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

Moot points.
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> 5U Format Modules Goto page 1, 2  Next [all]
Author Moot points.
Rex Coil 7
Moot Booxle really inspired purchasing Dot Com stuff. His video "Explosion" (now 12 years old) is just so bitchin! Simple things, using a foot control to sweep the VCF cutoff, plus careful application of delay, and a few other tricks make the video. As well as his adept musical abilities, of course.



He's back at it again, with a new series he calls "Moot Points". Interesting techniques abound in the two videos he's produced so far. Some in the 5U forum may find them useful.

Posted just yesterday, this first one shows how he sets up the Korg Odyssey for funk/pop-jazz sounds, left handed bass lines. Yes, it's an ARP, however many of the techniques he demonstrates are easily passed to 5U usage. Much (most!) of what he shows is very innovative and clever. Between what Moot and Tom of Noddy's Puncture do with S/H, integration into my own rig is clearly needed.



Producing nicely thick PWM sounds using a sawtooth wave and a ramp wave is covered in this next video. Quite clever, FAT as Kim Jong Un's big round punkin head as well.




.... just when I think I've seen it all ....
thumbs up
EPTC
Yeah reagards to Moot, absolutely. Years back he did a review of the Clusterflux. I think that was one of the first things to open my mind wider to modular. It's still a great video with a lot of inspiring ideas.



Cheers on this appreciation thread, Rex.
Rex Coil 7
EPTC wrote:
Yeah reagards to Moot, absolutely. ... Cheers on this appreciation thread, Rex.
Thank you.

The "alt PWM" trick is something Moog 901 users may find helpful. It certainly has broadened my understanding of how to get the most from these synth modules.

Moot seems to find a lot of nuance within the settings of his synths. He readily shares what he knows and freely distributes it. I'm glad he does what he does.

cool
josaka
I(+most people) use this with my 901 its pretty standard for them really.. first time I have heard "beating"(or detuning) called "PWM"... "PWM" is self modulating square pulse of a single osc .."beating"(detuning) is playing with the timing of 2(or more) oscillators.. beating one of the 901 strongest points and why many seek them out.. you can do true "PWM" with 901 osc as well.. but you need to stand there and wiggle the PW by hand.. or.. as Noddy has done modify your 901 to modulate the pulsewidth.
josaka
Gerhard at SW told me one day he was thinking of adding a module to his lineup (after he completes the original Moog copies) that modulates the pulse.. he said sync was not happening smile
DrReverendSeance
Great playing on videos! I’d never seen these before, thanks for posting.
Stereotactixxx
josaka wrote:
I(+most people) use this with my 901 its pretty standard for them really.. first time I have heard "beating"(or detuning) called "PWM"... "PWM" is self modulating square pulse of a single osc .."beating"(detuning) is playing with the timing of 2(or more) oscillators.. beating one of the 901 strongest points and why many seek them out.. you can do true "PWM" with 901 osc as well.. but you need to stand there and wiggle the PW by hand.. or.. as Noddy has done modify your 901 to modulate the pulsewidth.


The reason that it in this case turns into sort of PWM is that he mixes a saw and a ramp in equal amounts. To do that with 901s, you will first have to invert one of the saws.
Rex Coil 7
Stereotactixxx wrote:
josaka wrote:
I(+most people) use this with my 901 its pretty standard for them really.. first time I have heard "beating"(or detuning) called "PWM"... "PWM" is self modulating square pulse of a single osc .."beating"(detuning) is playing with the timing of 2(or more) oscillators.. beating one of the 901 strongest points and why many seek them out.. you can do true "PWM" with 901 osc as well.. but you need to stand there and wiggle the PW by hand.. or.. as Noddy has done modify your 901 to modulate the pulsewidth.


The reason that it in this case turns into sort of PWM is that he mixes a saw and a ramp in equal amounts. To do that with 901s, you will first have to invert one of the saws.
Haa haaa!! Well well well, I've gloriously displayed my ignorance about the Moog systems once again. For some reason I thought the 901s had ramp wave outs. I am quite interested in adding Moog VCOs to my rig, but I keep falling on my face when it comes to figuring out how to go about doing the long-used methods of various sounds, such as auto-modulated pulse width (that is to say, not using my hand to sweep the pulse width knob manually).

