The long DIVA thread

[Gonga]

I regret having sold my Oberheim FVS back when. Besides the historic, epic sounds, the keyboard to SEM assignment was really cool. You could choose between having the SEMs trigger in a linear, successive sequence, or, where the first note pressed would go to a particular SEM, 2nd to another particular SEM, etc., or the 1st note to a particular SEM and the rest in successive sequence. The musicality of this was spectacular. Even the unintended differences between oscillators were wonderful, but when you set them up to be different purposefully it was even better. Jan Hammer took it one step further such that the first note pressed could be pitch bent, but subsequent notes could not, so he could get that Hendrix / Ponty "open string" sound and others. It simply has to be experienced to be fully appreciated.

Arturia's minimoogV in polyphonic mode can get a great polyphonic sync sweep like a memorymoog, but the stepping is even more pronounced than the CPU hit is.

[carrieres]

about the rolandish sound, what about a sh-1 filter ?

[Urs]

about the rolandish sound, what about a sh-1 filter ?

We'll have to see. We have a SH-09 as a reference which I prefer above most other Rolands with a similar sound. That, the Juno 60 and the System 100 might be the ones we go for. (we'll try to do the 100m in the context of Berlin Modular)

However, for the sake a variety over mass, we might end up with only two distinct Rolands to begin with. Maybe one that does the OTA thing and one for transistor/diode ladder. Those custom chips on the polyphonic models are unfortunately hard to analyse.

Mind you, many of the audible differences come from other parts such as mixers and overall gain. Thus I think that it's often merely the combination of things that make a character than the actual capacitance or resistance of a certain part. I'd rather have a handful of clearly distinguishable modules for each section than a bag of all nearly the same.

[Howard]

...I think that it's often merely the combination of things that make a character than the actual capacitance or resistance of a certain part. I'd rather have a handful of clearly distinguishable modules for each section than a bag of all nearly the same.

I couldn't agree more - with both opinions.

[carrieres]

exactly what i am thinking : the OTA filter, you must do it for the sake of keeping alive a part of synthetiser history !
imagine our world in 30 years, how many synths from the 1976-1977 will be still alive !
your work will deserve you a medal
ps : the sh09 does not have the OTA filter, does it ?

[Urs]

The SH-09 has a filter similar to SH-1, with 4 OTAs and FET transistors. We have to open it to see if it's the 3080ies as supposedly used in the SH-1 (need to check with the schematics buried somehwere in the drawer...)

If it is 3080ies then all is well because we have a bucketload of these. If it's not 3080ies, the we can at least measure things on the device.

It's more problematic to analyse the Jupiters and Junos with their custom ICs.

[Synthbuilder]

The SH-09 has a filter similar to SH-1, with 4 OTAs and FET transistors. We have to open it to see if it's the 3080ies as supposedly used in the SH-1

The SH-09 has four cascaded BA662 OTAs and not 3080s. Same gain structure around each stage though. The big difference, since I think the OTA part of the BA662 is very similar to a 3080, is that the SH-09 uses the BA662's additional internal buffers to buffer the output signal of the external FET. A buffer of a buffer if you like.

Now whether it makes a real difference in sound I couldn't say but I always rather liked the SH-1 filter.

Interestingly the early JP-4 has cascaded BA-662s while later ones used the IR3109 filter chip. I can't say the sonic difference between them was obvious but I have never had both around at the same time to tell for sure.

Tony

[carrieres]

this is what said olivier trambouze who sold me the sh1, he said the sh1 got his preference because it has the RCA CA3080 (metal can) from System 700 instead of the BA662
if you need some samples from the sh1, i will be very happy to send you whatever you need
btw, anyone know what kind of filters is inside the yamaha cs30 ?

[Synthbuilder]

anyone know what kind of filters is inside the yamaha cs30 ?

Yamaha's own VCF chip IG00156 which was used widely in the CS and SK range of keyboards. It's a state variable filter - two stages with VC controlled resonance. Quite a distinctive sound I think and different enough from other SVF designs.

Tony

[eXode]

O/T: How I'd love that filter in a Eurorack module...

anyone know what kind of filters is inside the yamaha cs30 ?

Yamaha's own VCF chip IG00156 which was used widely in the CS and SK range of keyboards. It's a state variable filter - two stages with VC controlled resonance. Quite a distinctive sound I think and different enough from other SVF designs.

Tony

[Urs]

I'd actually love a CS-30. An 80 or a 70 would just paralyse me. A 30 would be fun to treat.

[Urs]

A CS-80 is just like an Arp 2600. If I had an Arp 2600 I wouldn't dare to penetrate it with a patch cord.

[himalaya]

An 80 or a 70 would just paralyse me.

If you were to lift one up, yes.

[himalaya]

Mind you, to me the CS30 looks like a laboratory apparatus, however the CS40M, hmmm, lovely.

[Urs]

Yep, CS40m looks yummy too. CS30 has that nice sequencer though... unless you stumble upon a CS30L