Would you prefer one PCB with 3 VCOs a la JH-5A, or 1 VCO per PCB with more features |
One PCB with Oscillator Driver and 3 VCO cores (like JH-5A - cheap!) |
|
60% |
[ 62 ] |
1 PCB = 1 VCO (with many waveforms and inputs) |
|
39% |
[ 41 ] |
|
Total Votes : 103 |
|
Author |
Message |
janvanvolt
Joined: Nov 24, 2005 Posts: 285 Location: Mainz, Germany
|
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 6:55 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Hi all,
i finally figured out what the problem was with my LVCO ...
Nwo some questions with regards to the cabling. I am using the Bill&Will Version (7U with Waveshaper).
a)
What i couldn't get to work correctly is the Octave Switch (4'/8'/16') as only one part of it is working. I am using a DPDT on-on-on switch. Alternatively i got a MTS-2 Switch (also DPDT e.g. 6 pins). What is the correct wiring for this ?
b)
The Linear VCO detuning does not seem to have any effect on the VCOs
c)
What is the correct wiring for the VCO1 PW/PWM Switches ?
d)
1V/Oct Front-Adjust: How to wire this as well ?
Thanks for any help in getting this issues fixed ( and ready for the upcoming Happy Knobbing this weekend) _________________ Homepage - http://www.czmok.de
My dIY - http://diy.czmok.de
Film/Music - http://gfm.me |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
numbertalk
Joined: May 05, 2008 Posts: 992 Location: Austin, TX
Audio files: 5
|
Posted: Sun May 23, 2010 8:36 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Hi Jürgen,
I have found something with my Living VCOs. I have all 3 VCOs' V/Oct scaling calibrated very well. I did them all individually - I turned tracking from the driver off for each and used each VCO's individual V/Oct input with my Midi-to-CV converter unit. But then when I then check the scaling from the driver's V/Oct input and set each VCO to track the driver, each one is very off. I have the driver's vibrato depth all the way down,the driver's tune is close to center - when switching tracking on I tweak it a little to tune from the low note on my keyboard (it's close - don't have to move tune very far from centered) but then when I play the highest note on my keyboard, they are all 3 very sharp.
Have I done or am I doing something wrong? |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
jhaible
Joined: May 25, 2007 Posts: 2014 Location: Germany
Audio files: 24
|
Posted: Sun May 23, 2010 9:03 am Post subject:
|
|
|
If you're using some of the individual CV inputs for precise V/Oct control, you need to match the 100k resistors to 0.1%
JH. _________________ "I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours." (Mk 11,23f) |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
numbertalk
Joined: May 05, 2008 Posts: 992 Location: Austin, TX
Audio files: 5
|
Posted: Sun May 23, 2010 9:38 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Ah, I thought I might have done this, but guess I didn't.
So it sounds like I should just calibrate using the driver's V/Oct input, then, right? In that case should I use the driver's tune knob on the panel or the frequency vernier for each individual VCO when going back & forth with the trimmers to calibrate, or does it not matter?
Also, just to confirm, it sounds like the individual CV inputs are better strictly for FM/vibrato and not as keyboard-tracking inputs? Good to know.
Thanks!
jhaible wrote: | If you're using some of the individual CV inputs for precise V/Oct control, you need to match the 100k resistors to 0.1%
JH. |
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
jhaible
Joined: May 25, 2007 Posts: 2014 Location: Germany
Audio files: 24
|
Posted: Sun May 23, 2010 10:57 am Post subject:
|
|
|
numbertalk wrote: | Ah, I thought I might have done this, but guess I didn't.
So it sounds like I should just calibrate using the driver's V/Oct input, then, right? In that case should I use the driver's tune knob on the panel or the frequency vernier for each individual VCO when going back & forth with the trimmers to calibrate, or does it not matter?
Also, just to confirm, it sounds like the individual CV inputs are better strictly for FM/vibrato and not as keyboard-tracking inputs? Good to know.
Thanks!
jhaible wrote: | If you're using some of the individual CV inputs for precise V/Oct control, you need to match the 100k resistors to 0.1%
JH. |
|
Well, you can use the individual CV inputs for precise tracking also, but then the whole chain with all its branches must use 0.1% matching.
If you only use the drive CV inputs for precise V/Oct playing, you only have to match R145 and R146 to get the same sensitivity on both inputs.