As I sit here typing, pausing to think, I suppose there really is no reason to try to make something that is widely available out of the Moog 901ABBB ensemble. "Why not just use it as it is, enjoy it as it is, and don't try to make it into a well behaved lap dog?? ... accept it for it's merits, and use the ensemble as it stands ... work with it's strengths ... nevermind it's failings or weaknesses ... and stop trying to turn it into a bank of Q106s".

Yea ... see now that is starting to make a lot of sense. The ensemble does what it does, work with that! (I'm talking to myself here). If I want auto-PWM then I have other modules that can provide that in spades. I suppose it's sortof kike trying to make the Dot Com Q107 sound like a 4 pole transistor ladder LPF. If I want a 4p LPF .... use a 4p LPF! Use the state variable for what IT does best and stop trying to make a baseball out of a football.

Question: Wouldn't "inverting" a sawtooth wave just flip it upside down? I thought a ramp wave was a sawtooth turned around on the X axis?

seriously, i just don't get it

Correction; Y axis.

oops
Dave Peck
Rex Coil 7 wrote:


Question: Wouldn't "inverting" a sawtooth wave just flip it upside down? I thought a ramp wave was a sawtooth turned around on the X axis?

seriously, i just don't get it

Correction; Y axis.

oops


Ah, but here's the thing - With two detuned sawtooth waves, both being 'up' ramps or both being 'down' ramps, at the point that they are exactly out of phase with each other you'll briefly get a sawtooth signal that is exactly one octave above the actual sawtooth osc frequencies.

But when you invert one of the waveforms, so one is an 'up' ramp and the other is now a 'down' ramp, when these detuned oscs are at the point where they are exactly of phase with each other, you don't get that brief moment of 'octave up' sawtooth, you get a brief moment of near-cancellation.

The sound of these two detuned waveforms beating against each other is quite different than the sound of detuned sawtooth waves that are both 'up' or both 'down' ramps.

Try it. Since you have Q106 oscs, which already offer both 'up saw' and 'down saw', compare these two different signals and you'll hear the difference.

I particularly like the sound of three detuned saw waves, with one of them inverted relative to the other two, and different rates of detuning between adjacent oscs: fast beating between the 'root' osc and the slightly sharp osc, and slow beating between the root osc and an inverted, and slightly flat osc.
Rex Coil 7
Dave Peck wrote:
Rex Coil 7 wrote:


Question: Wouldn't "inverting" a sawtooth wave just flip it upside down? I thought a ramp wave was a sawtooth turned around on the X axis?

seriously, i just don't get it

Correction; Y axis.

oops


Ah, but here's the thing - With two detuned sawtooth waves, both being 'up' ramps or both being 'down' ramps, at the point that they are exactly out of phase with each other you'll briefly get a sawtooth signal that is exactly one octave above the actual sawtooth osc frequencies.

But when you invert one of the waveforms, so one is an 'up' ramp and the other is now a 'down' ramp, when these detuned oscs are at the point where they are exactly of phase with each other, you don't get that brief moment of 'octave up' sawtooth, you get a brief moment of near-cancellation.

The sound of these two detuned waveforms beating against each other is quite different than the sound of detuned sawtooth waves that are both 'up' or both 'down' ramps.

Try it. Since you have Q106 oscs, which already offer both 'up saw' and 'down saw', compare these two different signals and you'll hear the difference.

I particularly like the sound of three detuned saw waves, with one of them inverted relative to the other two, and different rates of detuning between adjacent oscs: fast beating between the 'root' osc and the slightly sharp osc, and slow beating between the root osc and an inverted, and slightly flat osc.
Dave, watch the Moot Booxle video called "Pule Width Modulation" up above in this thread. You'll see what we're discussing here.

cool
Dave Peck
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
Dave, watch the Moot Booxle video called "Pule Width Modulation" up above in this thread. You'll see what we're discussing here.

cool


Yup, we're discussing the same thing. And mixing detuned saws, with one inverted, gives you a PWM effect where the signal briefly 'disappears', like a pulse wave briefly achieving zero width. And it sounds different from two detuned saws which don't have one of them inverted, meaning saws that are both 'up' saws or both 'down' saws.
Rex Coil 7
Dave Peck wrote:
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
Dave, watch the Moot Booxle video called "Pule Width Modulation" up above in this thread. You'll see what we're discussing here.

cool


Yup, we're discussing the same thing. And mixing detuned saws, with one inverted, gives you a PWM effect where the signal briefly 'disappears', like a pulse wave briefly achieving zero width. And it sounds different from two detuned saws which don't have one of them inverted, meaning saws that are both 'up' saws or both 'down' saws.
I don't think we are.

