## State-variable filter with parallel HP,BP & LP outputs

Device/Module Wishlist

Original topic on PlanetZ: https://forums.scopeusers.com/viewtopic.php?t=19203

####

Posted: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:54 am
by Shroomz~>
As far as I know we don't have any modular modules with the spec of a true state-variable modular filter. It would be great if someone could build one with simultaneous HP,BP & LP outputs & maybe even a pole sweep.

####

Posted: Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:02 am
by at0m
There's one for now, MultiMode Filter B.

####

Posted: Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:15 am
by Shroomz~>
oops, forgot about that one
No pole sweep right enough. A filter like the Oscar's would rule middle earth. 2 2-pole state-variables in series with a pole sweep between them. What a sound

####

Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 9:39 am
by HUROLURA
I think you can achieve an Oscar like filter by cascading two Multimode filter B units.
Each of them feature two modulation input:
- one can be EG modulated
- one can be LFO modulated
Then using one "DC adder module" you could adjust a cutoff difference between both units.
You should them get something like what you can get with the OSCAR...
If anybody as an OSCAR frontpanel picture, I think I could go further and maybe try to build an OSCAR like patch...

####

Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:04 am
by Shroomz~>
Patch or device?

####

Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:01 am
by HUROLURA
Modular patch idea.
Do not have enough money to buy myself a scope pro and start up designing such a device with SDK.

####

Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:27 am
by astroman

> On 2006-06-12 10:39, FRA59-HELP wrote:
> ...Then using one "DC adder module" you could adjust a cutoff difference between both units.
> You should them get something like what you can get with the OSCAR...

honestly, I've done that years ago with even more filters (and parameter control)...
never cared if there's a thing called Oscar that might sound similiar
maybe a little more self confidence (some inspiration from the 'classics' is perfectly ok) and extend the well-known.
cheers, Tom

####

Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 3:13 am
by HUROLURA
You are completely right Astroman but I just thinking about a device rather than a modular patch...

####

Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 9:20 am
by Shroomz~>
If you think you can build an oscar patch, just build it & sod anyone who's negative about it.
It's quite a complex hybrid synth & definately one of the all time classics in terms of uniqueness of sound. The more unusual features like the filter, adative synthesis, duophony, sequencer etc, won't be very easy to get right, but if you get a decent Oscar patch together someone might well be willing to take it further & make a standalone device.
It's all good & on a platform with so many classic synth emulations I don't see any negative aspect in someone (or anyone for that matter) creating some missing classic emulations, as most classic synths sound different & have different features to one another.
Some will say 'we've got enough synths already', some will say 'why not do something different instead of another synth emulation'. They're talking out of their rear ends imo, as a set of classic synth emulations ain't complete till it's complete.

####

Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 2:05 am
by astroman
you miss the point, Shroomz - I wasn't negative at all.
It was just a hint to not limit oneself in mimicking while it's possible to extend (and most likely improve) the original idea.
In the analog world you cannot build filter groups of (say) a dozen units per voice economically and you cannot control (some) filter parameters by certain other parts of the synth because it's technically impossible.
In Scope, either Modular/Flexor or SDK, that is possible easily.
The difference between the 2 approches is the detailed level of control and screen estate (convenience), but it's not fundamental regarding the sound engine - I'm not biased against a device built with SDK.
cheers, tom

####

Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 6:11 am
by Shroomz~>
Okay dokay.
Everyone's entitled to their own point of view.

####

Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 11:36 am
by hubird
wasn't exactly that what was said to be not the point?

####

Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 12:12 pm
by Shroomz~>
I'm affraid I don't follow your train of thought or understand your input.

####

Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 12:56 pm
by hubird
I meant, there were no two point of views (about the same subject).
Never mind, sent you a pm

####

Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 1:45 pm
by Shroomz~>
The international language barrier seems to cause the confusion.

####

Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:43 am
by Shroomz~>
Nah, that would be devilish.

####

Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:45 pm
by j9k
my sv 808 is a state variable oscillator. which is close to the filter. i'll have to play with it some more.
j9k