Moog Music Forum

Yea that's a nice LFO 2 Module built into the Voyager XL's patch panel!

It is unfortunately very unlikely that either the MF-108M or 104M
will ever get an LFO Out as a standard feature or option.

Keep pushing for it in future products though. I'd love to have it in something.

I wish they would just release a multi-waveform tap tempo volt per octave lfo, two envelope generators, and a vca and squash the existing customer demand for it.

David Smyth wrote:I know by looking at the above discussion that this mod is unlikely, but if it somehow was implemented, I think it should be available for both the MF-108M Cluster Flux & MF-104M Analog Delay, as they both have a very similar design and the same desired 6-wave-shape LFO (Note: not 7).

Note:

To be very clear, the MF-104M, MF-108M, and LFO2 of the Voyager XL
ALL have 7 (not 6) LFO Shapes. As explained in their Owner's Manuals:

On the MF-104M, CC# 102 will call up the following 7 LFO Shapes:
0-15=Sine,
16-31=Triangle
32-47=Square,
48-63=Saw
64-79=Ramp,
80-95=S&H,
96-127=Smooth S&H

On the MF-108M, CC# 70 will call up the following 7 LFO Shapes:
0-15=Sine,
16-31=Triangle,
32-47=Square,
48-63=Saw,
64-79=Ramp,
80-95=Random Stepped,
96-127=Smoothed Random

On the Voyager XL, CC# 95 will call up the following 7 LFO Shapes:
0-15 = TRIANGLE
16-31 = SQUARE
32-47 = RAMP
48-63 = SAW
64-79 = S&H
80-95 = S&H SMOOTH
96-111 = SINE (MIDI only)
112-127 = FUTURE USE

EricK wrote:I wish they would just release a multi-waveform tap tempo volt per octave lfo, two envelope generators, and a vca and squash the existing customer demand for it.

Me too. Sometimes the Moog product process of creating the most awesome, out of the box, boundary expanding products forces years of waiting. I personally think in this case it wouldn't be hard, or expensive to create a simple customer satisfying tool - given the fact that it requires little engineering using existing product "sections" and a form factor already designed by forum members .

Keep this idea simple, start it small, and expand the product into MP-201's bigger PhD brother later. The baby brother has demand now, and would support growth of bigg bro.

_DemonDan_ wrote:

David Smyth wrote:I know by looking at the above discussion that this mod is unlikely, but if it somehow was implemented, I think it should be available for both the MF-108M Cluster Flux & MF-104M Analog Delay, as they both have a very similar design and the same desired 6-wave-shape LFO (Note: not 7).

Note:

To be very clear, the MF-104M, MF-108M, and LFO2 of the Voyager XL
ALL have 7 (not 6) LFO Shapes. As explained in their Owner's Manuals:

On the MF-104M, CC# 102 will call up the following 7 LFO Shapes:
0-15=Sine,
16-31=Triangle
32-47=Square,
48-63=Saw
64-79=Ramp,
80-95=S&H,
96-127=Smooth S&H

On the MF-108M, CC# 70 will call up the following 7 LFO Shapes:
0-15=Sine,
16-31=Triangle,
32-47=Square,
48-63=Saw,
64-79=Ramp,
80-95=Random Stepped,
96-127=Smoothed Random

On the Voyager XL, CC# 95 will call up the following 7 LFO Shapes:
0-15 = TRIANGLE
16-31 = SQUARE
32-47 = RAMP
48-63 = SAW
64-79 = S&H
80-95 = S&H SMOOTH
96-111 = SINE (MIDI only)
112-127 = FUTURE USE

Ahh! Touché!

As you can imagine I looked at the front panel knob only. Having received my MF-104M within the past week, I am yet to explore it's full capabilities, but thanks to you I am happy to know that there is an extra Smooth S&H!

Thanks for the insight!

David.
NZ

_DemonDan_ wrote: On the MF-104M,
80-95=S&H,
96-127=Smooth S&H

On the MF-108M,
80-95=Random Stepped,
96-127=Smoothed Random

On the Voyager XL,
64-79 = S&H
80-95 = S&H SMOOTH

Dan, what's the difference between Sample and Hold vs. Random Stepped? In my mind they are the same thing. Are there different implementations of S&H that are being called by different nomenclature?

Stephen




.

Vsyevolod wrote:

_DemonDan_ wrote: Dan, what's the difference between Sample and Hold vs. Random Stepped?
In my mind they are the same thing. Are there different implementations
of S&H that are being called by different nomenclature?

Hi Stephen,

I agree: They seem to be identical implementations of S&H.
I think it's just that the manuals were written at different times
(maybe even by different people).

deedussin wrote:I haven't touched my CP-251

wanna SELL it to me? ~ I have been imagining ways I might be able to use a second CP-251
~
i am really digging the ClusterFlux ~ enjoying the thread, if a little confused why you would need an OSC out with all the rest of them available on the other Moog modules

re:

metron wrote:EricK wrote:
I drew this up a few years ago and mailed it to Moog.

love this too Thanks EricK I guess it must be a little harder for the Moog crew to actually make the stuff behind the knobs actually WORK <shrug> then it is to draw it up?

misterpete wrote:I guess it must be a little harder for the Moog crew to actually make the stuff behind the knobs actually WORK <shrug> then it is to draw it up?

Thanks for the compliment, by the way!

Yeah I think it would be cost prohibitive also, at least that's what Amos indicated.

I'm surely not an Engineer, but I don't think it would be THAT difficult to engineer considering that it is based off of things that they have already built on the Voyager and Foogers.

There were several things demanded over the years in ancient threads on this forum.
Polysynth
More affordable synth
Chorus/Flange
Sequencer
Vocoder
Modules

We got a few of those...and stuff we didn't ask for like a guitar, a lap steel guitar, customized guitars, and another thing that goes on a guitar. Maybe we need to stop demanding they make stuff or they might make an acoustic guitar just to piss us off.

I think Kevin told me when I submitted that mock-up to him for his opinion that asking them to make something almost ensures they wont make it. Looks like theres some truth to that!

By the way, now I have all of the capabilities of the CP255 in my modular except for the Dual Trigger Delay and the Envelope follower, so if they built it I really would have a hard time justifying the purchase (but I probably would anyway).


Eric

It's been said before but even an updated version of the CP-251 would be handy.

A midi-sync'ed LFO with more waveforms (ramp & reverse ramp), cycle reset and clock divider would be a huge step in the right direction. I can't count the # of times that people new to the forum as that question.

Considering the cost of parts & labor, improvements in manufacturing costs, etc. they could likely do it at the same cost but I'm just guessing. Folks are pushing out innovative ATMega based DIY solutions for just a few bucks per unit these days so whatever it costs them to adapt something could be recovered in having the board updated to surface mount.

I would love to have just this Erick!
This is the missing link for me.
If moog doesn't do it in a short time (one year), I will go modular.
I really NEEEEEEEEEEED this kind of CP!!!!!!
And than a multimode filter!

Can someone from Moog please explain why an LFO out isn't possible? I will do the work myself--I'm not trying to make extra work for anyone. I'd assume it's because there isn't room for a output buffer--is that correct? I would be happy to drill a jack and then connect my own opamp buffer if that is the case. The design is modular, so I really can't conceive of why an LFO out wouldn't be possible. It's all just control voltages.

If someone can bring some clarity to this subject, it would be enormously satisfying to customers of yours who would like to know. Thanks a ton!

The LFO display LED can be used as one half of a vactrol.

willi wrote:The LFO display LED can be used as one half of a vactrol.

Brilliant!! Thanks for that
Have you tried it yourself?