You're comparing unison saw waves against PWM. Moot is demonstrating that by using a saw and a ramp, the "disappearing" thing that PWM also creates is may be produced.

This is about creating a PWM-like sound by using a ramp and a saw. Which is precisely what some folks want, but can't have it because the Minimoog doesn't offer PWM. I fully understand that unison saws are different than PWM, but for those without the capability of PWM (such as Minimoog owners) using the ramp and saw offers a viable solution.

It's not about which one is better or which one won't phase cancel or which one presents an octave higher harmonic at a certain point ... it's about how to mimic PWM on synths that don't have PWM but DO have saw/ramp waves.

thumbs up

EDIT: One other thing (minor as it is). In synths, "inverted" usually means that which was positive is made negative. A ramp wave, by that description, is not inverted. It's rotated. Both the saw and the ramp are positive waves. Unless they are inverted to negative.



I am attempting to learn something here, please don't take this as contradiction or being a smart ass.

cool
Rex Coil 7
Ok, wait. I think I get it now. When looking at my own little diagram, I can see how a ramp wave can be an inverted saw. It all depends on how the phase of the ramp is viewed. Better said, at which degree of phase the ramp is viewed. Did I get that right?

No ... damnit ... it still doesn't make sense to me. The ramp is still positive voltage. Right? An inverted saw would be negative voltage, wouldn't it?
josaka
basically all of this is a moot point really you cannot get true pwm out of the 901's umless you do it by hand or mod them..
this other phase cancelling sound sounds fantasic from the 901(the best sounding beating osc?) as I said in another thread to you its a 901 not a version of something else its power lies in the sweetness of these things..
it is also the reason why people are still using the limited option minimoogs and crave original 901/921(921 a little harder sounding and .com even more so)(the voltage/volume levels of the .com may have a big part to play here)

I would really forget about these comparison chart things .. sit back put your feet up and enjoy the tones.. smile




Stereotactixxx
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
No ... damnit ... it still doesn't make sense to me. The ramp is still positive voltage. Right? An inverted saw would be negative voltage, wouldn't it?

I had a hard time grasping your confusion, but now I get it. Both saws and ramps are bipolar, with equal amounts of the waves above and below 0V. That is why an inverted saw is exactly the same as a ramp.
Dave Peck
Stereotactixxx wrote:

I had a hard time grasping your confusion, but now I get it. Both saws and ramps are bipolar, with equal amounts of the waves above and below 0V. That is why an inverted saw is exactly the same as a ramp.


Yes!
Dave Peck
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
I don't think we are.

You're comparing unison saw waves against PWM. Moot is demonstrating that by using a saw and a ramp, the "disappearing" thing that PWM also creates is may be produced.

This is about creating a PWM-like sound by using a ramp and a saw. Which is precisely what some folks want, but can't have it because the Minimoog doesn't offer PWM. I fully understand that unison saws are different than PWM, but for those without the capability of PWM (such as Minimoog owners) using the ramp and saw offers a viable solution.

It's not about which one is better or which one won't phase cancel or which one presents an octave higher harmonic at a certain point ... it's about how to mimic PWM on synths that don't have PWM but DO have saw/ramp waves.

)[/quote]

Yup, and I'm just pointing out (as is Moot) that two detuned saws with one inverted sound a lot more 'PWM-like' than two detuned saws that have the same polarity. Try it.

BTW you can also create a 'PWM-like' sound with only ONE sawtooth (or ramp, doesn't matter in this case), an LFO, a mixer module, and a clipper module:

Mix the saw and LFO together in the mixer so the output of the mixer is a sawtooth wave that is slowly being 'biased' postive, then negative by the LFO. Patch that through a clipper module and set it so the saw wave is unaffected when the LFO is at zero volts and is not baising the saw wave, but so the clipper module begins to clip off the top & bottom of the saw wave when that wave is getting biased positive or negative. It creates a pronounsed 'PWM-like' motion to the sound - with only one saw osc.
Rex Coil 7
josaka wrote:
basically all of this is a moot point really you cannot get true pwm out of the 901's umless you do it by hand or mod them..
this other phase cancelling sound sounds fantasic from the 901(the best sounding beating osc?) as I said in another thread to you its a 901 not a version of something else its power lies in the sweetness of these things..
it is also the reason why people are still using the limited option minimoogs and crave original 901/921(921 a little harder sounding and .com even more so)(the voltage/volume levels of the .com may have a big part to play here)

I would really forget about these comparison chart things .. sit back put your feet up and enjoy the tones.. smile


(quoting myself, a half dozen or so posts up, re; 901s and their limits/strengths .... )

Rex Coil 7 wrote:
Haa haaa!! Well well well, I've gloriously displayed my ignorance about the Moog systems once again......

