MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index
 FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 
WIGGLING 'LITE' IN GUEST MODE

New Q106A Oscillator (VCO)
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> 5U Format Modules Goto page 1, 2  Next [all]
Author New Q106A Oscillator (VCO)
island
Hi dot.com new's -> Q106A

bwhittington
That's pretty nifty! As a public service, I'd be happy to buy anyone's used Q106's so that they can buy a brand new Q106A for roughly the price of an upgrade kit. hihi

Certainly seems recommendable for a new user to add one or two instead of a Q106.
trentpmcd
Kind of funny, earlier this week I was trying to decide if I should get a Q106 (to make 3) and a Q141 now and push off another maker's VCO until later or get the other one now and get the Q106/Q141 combo later. And then Roger did this and made up my mind for me. It's already been ordered... Will most likely upgrade the other two with the conversion kit some day.
hsosdrum
I currently have 6 Q106s: 2 with Q141s and 4 without. Looks like I'll be ordering 4 upgrade kits and some new Q106As when I expand my DotCom system later this year. (44 units? That's just a toe in the water...)

I'm sure that Roger drew some inspiration from the recent J247 thread here on MW.
josaka
and there is this little thing..
https://synthesizers.com/q106ack.html
ba1
I was hoping it would be 1MU with course and fine range pots instead of the switch.
Jsharpphoto
ba1 wrote:
I was hoping it would be 1MU with course and fine range pots instead of the switch.


I highly doubt there will ever be a official 1u q106 kit, because the PCB would have to be perpendicularly mounted, and then the module would be the ONLY dotcom module that didn't fit in a Box11. I think Roger is content to offer the LFO++ as a suitable 1u VCO and call it done.
alternating.bit
Meh. I like the look & layout of this one better and I'm glad I ordered them.

ba1
Jsharpphoto wrote:
ba1 wrote:
I was hoping it would be 1MU with course and fine range pots instead of the switch.


I highly doubt there will ever be a official 1u q106 kit, because the PCB would have to be perpendicularly mounted, and then the module would be the ONLY dotcom module that didn't fit in a Box11. I think Roger is content to offer the LFO++ as a suitable 1u VCO and call it done.


You're probably right. Guess I'll just buy another SSL 1200.
Rex Coil 7
DANG IT! Haha!!

I just went to a lot of trouble to do a lot of the stuff that this new VCO offers ..... the switches on the center strip as well as what I have going on with the two switching panels are pretty much covered by this new offering.



Oh well, it is what it is. seriously, i just don't get it

I must say, very nice! Coupled with that new LFO++ Roger has designed a lot of processing power happening there.
Rex Coil 7
One thing that cannot be denied ..... at least Roger at Synthesizers.Com is listening to what users and potential buyers are saying and asking for.

What with the following .....

** Q148 VCA++
** Q167 LFO++
** Q179 Envelope++
** Q173 Gate Math
** Q174 Midi-CV
** Q175 Midi-CV aid
** The entire Q182 controllers series
** The EXCELLENT QKB61 and QKB37 midi controller keybeds with high end solid walnut wooden sides and top.
** Box -1, 2, and 4.
** Power distribution systems for the Box series.


.... and probably a few other things that I missed, as well as ~whatever~ he's got on it's way in the future, nobody can say he's been sitting on his hands. Roger is listening, he is responding to demand, and he's producing absolutely no vaporware (as in nothing is published as some "in progress prototype" BS ... he only publishes production-ready items).

Having been in the audio processor production game my own damned self, I know first hand how much effort and devotion it takes to stay ahead of the competition, or at least respond to fickle customer demands. The modular synth business is tough to be successful in. And I have to opine that Roger is one of the top fellas in the industry.

Lastly, Synthesizers.Com is one of the better companies to deal with as a customer. No BS, no questions asked returns, polite and helpful communications, and unquestionably fair pricing.

