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
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>