Great! I'll wait patiently. Regards, Ingo

--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com , "selfoscillate"
<synaptic_music@y...> wrote:

>
>
> hello ingo (the not self-oscillating :-)),
>
> afaik the a133 is not really a ring modulator, but like a vca,
> it can be used to achieve similar effects.
> i'll record a sample using the a133, but i cannot
> do this before weekend i guess. i still have some troubles
> with my recording card. one time it works, the next time it
> doesn't. computers can be a pain in the ....
>
> best wishes
>
> ingo
>
>
>
> --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com , "ilanode" <techmeier@w...>

wrote:

> >
> > Is the A133 really capable of both amplitude and ring

modulation

> > There's no info referring to this on the Doepfer HP. Anyhow,

Ingo,

> > if you don't mind I'd like to hear some examples of amp/ring
> > modulation with the A133. Regards, Ingo
> >
> >
> > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com , "selfoscillate"
> > <synaptic_music@y...> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > hello,
> > >
> > > i tried the a133 too, but i haven't recorded it, because i
> > > wanted to compare only dedicated ring modulators.
> > > you are right, the a133 can also be used to generate
> > > ring modulator effects. damn, i should have recorded
> > > that module too.
> > >
> > > best wishes
> > >
> > > ingo
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com , "okiikahuna"
> > <okiikahuna@y...>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com , "ilanode"

<techmeier@w...>

> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I think you guys might have missed Doepfer's "other" ring
> > modulator
> > > > in your otherwise exhaustive comparison. The A-133

Polarizer

> is
> > > just
> > > > a 4 quadrant multiplier and seems to make a fine balanced
> > > modulator.
> > > > Just adjust the carrier for the least amount of leakage with

no

> > cv
> > > > applied, then put the modulator signal into the CV jack. You
> can
> > > vary
> > > > it continuously between balanced modulation and ampitude
> > modulation
> > > > by turning the knob or applying an offset. To me, the sound
> > seems
> > > > most similar to the unmodded A-114, which raises lots of
> > > interesting
> > > > questions about the effect of DC v. AC coupling, since the A-
> 133
> > is
> > > > clearly DC.
> > > >
> > > > Although it has been a few years since I have played with

one,

> I
> > > have
> > > > very fond memories of the sound of the Buchla 100 series

ring

> > > > modulator. Does anybody know what was in this circuit Was
> > there
> > > > anything special about it
> > > >
> > > > K
> > > >
> > > > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com , denis goekdag <q-
> > art@g...>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > it's really easy to assemble one or two cgs ringmods

from

> > the
> > > > > assembled
> > > > > > boards you can buy, just take an 8 hp blindplate, drill

6

> > 8.2mm
> > > > > holes
> > > > > > for the s6 sockets, hot-glue the two cgs boards to the
> plate
> > > (the
> > > > > > transformer's "casing" allow this quite smoothly), wire

the

> > > > > sockets,
> > > > > > done.
> > > > > Yes, probably the most simple DIY project around. The most
> > > > > complicated part is to get in touch with Ken of CGS at

least

> > he
> > > has
> > > > > never replied to my mails. > :( Ingo
> > > > >
> > > > > > Am 15.11.2005 um 18:09 schrieb Zoran Bosnjak:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ingo,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > thank you so much for the example! I like the CGS ring
> > module
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > most. What
> > > > > > > a pity it is not offered assembled. I still have to

get

> > the
> > > > > soldering
> > > > > > > lesson
> > > > > > > #1 before trying to figure it out myself... (Does

anybody

> > > offer
> > > > > basic
> > > > > > > electronics course in Montreal )
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Zoran
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> From: "selfoscillate" <synaptic_music@y...>
> > > > > > >> Reply-To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > > >> To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > > >> Subject: 1 Re: comparing ring modulators
> > > > > > >> Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 10:38:39 -0000
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com , "ilanode"
> > > > <techmeier@w...>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com , "selfoscillate"
> > > > > > >>> <synaptic_music@y...> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> hello antonio,
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> the missing lows in #5 are probably because the
> > > > > > >>>> cgs real ring is a passive device, the output
> > > > > > >>>> loudness is weak on this module.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Just want to add that the RRM is known to load the

VCOs

> > and
> > > > > thus
> > > > > > >>> affecting their performance. The results would be
> > different
> > > > if
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >>> inputs of the RRM were buffered. One could add an Op
> Amp
> > to
> > > > > each
> > > > > > >>> input or (if I'm not mistaken) 2 Analogue Solutions'
> > MX224
> > > > > > >>> Mixer/Buffer Modules. Obviously the latter is not

very

> > > > > economical.
> > > > > > >>> Regards, Ingo
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> i usually use those mx224 buffers in front of the cgs
> > real
> > > > ring,
> > > > > > >> but i didn't in my example, because i wanted to show

the

> > > > > > >> significant differences of the loudness.
> > > > > > >> anyway, if you use those buffers, the output level of
> > > > > > >> the cgs real ring is still much lower than on the

other

> > > > > > >> ring modulators.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> best wishes
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> ingo
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>