behringer? Right there in your photo one can easily see the additional cost.
That phosphor bronze stamping and the extra time to assemble it. Is. The. Reason. There's. More. Money. In. Uli's. Pocket.

At. Our. Usability. Expense.

Information and photos like that are priceless in the discussion about Behringer choices and how they affect results.

THANK YOU.

[SkyWriter]

Lol! Just doing my jo.... sh*t that doesn't work anymore.

I guess this was the most disappointing discovery about the pots. I glossed over that detail thinking it was just a physical stop, and maybe some contaminants, or the piece fell off. But the second one I watched very carefully for any missing parts. I'm going to keep pulling pots until they've all been replaced. Each replacement is an improvement; either now, or in the future, the benefit will be rewarded as the rest of the circuit is pretty damn good. It's a shame. I would gladly have paid a couple of extra bucks to not have to swap the pots. But this is cost reduction. Everyone does it.

That Hakko desoldering iron was the best purchase of the year! Next to the System 55 modules themselves. Lol!

[mmckenzie]

Speaking of 914. Got the rest of the knobs in.

I have some of those knobs for the hand-made modules that my arch cheapskate self couldn't bring itself to buy, i.e. the attenuators!

My problem with the 914 is getting my fingers round the knobs as supplied. Would you say that those slightly chunkier knurled ones make that easier as you can grab them with old knarled fingers even though the space between them is smaller?

How did you wire the 914 up to play with the feedback possibilities? Out into a CP3 mixer then out of that back in again? Perhaps my efforts so far have been thwarted by the loss of level going through the unit even when all the knobs are at 10.

[SkyWriter]

My problem with the 914 is getting my fingers round the knobs as supplied. Would you say that those slightly chunkier knurled ones make that easier as you can grab them with old knarled fingers even though the space between them is smaller?

Good question. The larger knobs on the 914 block off areas I could get to with the smaller knobs to the sides of the knobs. But top and bottom are clear. Same with 911. I need less 'pinch' to turn knobs now. The little knobs don't give you enough fine control over angular sweep because of the smaller knob diameter. It is eurorack, everything is super-tiny. It's like a moog modular micro-machine.

How did you wire the 914 up to play with the feedback possibilities? Out into a CP3 mixer then out of that back in again? Perhaps my efforts so far have been thwarted by the loss of level going through the unit even when all the knobs are at 10.

Remember the CP3A-M can boost signals by using multiple inputs. I 'mult' the 914 output into three CP3M inputs, then run that into the 914 input. Feedback loop includes the 914 - not just feedback the mixer itself. Use white noise to stimulate the resonant filter, 914 knobs over 7-8 will start the feedback. You need two* CP3A-M's - one for the input to the 914, and one to 'mult' up the output. It'll be a bit of a balancing act unmodified, but can be done with a little effort.

*-actually, I just looked at the patch, you can collapse in down to one mixer with the single white noise source. Playing with it, it seems much easier to control than the stock pots. The real test is a side by side, with I'll get to Another note on feedback - set the shelving filters to zero, they overlap with the bands and disturb the balance. Also, there seems to be some phase error going on, when I do increase the high shelving, it lowers the output hrough most of it's range in feedback. Interesting. More to look at here. Wish I had my old Bruel and Kjear gear :-)

[KSS]

as the rest of the circuit -and build*- is pretty damn good. It's a shame. I would gladly have paid a couple of extra bucks to not have to swap the pots.

This! is why -the collective- 'we' bitch about Behringer.

*-and build- added by KSS

[MuadMusic]

I got a couple of 960 sequencers this weekend. I'm setting up a new rack:
Here's a video featuring a 2hp Play sample player module, as well as a couple of Z506 Swiss Daisy DSPs, driven by the really inexpensive Behringer 960 Sequencers. Let me know what you think.

[EPTC]

Gonna think about this inductor thing more....

If you all can make an inductor version of this I'll be totally amazed. Best success! I'm guessing that will be a pretty deep module, one long horizontal card going back about six or seven inches, but could be wrong.

Will publicly say I'm now considering picking up CP35. Come on, $80 for the best grouped attenuator set ever made! That's tough to turn down.

What kind of solvent removes behringer's screenprinted logo?

[SkyWriter]

Gonna think about this inductor thing more....

If you all can make an inductor version of this I'll be totally amazed. Best success! I'm guessing that will be a pretty deep module, one long horizontal card going back about six or seven inches, but could be wrong.

Will publicly say I'm now considering picking up CP35. Come on, $80 for the best grouped attenuator set ever made! That's tough to turn down.

Nah, that was an early thought. I'm plenty happy with a reliable RC version. I never really identified with the notion of a 'Moog sound" or an "Inductor sound". If it sounds good, I'll use it. I like this kit for the systems design, it works the way I like to think, and the work it can do. The rest of eurorack seems like black box design to me. Ultimately unsatisfying when your intent is to accurately model something else for reproduction. It's cool if you just experiment and the output is just the sound. For me the output is the entire context of the patch to model elsewhere. I also like to make music wIth it. Lol!

What kind of solvent removes behringer's screenprinted logo?

LOL! Wish I knew :-) I just use my ever-present mind editorializing powers I use everywhere else I go!

@MuadMusic, nice video! I see why quantizers are important for the B960, values are tough to dial in (Yet again), quantizer does the trick! :-)

I like the CP35 because its the only static HIGH and LO I have :-) plus those mults work beautifully with the 961 trigger distribution, and the attenuators for the 911's. Great S-trig accessory.