(sic) oops d'oh!

..... As I sit here typing, pausing to think, I suppose there really is no reason to try to make something that is widely available out of the Moog 901ABBB ensemble. "Why not just use it as it is, enjoy it as it is, and don't try to make it into a well behaved lap dog?? ... accept it for it's merits, and use the ensemble as it stands ... work with it's strengths ... nevermind it's failings or weaknesses ... and stop trying to turn it into a bank of Q106s".

Yea ... see now that is starting to make a lot of sense. The ensemble does what it does, work with that! (I'm talking to myself here). If I want auto-PWM then I have other modules that can provide that in spades. I suppose it's sortof kike trying to make the Dot Com Q107 sound like a 4 pole transistor ladder LPF. If I want a 4p LPF .... use a 4p LPF! Use the state variable for what IT does best and stop trying to make a baseball out of a football....


applause
Rex Coil 7
Dave Peck wrote:
Try it....
I absolutely will ......

.... once I get this operating .....





Thanks.

I know it's easy to lose patience with me. I've always been a very inquisitive person, to the annoyance of those around me (especially teachers and instructors).

w00t!!

So I appreciate the fact that people within this thread are willing to help.

oops Hug
Dave Peck
Hey, no problem! BTW your synth is going to be frikken gorgeous.
Rex Coil 7
Stereotactixxx wrote:
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
No ... damnit ... it still doesn't make sense to me. The ramp is still positive voltage. Right? An inverted saw would be negative voltage, wouldn't it?

I had a hard time grasping your confusion, but now I get it. Both saws and ramps are bipolar, with equal amounts of the waves above and below 0V. That is why an inverted saw is exactly the same as a ramp.
This (above) helped more than anything. THANKS!

I was under the (incorrect) impression that these wave forms were all unipolar, which was throwing my ability to understand things.

So this comment helped truckloads.

Thanks once more for the patience afforded to me.

Mr. Green
Rex Coil 7
Dave Peck wrote:
Hey, no problem! BTW your synth is going to be frikken gorgeous.
Thank you, Dave. It's definitely a labor of love, no doubt about that! Reminds me of doing the foldback modification to spinet Hammonds. Tedious, puts a kink in your neck, and worth every second and solder burn.

love
Rex Coil 7
josaka wrote:
..... I would really forget about these comparison chart things .. sit back put your feet up and enjoy the tones.. smile

Wow ... in this video, between 00:25 and 00:35 ... the camera is vibrating from the low end.

woah eek! we're not worthy
Stereotactixxx
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
Stereotactixxx wrote:
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
No ... damnit ... it still doesn't make sense to me. The ramp is still positive voltage. Right? An inverted saw would be negative voltage, wouldn't it?

I had a hard time grasping your confusion, but now I get it. Both saws and ramps are bipolar, with equal amounts of the waves above and below 0V. That is why an inverted saw is exactly the same as a ramp.
This (above) helped more than anything. THANKS!

I was under the (incorrect) impression that these wave forms were all unipolar, which was throwing my ability to understand things.

So this comment helped truckloads.

Thanks once more for the patience afforded to me.

Mr. Green


Absolutely no problemo.

And just in case it wasn't clear, mixing a saw with a detuned ramp, actually produces a pulse wave that is sweeping between 0% and 100%. So, not only does it emulate the LFO modulation of the full range of possible pulse widths, it also actually is a pulse. Getting any other type of PWM sound than the full sweep of a triangle LFO is however more of a challenge.
josaka
Another very "Pwm'y" effect can be done with osc that you can modulate through the waveforms ...

like Buchla, Kobol, Hordijk HRM, Oakley Slim VCO ,I think the SSL Osc does too.. its a wonderful sound.

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