But if you want everything to be preccision inputs, then you have to match R1, R2, R3 on VCO1 (and same thing on other two VCOs), *and* you must make sure that the path from driver input to driver output also has precise unity gain, i.e. match R144, R145, R146 and R137, R141
JH. _________________ "I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours." (Mk 11,23f) |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
numbertalk
Joined: May 05, 2008 Posts: 992 Location: Austin, TX
Audio files: 5
|
Posted: Sun May 23, 2010 11:01 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Thanks!
jhaible wrote: | numbertalk wrote: | Ah, I thought I might have done this, but guess I didn't.
So it sounds like I should just calibrate using the driver's V/Oct input, then, right? In that case should I use the driver's tune knob on the panel or the frequency vernier for each individual VCO when going back & forth with the trimmers to calibrate, or does it not matter?
Also, just to confirm, it sounds like the individual CV inputs are better strictly for FM/vibrato and not as keyboard-tracking inputs? Good to know.
Thanks!
jhaible wrote: | If you're using some of the individual CV inputs for precise V/Oct control, you need to match the 100k resistors to 0.1%
JH. |
|
Well, you can use the individual CV inputs for precise tracking also, but then the whole chain with all its branches must use 0.1% matching.
If you only use the drive CV inputs for precise V/Oct playing, you only have to match R145 and R146 to get the same sensitivity on both inputs.
But if you want everything to be preccision inputs, then you have to match R1, R2, R3 on VCO1 (and same thing on other two VCOs), *and* you must make sure that the path from driver input to driver output also has precise unity gain, i.e. match R144, R145, R146 and R137, R141
JH. |
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
numbertalk
Joined: May 05, 2008 Posts: 992 Location: Austin, TX
Audio files: 5
|
Posted: Mon May 24, 2010 6:04 am Post subject:
|
|
|
I went back and checked and I did use actual .1% precision resistors, 50ppm as well, for all of these *except* R137, R141 and R144.
Also the interesting thing is, to be clear, I am able to get each of the individual V/Oct inputs to scale great over a wide range. I am also able to get the 3 VCOs to scale to the driver's global V/Oct input over that same range. The problem is that these do not match up - if I calibrate to one then the VCOs do not scale properly to the other. Does this make sense? Could this simply be because of these 3 resistors, if all of those others are .1% resistors?
Right now I have it scaled to the driver but it would be nice and give me some flexibility to also be able to use the individual inputs as well.
Thanks again.
jhaible wrote: | numbertalk wrote: | Ah, I thought I might have done this, but guess I didn't.
So it sounds like I should just calibrate using the driver's V/Oct input, then, right? In that case should I use the driver's tune knob on the panel or the frequency vernier for each individual VCO when going back & forth with the trimmers to calibrate, or does it not matter?
Also, just to confirm, it sounds like the individual CV inputs are better strictly for FM/vibrato and not as keyboard-tracking inputs? Good to know.
Thanks!
jhaible wrote: | If you're using some of the individual CV inputs for precise V/Oct control, you need to match the 100k resistors to 0.1%
JH. |
|
Well, you can use the individual CV inputs for precise tracking also, but then the whole chain with all its branches must use 0.1% matching.
If you only use the drive CV inputs for precise V/Oct playing, you only have to match R145 and R146 to get the same sensitivity on both inputs.
But if you want everything to be preccision inputs, then you have to match R1, R2, R3 on VCO1 (and same thing on other two VCOs), *and* you must make sure that the path from driver input to driver output also has precise unity gain, i.e. match R144, R145, R146 and R137, R141
JH. |
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
jhaible
Joined: May 25, 2007 Posts: 2014 Location: Germany
Audio files: 24
|
Posted: Mon May 24, 2010 10:02 am Post subject:
|
|
|
numbertalk wrote: | I went back and checked and I did use actual .1% precision resistors, 50ppm as well, for all of these *except* R137, R141 and R144.
Also the interesting thing is, to be clear, I am able to get each of the individual V/Oct inputs to scale great over a wide range. I am also able to get the 3 VCOs to scale to the driver's global V/Oct input over that same range. The problem is that these do not match up - if I calibrate to one then the VCOs do not scale properly to the other. Does this make sense? Could this simply be because of these 3 resistors, if all of those others are .1% resistors?
Right now I have it scaled to the driver but it would be nice and give me some flexibility to also be able to use the individual inputs as well.