Love fest complete. Fanboy OUT!

daveholiday
I am a bit unclear as the the function of the AC/DC switches for the linear and exponential inputs. I watched the video and read the documentation, but still am not sure of the use. Could anyone chime in with a basic explanation of what I am missing?
Rex Coil 7
daveholiday wrote:
I am a bit unclear as the the function of the AC/DC switches for the linear and exponential inputs. I watched the video and read the documentation, but still am not sure of the use. Could anyone chime in with a basic explanation of what I am missing?
Same here, I thought those inputs on the standard Q106 were DC coupled anyhow (ok to use either cv voltages or audio rate inputs). If so, why the toggles on the Q106A repanel?
ranix
In terms of $ per square foot the standard Q106 is still in the lead lol
josaka
https://www.techwalla.com/articles/difference-between-ac-dc-amplifiers

basically DC is a full(rougher) signal and AC subtracts noise so is smoother and more musical... ( depending on your taste in music of course smile )

"DC
DC amplifiers are used in science, medicine and engineering whenever people deal with DC and slow-moving signals. Sound engineers may use DC amplifiers when they need excellent low-frequency response.

AC
Home stereos make up the biggest use of AC amplifiers. Radio and television engineers use very-high-frequency AC amplifiers. The AC coupling conveniently rejects noisy DC signals."
Rex Coil 7
ranix wrote:
In terms of $ per square foot the standard Q106 is still in the lead lol
Geez ... c'mon man ... only by FIVE BUCKS. If you add the Q106 and the Q141 together ($225.00 + $58.00) it comes to $283.00 .. the Q106A is $288.00.

I think the extra labor involved to build the Q106A is well worth the extra $5.00 .... as well as saving 1U of space. In a four VCO system that costs $20.00 more dollars, but saves you four spaces. Seems like a very fair trade off to me. If someone told me that they could save me 4 spaces, while retaining all of the same functionality in my system for only $20.00 bucks, I'd take it!

Sooo .... what was that about being more cost effective again? I think the benefits outweigh the five lousy bucks. It's more about total return on investment, and less about total cost involved. It's more efficient money .. think of it like better gas mileage.

Yeeeeeyup. thumbs up

EDIT: Corrected my broken math ... twice!
kindredlost
Fantastic idea!

This is going to be one of those monthly expenses for me until I get my eight Q106's converted over. I will probably stand there for a few seconds with the cable in hand staring at the new layout trying to grog how to plug it in. My brain is so tuned to the Q106 that this might be like learning a new language (or at least a new accent).

I have been a little shy about some of the crowded modules from synthesizers.com lately but this one is a perfectly good solution. The only reservation I have is the smaller knobs eliminate the handy little tick marks which I do use. They may seem superfluous but they are a help for me.
kindredlost


I hadn't thought about feeding one of the outputs back into another input like Roger did here. Good way to wave shape. Using a few modules in between like a VCA and EG or LFO for dynamic modulation will be fun as well. Pretty basic stuff but opens up more possibilities if you only own one VCO.

I've never had the aid modules for any of the Q106's so I haven't tried any of these ideas before. Seems like a whole lack of ingenuity on my part.

Has anyone played around with this feedback idea before with their aid modules? It looks to be an exciting new avenue for me. I mean I guess you could do it with the Q106 as it is in some ways but the extra waveform output of the Q106A along with the attenuators is a big help in dialing in more fine wave shaping. Nothing ground-breaking but very handy for sure.
Rex Coil 7
kindredlost wrote:


I hadn't thought about feeding one of the outputs back into another input like Roger did here. Good way to wave shape. Using a few modules in between like a VCA and EG or LFO for dynamic modulation will be fun as well. Pretty basic stuff but opens up more possibilities if you only own one VCO.

I've never had the aid modules for any of the Q106's so I haven't tried any of these ideas before. Seems like a whole lack of ingenuity on my part.

