Shruthi-1 potentiometer
  • hi all , finally my Shruthi-1 work and it's so great!! sound so crazy :)

    but i have a little regret: the potentiometer, i explaine:
    [
    for exanple: i press S1 and use P1 for modify chape of osc1. i chose the laste chape, so potentiometer is at the right.

    after i whant change cutt of so i press S2 , my cutt of is 23 and i whant to increase it progressively.

    BUT my P1 is at 127 so i can't increase it progressively i need to go quick at the left and efter go to the right progressively.
    ]

    i use Shruthi-1 in live so that problematique.

    Why don't change all potentiometer by Potentiometer infinite rotation and when you turn it at left decreast value and turn to the right incrast value.

    you understand?
    It's possible ? what you thinck about that?
  • Go to system settings and turn snap on!

    “sna (snap): Enables potentiometers’ “snap” mode. This mode makes it less likely to accidentally change a parameter value when switching pages. Suppose you’re tweaking the filter resonance with P2 — you rotate it all the way down to 0. Then you switch to the oscillator 1 page to adjust the oscillator 2 parameter. If the current value of the parameter is set to 64, you’ll hear a discontinuity, since the value of the parameter will instantly jump to 0 or 1 when you start touching the pot. When snap is on, things will happen differently: rotating the pot will have no effect until the position of the pot actually reflects the current value of the parameter. After that, the parameter value will track the potentiometer’s position. Another way to explain it: when snap is on you have to move the pot to “grab” the current parameter value before the parameter is modified.”

  • yes i know thx ) but i realy thinck Potentiometer infinite rotation was more simple and better in use
  • “infinite potentiometers” (actually, encoders) would imply a change in hardware, and would procure a less “touchy” experience. With only a swing from your fingers, you can go for instance from none to full resonance in an instant, which is impossible to get with encoders, that would require several turns to get from the minimum to maximum position. Also, encoders require the musician to look more at the screen, which is not a good option.
    So all in one, with the “snap” function, potentiometers are better for this spot.

  • on my jomox 888 i have this knobs : http://fr.audiofanzine.com/outils/a.provider,m.183907,mod.media,th.normal,s.pictures.JPG
    it's infinty knob and if you turn it quick you " can go from none to full resonance" cose no guts

    last week they are sell in jomox but not naw :( if i find it i give a reference).


    [EDIT]----> http://www.jomox.de/shop/product-details/xbase999-888-encoder-en1l47.html
    but no reference anywon know it? and have expereince wise same Encoder
  • There's various encoders, some have differing resolution. With my MB-6582 they work great, especially with the detent removed so they smoothly turn.
  • There’s no such thing as a potentiometer with infinite rotation.

    Maybe you’re talking about encoders. Some things that are “broken” with encoders:

    • Requires more CPU power since you need to poll them constantly to detect a change ; and do some processing in software to decode them. Not doable on a small machine like the Shruthi where every CPU cycle counts. Hence the “buggy encoder missing increments” common to many, many machines…
    • Expensive. The cheap encoders have 12 or 24 clicks, which would mean you would need 6 turns to go from no cutoff to max cutoff. Nobody wants that. The encoders with 100 steps are much more expensive and/or need to be made on demand to get into a reasonable price range. Many people are building Shruthi-1s from bare boards, so such a custom part is not an option.
    • Bad feeling.

    There’s a reason why some companies like DSI switched from encoders to pots :)

  • first of all, i like the pots (and the whole controll interface) of the shruthi and dont think they should be changed.

    i still have thoughts about encoders: some devices have some sort of acceleration function which increases the steps the parameter is changed, when turning faster. i think this is a nice feature. (which is in software i guess and uses even more cpu)

    i don`t think it requires expensive encoders (because this is a feature of cheap behringer controllers)

    i think this is great for parameters with much more than 128 steps, because with parameters like this it is sometimes hard to get to the right value with a pot. with the accelerated encoder thing you can move through the whole resolution with a (fast) finger swing and still precicely select values (when moving slowly)
    this is much more intuitive than having to hold a button or keep the encoder pressed to increase steps.

    maybe if future products (which might have a faster cpu) have parameters like that, you might consider using this kind of control, pichenettes.

  • For my money, keep the pots. 9 times out of 10 the encoders are more trouble than they’re worth…

  • I’ve just bought a Microwave XT. All the knobs on this machine are encoders (including the main volume knob, which seems odd). I’ve not had a chance to play with it much yet, but I’ll get back to you on how they feel in operation. One thing I have noticed with the Microwave- the knobs are too close together. I don’t have especially fat fingers, but even I find it fiddly to operate them. The Shruthi-1 controls are fine, though.

    a|x

  • @6581punk
    nice engine i whant one !



    @ pichenettes
    i understand not possible cose cpu of Shruthi-1, dificulte to implement and not cheap.
    my dream collapses :p

    DSI switched from encoders to pots? realy, cose they have many encoder on they last product like tempest.
  • i have never read that interesting
  • The solution is motorised pots that move to the current value :)

    DSI is providing both versions so people can choose.

    Both go bad, pots start to crackle and encoders get dirty and jump around. Much of the problems tends to be on gigging instruments that have a hard life. Heat, smoke, dirt and dust.

    But it has to be one or the other on a niche product I guess. People can always build their own programmer using whatever they like?
  • I think one of the best solutions is the lit encoders used by Moog in their Little Phatty/Slim Phatty synths. I love having an indicator that I can see right on the knob instead of having to squint at the LCD for the value. And the way their encoders feel and work is really quite nice IMO. A lot of people find them too plastic feeling, but they feel fine to me.

    They’re huge though and I wonder how much they cost? A Shruthi-1 would look pretty tricked-out with lit Phatty-style encoders…

  • My philosophy for avoiding disappointment is this. Buy a product that does what you want how you want it to :)

    If you can't change it (because it is proprietary) or won't change it (because you are lazy or not able to) then probably best looking elsewhere.

    I really wonder what people did years ago when there were no knobs, probably write music instead of twiddling :)

    ps. Novation use similar encoders with status displays.
  • Another pot question: Optional output pot is 10k. Can I use a 22k pot instead?
  • I'm guessing 10k is enough to make the sound inaudible (aka infinity on a mixer), so a 22k must take the sound beyond infinity :)
  • To the infinity and beyond! Ok, but I am not at my best in this area. I'll get me coat...

    Sthruthi-1 works well though, I'm in the middle of making the controller. SnowWhite will get wooden cheeks, too:)

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion