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

Euro dual Teezer?
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Eurorack Modules Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next [all]
Author Euro dual Teezer?
frijitz
I've just heard from Scott that he has a batch of dual Euro Teezers assembled and another getting close. The price is not exactly fixed, but I'm pretty sure it is going to be competitive.

Ian
petejm
Huh, a little over a week ago this wasn't happening & now one batch has been assembled & another almost ready??? Am I missing something here?

I'm not complaining, just confused! hmmm.....
softpieces
Very interested in this.
mojopin
oh shit... dual teezers...rubicon... and zeroscillators in stock at AH

let's just hope it isn't five inches deep!
ringstone
Wow, competition's hotting up... w00t

Cheers
Blair
HeWhoWantsJeans
frijitz wrote:
I've just heard from Scott that he has a batch of dual Euro Teezers assembled and another getting close. The price is not exactly fixed, but I'm pretty sure it is going to be competitive.

Ian

Goddamn, you had me worried, Ian. Because I do want to check out one of Scott's Dual-Tezzers. I'll have to bug him to bring one to a 'Wiggler meet here in town.

Thanks for the heads up. thumbs up
contrasttx
There's a preorder page up now. $650, so a decent discount compared to two Rubicons. Not skiffable, 4.1in deep.

http://www.bridechamber.com/Euro_Teezer.html
petejm
contrasttx wrote:
There's a preorder page up now. $650, so a decent discount compared to two Rubicons. Not skiffable, 4.1in deep.

http://www.bridechamber.com/Euro_Teezer.html


Awesome, thanks for the heads up. Looks big, anyone have a guess at the HP?
KNYST
my guess would be 26-28hp
Juxwl
What's everyone think of the panel design?


confused
mOBiTh
are the euro pcbs gonna be available to buy do we know?
HeWhoWantsJeans
Juxwl wrote:
What's everyone think of the panel design?


confused

I think it's certainly effective - given how I believe the boards had to be mounted. Not flashy - sure, but effective.
Joe.
I don't understand the appeal seriously, i just don't get it

It looks like two teezers, built and placed under the same front panel... why not just build two single units? why not make use of the wasted space that is the giant strip through the middle, and replace the unneeded writing for some features that justify two teezers in the same unit?

A ring mod?
A mixer?
Anything?

Don't get me wrong, two is better than one... but is there same feature that's not evident from the pics that I'm missing, that justifies a single dual panel, instead of two single panels?
HeWhoWantsJeans
LoFi Junglist wrote:
I don't understand the appeal seriously, i just don't get it

It looks like two teezers, built and placed under the same front panel... why not just build two single units? why not make use of the wasted space that is the giant strip through the middle, and replace the unneeded writing for some features that justify two teezers in the same unit?

A ring mod?
A mixer?
Anything?

Don't get me wrong, two is better than one... but is there same feature that's not evident from the pics that I'm missing, that justifies a single dual panel, instead of two single panels?

I'm going to guess that the PCB is so wide that standing it upright (to do a single-Tezzer) wasn't feasible. So with the current design, the only option was to mount the PCB width-wise and perpendicular to the panel. That said - the only way to reasonably consume that much HP would be to do a dual unit (at that point).
Joe.
HeWhoWantsJeans wrote:

I'm going to guess that the PCB is so wide that standing it upright (to do a single-Tezzer) wasn't feasible. So with the current design, the only option was to mount the PCB width-wise and perpendicular to the panel. That said - the only way to reasonably consume that much HP would be to do a dual unit (at that point).


ah kk, thanks for clearing that up.

I think it would be great if the panel had some features like summed outputs and perhaps normalized inputs for the LIN & Exp FM between osc 1 and 2, with knobs for offset or polarity (so a modulation source could be applied to osc 1, and slightly offset or inverted then sent to osc 2 if nothing else is plugged in). There seems to be plenty of room on the panel which could be utilized still.
Drumdrumdrumdrum
I thought, from the bell demo, that it has got a ringmods? By the look of the front panel it seems not. Why not? seriously, i just don't get it
ringstone
HeWhoWantsJeans wrote:
I'm going to guess that the PCB is so wide that standing it upright (to do a single-Tezzer) wasn't feasible. So with the current design, the only option was to mount the PCB width-wise and perpendicular to the panel. That said - the only way to reasonably consume that much HP would be to do a dual unit (at that point).


Yes, I'm assuming (though I may be wrong) that these are using the same PCB as the 5U. Since there's now some commercial imperative to get these on the market it was probably quicker to produce a dual unit with those PCBs rather than design, lay out and debug a specific Euro PCB. Once again, just conjecture, and not in any way intended to be a criticism - I have some very fine dual/multi Euro modules that use CGS boards and panels from Clarke for example.

Drumdrumdrumdrum wrote:
I thought, from the bell demo, that it has got a ringmods? By the look of the front panel it seems not. Why not? seriously, i just don't get it


I believe that the bells demo was intended to demonstrate that Thru-Zero is capable of producing very realistic sounds of this type simply using FM.

Cheers
Blair
negativspace
Those are some FM bells, yo. And speaking of that... as an FM-oriented oscillator, a dual module makes a lot of sense. May well have to do with the PCB size too, although the originals were too tall to clear the rails in anything other than a 'shelf' configuration which is really hacky IMO. I'd hope they were trimmed down for parallel mounting.
softpieces
This looks great. Like others have said, a mix bus for internal routing (with manual and cv control of the routed wave's amplitude) would take this to the next level.
Drumdrumdrumdrum
OK. Wow!
ringstone
negativspace wrote:
May well have to do with the PCB size too, although the originals were too tall to clear the rails in anything other than a 'shelf' configuration


Appears this might be the case, the Bridechamber website warns these are not skiff-friendly at 4.1". Which I do believe looks very close to the width of the 5U PCB. The pots on this panel don't quite match the PCB-mounted pots on those PCBs though, so it could still be a different PCB.

Cheers
Blair
sonicwarrior
So: Are the dual units somehow linked together?

And: Is the missing pulse output relevant or not? seriously, i just don't get it
thermionicjunky
sonicwarrior wrote:
So: Are the dual units somehow linked together?

And: Is the missing pulse output relevant or not?


I doubt that they're linked. It's intended for dynamic FM, but without forcing the user to use a particular VCA for depth.

There are no pulse outputs in the design. That can be done very easily with external comparators. I'm going to build a 5-pulser to go with mine.
sonicwarrior
thermionicjunky wrote:
It's intended for dynamic FM, but without forcing the user to use a particular VCA for depth.


It has mini jacks, so normalizations are possible. Normalizations can be broken so no forcing the user to whatsoever. Just allowing the two units to interact without patchcords like many other units do.
noise brigade
Shame it dont have lfo mode
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Eurorack Modules Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next [all]
Page 2 of 4
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group