Has anyone played around with this feedback idea before with their aid modules? It looks to be an exciting new avenue for me. I mean I guess you could do it with the Q106 as it is in some ways but the extra waveform output of the Q106A along with the attenuators is a big help in dialing in more fine wave shaping. Nothing ground-breaking but very handy for sure.
All that you need to emulate what Roger showed there is a mixer (Q112, Q113 in Dot Com speak). The Q161 VCO mixer uses precisely the same PCB as the Q112/Q113. That said, you may patch waves into the mixer, and route it's output back in to the VCO FM inputs (as Roger demonstrated in the video you've posted). Then, patch a different waveform from the VCO out to your regularly used VCO mixer for the audio of the VCO.

If you use an actual Q161, you can have four waves (and any mix of those four waves) with it, and route it's output back in to the VCO's FM inputs for wave shaping, as Roger demonstrated. And then you STILL have all of the wave form jacks open to send audio out.

Since the Q161 simply taps into the VCO's waveform outputs right at the VCO wave output jacks, it's as if a mult was used to ~split~ a given waveform and send it's output to two different destinations. That said, there's no reason you cannot do the same thing. Simply use a mult to split a given waveform into two signals. Route one signal back in to the FM input, route the other to whatever destination you'd normally send your VCO outputs too (VCF? Pre-VCF mixer? .... everwhat).

I've tried to emulate that setup, while making things more immediate by using normaling and hard wired destinations that include various routing switches. I've also incorporated an Envelope Generator (just a Q109) into the works. I don't have an LFO in their, but by switching the EG's source of GATE from "kybd" to "alt gate" .. I can easily use the EG as an LFO by sending a slow, repetitive gate signal (I call it "GATE 2" on my rig) of ... let's say ... 1hz ... to the EG it's easy to "convert" that EG into an LFO by adjusting Attack and Decay times to create the LFO's waveform.

I've also made up a little normaled SYNC setup that routes the PULSE wave from a master VCO to a toggle switch. The toggle switch selects the master's pulse wave to either the HARD SYNC input, or the SOFT SYNC input, or "off" (no sync). When the toggle is in the "SOFT" position the signal uses the "amount" knob as well as the SOFT SYNC input. When the switch is in the "HARD" position the amount pot is out of the circuit, just like standard. I've also included an input jack (switching jack) so if I wish to use something other than the PULSE wave from the master to sync the carrier VCO to, by inserting a patch cord into the jack, it switches out the normaled pulse wave and uses whatever waveform I've patched into the jack. So everything gained, nothing lost. Win win.

As far as "waveform switch" is concerned, I simply tapped off of the SAW and PULSE wave output jacks (just exactly the same way that the Q161 does) and sent those signals out to an On-Off-On SPDT toggle switch. The output of that switch is sent to the input of the VCO mixer (which has been normaled to reduce cord clutter). Again, using switching jacks on the mixer, i can still patch in any waves from the VCO into the mixer, just as the stock setup is done. This way I have immediate access to SAW and PULSE waves via the toggle switch, and I may also shut the VCO completely out of the mix with the "OFF" position on the switch. This way I can introduce a VCO into a sound instantly (a la Minimoog), and remove it just as instantly.

It's a two VCO "voice" setup. I'm still developing all of the quirks and quarks, but it's coming around. Here's a pic of one of the Two VCO Voice sections on my project synth (there are two of these complete sections in my synth ... total of four VCOs). The two large toggles on the aluminum strip below the Voice are the "SAW-OFF-PULSE" selectors, the outputs from the VCOs are routed to these toggles, then the selected waveforms are sent to the mixer stage that resides in between the two Voice Sections. One toggle per VCO.




I've changed the controller panel, it now looks like this ......






Explanation of control functions ......






These controller panels are prototypes, when I get all of this worked out I'll redo these on nice looking panels without the extra holes etc. These were just old panels I had on hand that I've used to work these ideas out with.

For more details of this effort, see my project thread. Page 7 is where all of this normaling stuff is going on.

