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

Penrose Possibles (Open Source Sonic Potions Quantizer)
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> BugBrand Devices Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next [all]
Author Penrose Possibles (Open Source Sonic Potions Quantizer)
otoskope
Oh, totally missed this thread. They look great, Tom. I hope you can make a batch, I'd definitely be interested.
BugBrand
Just got the blessing from Julian!
otoskope
Great news!
chrisdermo
BugBrand wrote:
Just got the blessing from Julian!



AWWWWWW YE nanners
anadeji
Very excited for this !
/\/\/\/
hyper hyper hyper hyper

Always excited for new designs, but this one really gets the imagination going.
And that DC mixer built in ... great great great!
BugBrand
Before rolling these out properly I'd like a few people to help as testers - ideally UK, but Europe would probably work too. I've got a few built so once confirmed things should get going fairly soon.
rico loverde
BugBrand wrote:
Before rolling these out properly I'd like a few people to help as testers - ideally UK, but Europe would probably work too. I've got a few built so once confirmed things should get going fairly soon.
excited for this one!
chrisdermo
This is me raising my hand enthusiastically SlayerBadger!
a100user
happy to help if needed Tom as I have a vested interest in these becoming available, I want one smile
T. Jervell
Guess I’m a bit late to the party... also not a UK resident...but still hihi
But, very excited that the quantizer is near complete It's peanut butter jelly time!
sungja
I have the barton you did but this one looks more playable so put me down for one of these please. thumbs up
sensanalog
I so can't wait for this Tom!
Vcoadsr
Hi Tom, I'd happily do some testing for you, done my fair share of alpha & beta testing for Matthew at ALM over the years, cheers Phil
tIB
Always here if needed!
BugBrand
So, having had more of a check last night (+ help from Batchas) I wanted to mention the current issues. They appear to be based on the original design rather than my version as I've checked similar on my original 1FW Penrose adaption - as such, I'm not quite sure what to suggest.

1) Jittery behaviour - when using larger spans (3+ octaves) you can get some instances where the Penrose isn't quite sure which note to settle on, so you get trilly/jittery results. In my own usage I've tended to stick anyways to a few octaves, so I've not overly noticed this.

2) Crashes - This was flagged up by Batchas - I'd not come across it due to my usage, but I was finally able to replicate it repeatedly and also find that it occurred too on the original Penrose. As such I believe it might be firmware related. If the combination of CV ins and Initial are relatively high (I think summing to over 10V but haven't id'd exactly) then having an external trigger connected to the input (whether or not it is switched to use it) can cause the Penrose to latch up which then requires a power reset.

3) Accuracy - so I did move to the 12bit DAC but it is noticeable that these have some variance unit to unit. Mostly they seem pretty good, though I did have one testing yesterday which was really quite out just on the first octave. I guess I'll find out more through testing - might have to swap out some of the DACs if particular ones are inaccurate.

I've got a few built and flashed - shared one to another UK user, so hopefully there'll be further comments this weekend. Can equally share a few more around, but I'm still somewhat wary due to these points & that I'm unsure whether they can be sorted.

One point - I use an IDE programmer on these, but in theory you can use an audio file to update (haven't tested this yet). I'm not overly keen on sending loads out if users can't perform any firmware update.

Anyways - curious what people think?
T. Jervell
Well, I guess you already know where I stand Tom hihi
But regarding your point. Jittery/trill-behaviour I’ve experienced with more than three different euro quantizers, so I don’t know if this is a «common» problem that is hard to solve?
The crashing bit is of course unfortunate, but I guess as long as it’s know, and specific to what you just said then no problem.

So my opinion would to go for it. I don’t mind jitter/stutter, I’ve several times used it intentionally with my previous quantizers. But not all would agree with me, I know hihi
otoskope
Well, you know my willingness to test things, Tom.... Looks like a great module, and I hope you get the issues sorted. I remember we discussed DC offset and attenuator already on the old dual Barton Quantizer. So useful!
Vcoadsr
BugBrand wrote:

One point - I use an IDE programmer on these, but in theory you can use an audio file to update (haven't tested this yet). I'm not overly keen on sending loads out if users can't perform any firmware update.

Anyways - curious what people think?


Hi Tom, I’ve got a PICKIT 3 programmer that I use to update The Harvestman modules so if that’s what’s also needed to update the firmware on this then I can definitely help test - let me know what you think ... Cheers Phil
BananaPlug
I wonder if this is a case where rigorous attention to grounding, bypassing, power filtering makes the difference even if no particular “cause” is discovered.
batchas
T. Jervell wrote:
The crashing bit is of course unfortunate, but I guess as long as it’s know, and specific to what you just said then no problem.

It happened while testing (switching + increasing offset) but this kind of manip that brings it to crash is definitely not something I ever did in a "normal" situation when playing with the other Penrose(s).

Tom found out it's also on the original Penrose, which we did not know and it proves as said that it's really not a usual/normal manip!
DickMarker
Just to chip in my twopence regarding jitter, every quantiser I've ever used has, when fed a wide cv range, been a little prone to jitter/trills as you described. So in that respect, it doesn't seem like something that necessarily needs correcting as it's to be expected and the key to avoiding it is in the hands of the user trimming the input to a usable range.
Cool module btw - like what you've done with the design.
pld
So this isn't my usual format haunt, but...

BugBrand wrote:
1) Jittery behaviour - when using larger spans (3+ octaves) you can get some instances where the Penrose isn't quite sure which note to settle on, so you get trilly/jittery results. In my own usage I've tended to stick anyways to a few octaves, so I've not overly noticed this.

FWIW there was some discussion on the (currently MIA) SP board about adding hysteresis to avoid the indecisive oscillation.
I know I implemented a naive version at some point (without looking deeper at the underlying adc resolution etc.) but then got distracted by other shiny things smile I assume I kept the code somewhere though.
BugBrand
pld wrote:
So this isn't my usual format haunt, but...

FWIW there was some discussion on the (currently MIA) SP board about adding hysteresis to avoid the indecisive oscillation.
I know I implemented a naive version at some point (without looking deeper at the underlying adc resolution etc.) but then got distracted by other shiny things :) I assume I kept the code somewhere though.


Ah, are you Patrick Dowling then? I did come across your firmware version and it did seem better than the original..
The strange thing remains that stability is good on for about 3 octaves - hardly any jittery behaviour.
I've not looked at code for ..years.. so unsure whether this project should be my route back in!

Edit - there's a github here: https://github.com/patrickdowling/Penrose

Yes, it is a shame that the Sonic Potions forum vanished..
BugBrand
So I didn't get much focus on this last week - hoping to move forward this week.

As mentioned above, the idea of delving into programming is not something I necessarily relish.

I have wondered about scaling everything down by a factor of 2 - I don't overly see the call for 10 octaves of range - 5 would seem more than enough. I'll have to have a check as to whether this reduces the potential for crashes etc. As mentioned it should reduce the scope of jittery behaviour and it does sound like for most users it wouldn't really alter usual usages.
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> BugBrand Devices Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next [all]
Page 2 of 5
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group