[galanter2]

If you have an extra row of sequencer knobs you can add its output attenuated down. This amounts to one row being coarse tune, and the other fine tune.

[SkyWriter]

[

Agreed. That description SynthBaron quoted misses out the *much* more likely reason for any shift. Carbon Comp resistors. Those absolutely DO change over time, and their values can shift significantly. I'd trust that *far* more than copper oxidation increasing mass. Used othave an Allen organ in the next room, and it was sweet. Oh, and electrolytics drying up. And wax-paper caps changing with humidity. And..

Oh man, I forgot about all the different types of caps we had back then; mica, paper wax, plastic drops, plate ceramic, all the tantalums and electrolytics. You loose the sense of variety with SMT. My first synth was made from grab bags of TV parts with all those different types of caps and resistors with short snipped leads. Fun!

Stuff changes over time. Electro-migration, wear, heat wear, over voltage breakdown. We used to fix the skew on these big old minicomputers by moving a little snip of wire across a PCB etch to set the board clock skew on each of 60+ modules for a CPU. It was good for about 5 years, then we would start to get weird crashes on some machines. Took a while to figure that one out. All the best problems have interesting causes.

[SkyWriter]

If you have an extra row of sequencer knobs you can add its output attenuated down. This amounts to one row being coarse tune, and the other fine tune.

That's what I love about modular. Cool use cases for simple machines! It's a lot like logic design once you get out of the 'just NAND gates' level.

[KSS]

Will publicly say I'm now considering picking up CP35. Come on, $80 for the best grouped attenuator set ever made! That's tough to turn down.
What kind of solvent removes behringer's screenprinted logo?

If you have *any* diy skills at all that module can be made with a power connector, 4 pots, 4 resistors, and 20 jacks. .25 x1 +.25-.50 x4 + .02 x4 + .25 x20 = 5.32 or 6.32 plus panel. You don't even need a PCB. I nearly always stay on the side of the mfr in these "It should only cost this much" topics. But this seems exceptionally high, compared to its brethren and considering what it only has to have* to be workable.

*I don't know what the actual module circuit they used is. But the only thing i *might* want to add to my list of parts is *maybe* a capacitor from each resistor junction dividing the twelves into 6V. There's literally less than 20 wires needed to make that madule. I'd make them all day long for anyone who was willing to pay 80USD each!

[KSS]

What kind of solvent removes behringer's screenprinted logo?

LOL! Wish I knew :-) I just use my ever-present mind editorializing powers I use everywhere else I go!

You both have a well-trod path to follow for answers. People been covering up synth logos -for various reasons- since well, since synths were synths.
Gaffers tape if you're sponsored and you're playing something the sponsor didn't make. Or again gaffers if you're *not* sponsored and you don't feel like advertising for free those bastids who decided not to support you!
Rattle can, masking tape, Korg stickers over moog, moog stickers over Roland. Dogs and cats living together.. Ever seen a moogHA ? <-- cause moog is only long enough to cover the YAMA. Now why didn't they do a YAmoog instead? Or even a YmoogA..
Hmm.. That's strange. Nobody *ever* covered up ARP..

Then you've got the esoteric answers of the enlightened 4U crowd. Serge. Classic paintings and photos. Or the red spots and tie-dye of Buchla. Yes, many ways to cover a despised or unwanted logo in synthdom!
Synth techs have seen them all.

I like the CP35 because its the only static HIGH and LO I have :-) plus those mults work beautifully with the 961 trigger distribution, and the attenuators for the 911's. Great S-trig accessory.

I can't look at a module like that and not want to mod. Add either toggles or pull pots -or both- for AC/DC and Lin/Log taper. Or even adding a cap between two jacks at one end of the multiple, like John Simonton did for the PAIA 2720. Brilliant.

[mmckenzie]

Will publicly say I'm now considering picking up CP35. Come on, $80 for the best grouped attenuator set ever made! That's tough to turn down.

This and the price for the 995 attenuators just shows what the overhead is for doing anything at all. The panel, the pcb, the design time, the packaging, the marketing, the discount for distributors etc etc. And then the beauty is having someone else doing all the hard work...

[mmckenzie]

My problem with the 914 is getting my fingers round the How did you wire the 914 up to play with the feedback possibilities?

Remember the CP3A-M can boost signals by using multiple inputs. I 'mult' the 914 output into three CP3M inputs, then run that into the 914 input.

A Doepfer A-183-3 Amplifier Module might be a useful slimline addition. I've already been thinking I need one when trying to interface the 921 as a trigger source for the Doepfer A-184-1V Ring Modulator and S/H which nicely addresses a couple of omissions from the Behringer Moog offering in only 4HP.

[SkyWriter]

I can't look at a module like that and not want to mod. Add either toggles or pull pots -or both- for AC/DC and Lin/Log taper. Or even adding a cap between two jacks at one end of the multiple, like John Simonton did for the PAIA 2720. Brilliant.

YES! Exactly! I remember that utility panel on my 2700, and I've thought of doing the same thing instead of getting a slew limiter too :-)

[MuadMusic]

If you have an extra row of sequencer knobs you can add its output attenuated down. This amounts to one row being coarse tune, and the other fine tune.

Great tip!

SkyWriter:
"@MuadMusic, nice video!" Thanks!