Link = https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=78836&postdays=0&pos torder=asc&start=150
Rex Coil 7
One other thing to note, the Q141 that is mated to the Q106 to create the new Q106A is a completely PASSIVE circuit, all the Q141 does is make use of already available header connections on the Q106 PCB. The Q141 module requires no power. If you use a Q161 VCO Mixer to obtain wave mixing, it's not too difficult to make up yourself the remaining features of the Q141.

And another note, the Q161 VCO Mixer simply taps into the regular waveform output jacks and pipes those "copies" to the inputs of the Q161 mixer, while still providing full access to the Q106's waveform outputs (in other words you can use the signal from the Q161 AND the signals from the Q106 simultaneously). You can have the mixer outputting (let's say) a SAW wave, and you may also have another SAW wave coming from the Q106's outputs at the same time. Essentially the Q161 is a mult and a four channel mixer .. the end. The Q161 requires power, as it is an active circuit.

thumbs up
megaohm
josaka wrote:
https://www.techwalla.com/articles/difference-between-ac-dc-amplifiers

basically DC is a full(rougher) signal and AC subtracts noise so is smoother and more musical... ( depending on your taste in music of course smile )



That is not correct.
If you have that site bookmarked I encourage you to delete it.
Everything about it is wrong and terrible.
The statement that DC is "rougher" and/or AC is "smoother and more musical" is complete nonsense and should be disregarded entirely!

DC input means any signal patched here will influence the circuit.
That could be an audio signal, a fixed steady voltage, or a mixture of those two.
In the case of the VCO Lin CV input in DC mode -
Any and all signals patched in will vary the oscillator's frequency.

AC coupled means it will block the fixed steady voltage, it will also block or attenuate very slow moving signals (such as a slow going envelope or LFO).
It WILL let an audio or other fast moving signal through.

In the case of the VCO Lin CV input in AC mode -
Patch a signal in that is a mix of audio and DC signals.
The DC portion of the mix gets blocked by an input capacitor.
Only the audio will get through and vary the frequency.

Use AC coupling when you want to strip out any voltage offsets from an audio signal.
Offsets can accumulate from VCF modules, the mixing of VCO waves, and many other places (IOW: it's not always intentional).
Some say that for Lin frequency inputs it is best to have an audio signal centered around 0V so AC coupling is what you want for that.

Other times you may want DC to have an effect, too.

An audio signal that is perfectly centered around 0V will function identically regardless of AC/DC switch setting.

Capacitors that do the job of making the input AC coupled are not perfect (nothing in the real world is!). Exploit that for useful effects.
Try feeding an square or saw shaped LFO or an EG with no attack into the AC coupled input.
trentpmcd
megaohm wrote:
josaka wrote:
https://www.techwalla.com/articles/difference-between-ac-dc-amplifiers

basically DC is a full(rougher) signal and AC subtracts noise so is smoother and more musical... ( depending on your taste in music of course smile )



That is not correct.
.../clip/....
Capacitors that do the job of making the input AC coupled are not perfect (nothing in the real world is!). Exploit that for useful effects.
Try feeding an square or saw shaped LFO or an EG with no attack into the AC coupled input.

Thanks. Very useful info.
Rex Coil 7
trentpmcd wrote:
megaohm wrote:
josaka wrote:
https://www.techwalla.com/articles/difference-between-ac-dc-amplifiers

basically DC is a full(rougher) signal and AC subtracts noise so is smoother and more musical... ( depending on your taste in music of course smile )



That is not correct.
.../clip/....
Capacitors that do the job of making the input AC coupled are not perfect (nothing in the real world is!). Exploit that for useful effects.
Try feeding an square or saw shaped LFO or an EG with no attack into the AC coupled input.

Thanks. Very useful info.
Agreed, thanks Josaka, for the concise explanation. I understand those concepts better now.
alternating.bit
^^ ok, reading all of that to me is like...

Rex Coil 7
^^^ lol
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> 5U Format Modules Goto page 1, 2  Next [all]
Page 1 of 2
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group