Bonjours à tous,
je me pose quelques questions à propos des oscillateurs 259e et 261e!Est-ce qu'un utilisateur averti pourrait m'expliquer qu'elles sont les différences entre ces deux modules?
Et je me demandais aussi si il était possible de faire du pitch tracking(pitch to voltage) avec un system Buchla?
questions system Buchla!
Re: questions system Buchla!
Bonjour Vassili.
Juste en dessous, un copié-collé qui devrait peut-être t' aider dans la compréhension de ces deux oscillateurs.
Tu trouveras beaucoup d' informations ici : http://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=19" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
N'hésites pas à poser des questions… beaucoup de personnes compétentes sur ce forum.
"the 259e module employs a purely digital synthesis algorithm. the primary oscillator uses a number of wavetables based loosely on chebyshev polynomials, which can be somewhat-arbitrarily mixed and truncated in response to the modulation oscillator and/or cv input. truncation of the wavetable naturally results in artifacts- very high frequency components; these do lead to aliasing effects when they interact with the (rather high) output sampling rate. but what you hear as artifacts are just as much the non-aliased high frequencies as the wrapped-around aliases of those frequencies (which tend to be very low since the nyquist is quite high.)
the modulation oscillator has a smaller selection of standard waveforms (triangle, saw, and square); it can perform pitch tracking of the primary osc; it can also perform hard sync with the output. when the mod osc can modulate pitch as well as track pitch, and modulate the shape and range of the wavetable as well as hard sync to the output of that wavetable, there are tremendous possibilities for internal feedback and noise of all sorts, modulated in subtle ways by the internal architecture of the firmware and the 8051. so there is lots of room for harsh digital noise in this module. but if you don't change the sweep size (the "warp" parameter is always set to "full") then you will be morphing between the clean sets of harmonics naturally generated by the chebyshev polynomials, and you get a nice kind of warm additive synthesis.
it has been pointed out that such effects could be implemented with commonly available software, with relative ease. this is absolutely true. since the stuff happens on an 8051 micro controller, and since we know (since Turing) that all computers do basically the same thing, you could re-implement this synthesizer on any level, from the top-level functionality (using max or reaktor or supercollider or Pd or Faust or C++ or... ), to using an 8051 emulator and programming it
in assembly. but any of these will be a very significant amount of work; if you are a skilled programmer, then (i hope) your time is
probably more valuable even than the equivalent cost of a 259e. and, of course, it is a MODULE which can interact with other modules in a
musical system, and you can play it with knobs and patch cords, and this is altogether more fun than a max patch, i believe. i hope i won't ever have to say anything on that point again.
the 261e module uses essentially the same design as the old 259. it is basically a sinewave and an analog shaping circuit, which is don's very unique invention; it adds harmonics while keeping the overall energy more or less constant. differences between the 261e and the vintage 259: the new module uses a digital sine-wave, which is very clean and does not drift, and the modulation oscillator has its own,
somewhat simplified wave-shaping circuit. and of course, to implement the 200e preset switching, MIDI interfacing etc., there is a digital control layer between the panel and the audio path.
in this module, the balance is a little less on the side of staz and a little more on the side of zwom."
Juste en dessous, un copié-collé qui devrait peut-être t' aider dans la compréhension de ces deux oscillateurs.
Tu trouveras beaucoup d' informations ici : http://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=19" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
N'hésites pas à poser des questions… beaucoup de personnes compétentes sur ce forum.
"the 259e module employs a purely digital synthesis algorithm. the primary oscillator uses a number of wavetables based loosely on chebyshev polynomials, which can be somewhat-arbitrarily mixed and truncated in response to the modulation oscillator and/or cv input. truncation of the wavetable naturally results in artifacts- very high frequency components; these do lead to aliasing effects when they interact with the (rather high) output sampling rate. but what you hear as artifacts are just as much the non-aliased high frequencies as the wrapped-around aliases of those frequencies (which tend to be very low since the nyquist is quite high.)
the modulation oscillator has a smaller selection of standard waveforms (triangle, saw, and square); it can perform pitch tracking of the primary osc; it can also perform hard sync with the output. when the mod osc can modulate pitch as well as track pitch, and modulate the shape and range of the wavetable as well as hard sync to the output of that wavetable, there are tremendous possibilities for internal feedback and noise of all sorts, modulated in subtle ways by the internal architecture of the firmware and the 8051. so there is lots of room for harsh digital noise in this module. but if you don't change the sweep size (the "warp" parameter is always set to "full") then you will be morphing between the clean sets of harmonics naturally generated by the chebyshev polynomials, and you get a nice kind of warm additive synthesis.
it has been pointed out that such effects could be implemented with commonly available software, with relative ease. this is absolutely true. since the stuff happens on an 8051 micro controller, and since we know (since Turing) that all computers do basically the same thing, you could re-implement this synthesizer on any level, from the top-level functionality (using max or reaktor or supercollider or Pd or Faust or C++ or... ), to using an 8051 emulator and programming it
in assembly. but any of these will be a very significant amount of work; if you are a skilled programmer, then (i hope) your time is
probably more valuable even than the equivalent cost of a 259e. and, of course, it is a MODULE which can interact with other modules in a
musical system, and you can play it with knobs and patch cords, and this is altogether more fun than a max patch, i believe. i hope i won't ever have to say anything on that point again.
the 261e module uses essentially the same design as the old 259. it is basically a sinewave and an analog shaping circuit, which is don's very unique invention; it adds harmonics while keeping the overall energy more or less constant. differences between the 261e and the vintage 259: the new module uses a digital sine-wave, which is very clean and does not drift, and the modulation oscillator has its own,
somewhat simplified wave-shaping circuit. and of course, to implement the 200e preset switching, MIDI interfacing etc., there is a digital control layer between the panel and the audio path.
in this module, the balance is a little less on the side of staz and a little more on the side of zwom."
http://lyonel.bandcamp.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; : http://www.vimeo.com/lyo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: questions system Buchla!
Merci beaucoup Lyonel!
J'ai récemment découvert l'excellent forum Muffwiggler qui est en effet très actif sur les systèmes Buchla!
J'ai récemment découvert l'excellent forum Muffwiggler qui est en effet très actif sur les systèmes Buchla!