Thanks again.
|
Yes, R137/R141 sets the gain of U11B. If this is not exactly -1, the result is exactly what you describe.
Same for R144/R145 and R144/R146.
JH. _________________ "I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours." (Mk 11,23f) |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
numbertalk
Joined: May 05, 2008 Posts: 992 Location: Austin, TX
Audio files: 5
|
Posted: Mon May 24, 2010 10:18 am Post subject:
|
|
|
jhaible wrote: |
Yes, R137/R141 sets the gain of U11B. If this is not exactly -1, the result is exactly what you describe.
Same for R144/R145 and R144/R146.
JH. |
Ah, good to know. At least it's only a handful of resistors to swap out.
Thanks again. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
frenchyinmunich
Joined: Jun 23, 2009 Posts: 113 Location: Germany
|
Posted: Thu May 27, 2010 2:31 pm Post subject:
Which waveshhaper for the living VCO |
|
|
Hello,
I built few living vco and I find them very stable.
It reminds me the ARP2500 VCOs.
Is there someone here who did a waveshaper for it?
f |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
loydb
Joined: Feb 04, 2010 Posts: 393 Location: Providence, RI
|
Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 4:50 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Is there an FPD file for a layout like JH has on his web page? I like the asymmetric layout a lot. I've got two of these puppies I need to start building...
Thanks! |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Mr.TorsionTorque
Joined: Jun 05, 2010 Posts: 14 Location: Minsk, Belarus
|
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:43 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Hi there... I'm considering ordering the VCOs but I've got one question.
Is hard syncing of OSC's is possible in a way of mod or something?
Thanks in advance for the answer and sorry for my English. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Noiseconformist
Joined: Aug 05, 2008 Posts: 27 Location: Vienna
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
jhaible
Joined: May 25, 2007 Posts: 2014 Location: Germany
Audio files: 24
|
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 12:11 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Mr.TorsionTorque wrote: | Hi there... I'm considering ordering the VCOs but I've got one question.
Is hard syncing of OSC's is possible in a way of mod or something?
Thanks in advance for the answer and sorry for my English. |
I haven't tried this myself, but it cannot be that difficult.
Simply build a second discharge path for C3 (referring to http://www.jhaible.de/living_vcos/living_vcos_sch_1of4.pdf), by connecting a 2nd transitor in parallel to Q3, together with a pulse shaping circuit at the base of this transistor. I will not draw this out for you in detail, but that's the idea how it could be done.
JH. _________________ "I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours." (Mk 11,23f) |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Mr.TorsionTorque
Joined: Jun 05, 2010 Posts: 14 Location: Minsk, Belarus
|
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 12:26 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
THX for the rapid answer, thats a good idea to think about... |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
LetterBeacon
Joined: Mar 18, 2008 Posts: 454 Location: London, UK
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
jhaible
Joined: May 25, 2007 Posts: 2014 Location: Germany
Audio files: 24
|
Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 10:00 am Post subject:
|
|
|
It's a matter of taste. Whatever user interface pleases you more - go for it. It's DIY, and just one extra resistor if you go for two pots.
I don't think a multiturn is that expensive, though. It needs less panel space, less milling for front panel graphics, only a single knob - allthough you can spend a fortune on stylish looking vernier knobs. Or get them cheap on ebay.
The most expensive solution would be a rotary switch for precise octave switching and a fine tuning pot.
JH. _________________ "I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours." (Mk 11,23f) |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
LetterBeacon
Joined: Mar 18, 2008 Posts: 454 Location: London, UK
|
Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 11:53 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Thanks for the reply!
I'd like to go for the 10-turn pot for all the reasons you mentioned, I just want to know what the advantages are (apart from using 1 pot instead of 2).
So is a 10-turn pot a pot that goes round 10 times? Does it mean you can be more precise with it, so you don't need a fine tune? |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
jhaible
Joined: May 25, 2007 Posts: 2014 Location: Germany
Audio files: 24
|
Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 1:35 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
LetterBeacon wrote: | Thanks for the reply!
I'd like to go for the 10-turn pot for all the reasons you mentioned, I just want to know what the advantages are (apart from using 1 pot instead of 2).
So is a 10-turn pot a pot that goes round 10 times? Does it mean you can be more precise with it, so you don't need a fine tune? |
Yes and yes.
(As opposed to the method used in the VCS3: There, an ordinary pot is used, in combination with a knob with some gear inside.)
JH. _________________ "I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours." (Mk 11,23f) |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
zarko
Joined: Mar 25, 2010 Posts: 22 Location: France
|
Posted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 1:47 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Hello All.
Hi Jürgen.
I just finished the wiring of the Living VCO's,and they are fonctional as entended,and sound verry fat
but i have a problem with the tracking v/oct on two vco's, just one is ok and take me less than five minutes to set up,but for the two other imposible to scale correctly.
i go to try explaying in my aproximative english.
Wiring is ok ,i test all the components in ohmmeter mode and i compare all the values with the functional one, and all its ok.
For the tracking i do this:
i connect a cv source directely on the VCO V/oct.
first i ajust the freq trimpot to have 16,20hz for the zero position.
after i aply a CV of 0V and turn the potentiometer knob to obtain 55hz on my freq counter after this i aply 1V and i read 102hz,i ajust the scaling to obtain 110hz. I turn back in 0V CV and i read 57hz, i readjust the freq pot to have 55hz again, after i aply 1V CV again and i read 102hz and this indefinitively until the timpot is in the maximum
range.each time i reajust the freq knob because the freq goes up, the tracking freq goes down.
Here is my problem,i suspect the CA3046 maybe a problem with the unmatched pair?
Lets me know if one of you having the same problem.
Thank you, Regards
Fred |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
jhaible
Joined: May 25, 2007 Posts: 2014 Location: Germany
Audio files: 24
|
Posted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:13 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
zarko wrote: | Hello All.
Hi Jürgen.
I just finished the wiring of the Living VCO's,and they are fonctional as entended,and sound verry fat
but i have a problem with the tracking v/oct on two vco's, just one is ok and take me less than five minutes to set up,but for the two other imposible to scale correctly.
i go to try explaying in my aproximative english.
Wiring is ok ,i test all the components in ohmmeter mode and i compare all the values with the functional one, and all its ok.
For the tracking i do this:
i connect a cv source directely on the VCO V/oct.
first i ajust the freq trimpot to have 16,20hz for the zero position.
after i aply a CV of 0V and turn the potentiometer knob to obtain 55hz on my freq counter after this i aply 1V and i read 102hz,i ajust the scaling to obtain 110hz. I turn back in 0V CV and i read 57hz, i readjust the freq pot to have 55hz again, after i aply 1V CV again and i read 102hz and this indefinitively until the timpot is in the maximum
range.each time i reajust the freq knob because the freq goes up, the tracking freq goes down.
Here is my problem,i suspect the CA3046 maybe a problem with the unmatched pair?
Lets me know if one of you having the same problem.
Thank you, Regards
Fred |
Could it be that you're turning the Scaling pot into the wrong direction?
If your frequency ratio for a 1V CV step is too small, you must turn the scale pot in a direction to increase the ratio, not the absolute frequency. It's a bit counter-intuitive the way that scaling and tuning go into different directions, but once you know it, it's not so difficult to tune at all.
JH. _________________ "I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours." (Mk 11,23f) |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
zarko
Joined: Mar 25, 2010 Posts: 22 Location: France
|
Posted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:48 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Thank or the reply,i try this tomorrow |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
zarko
Joined: Mar 25, 2010 Posts: 22 Location: France
|
Posted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 5:59 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Hi Jürgen
All works fine now for the second time i make a neewbe error, in fact its the same procedure to tune the Yusynth CVO, i don't know why i thinking that it was a different way, here was my error
Thanks. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
The Bad Producer
Joined: Mar 08, 2009 Posts: 282 Location: The Manhole
|
Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Hello all,
Just wanted to say, having just now finally finished my fourth Living VCO, how great they are!
I added the Saw - Tri - Sine waveshaper circuits from Electronic Peasants diagram on page 12 and they really add so much versatility to an already great design! Linear detune on Sine waves is something else!
Having these has and will open up so many musical possibilities to me...
So thank you Juergen for the amazing VCO, and thank you also to Electronic Peasant, Ray Wilson and Ian Fritz!
_________________ http://loudestwarning.tumblr.com/ |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
LetterBeacon
Joined: Mar 18, 2008 Posts: 454 Location: London, UK
|
Posted: Sat Sep 04, 2010 4:43 am Post subject:
|
|
|
That looks fantastic!
Do you have a stripboard layout for the waveshapers? |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|