Hello everyone. I am a computer programmer and hardware designer. I've been toying with the idea of creating a modern Pitch Computer. Something like the Zuma. I'm also a new owner of a VMS70.
I would appreciate some input on the topic. If anyone has a minute to answer a few Q's I'd appreciate it.
------------------------------------------
Would anyone be interested in purchasing a modern Pitch Computer if it packed tighter grooves than a Zuma or Vinylium Ultrapitch?
What do you dislike about your current pitching system?
What do you especially like about your current pitching system?
What features would you like to see in a new ptich computer?
How much would you all be willing to pay for a new ptich computer?
What kind of design would you like to see? Rack Mount? Small box that could fit inside the VMS lathe body?
Do you have any other input to give? Please let me know.
Thanks Everybody!
New Pitch Computer
Moderators: piaptk, tragwag, Steve E., Aussie0zborn
well pitch98 goes to the max possible. if you want to pack tighter you start modulating the grooves... physical limit....
i guess pitch98 its industrial standard now.
12 years of experience. many software updates.
the thing still got some development.
jvo just made recently new controller for it with very accurate rest time computing....and many more features.. if i cut on the vms70 i use it all the time. and i am close to convert my vms82...
doesnt make sense to make a new one. lot of development time. what would you save?
the only point is to do it by interest to understand how it works...
and i think professional cutting houses would not change....
and it is not that expensive...
i guess pitch98 its industrial standard now.
12 years of experience. many software updates.
the thing still got some development.
jvo just made recently new controller for it with very accurate rest time computing....and many more features.. if i cut on the vms70 i use it all the time. and i am close to convert my vms82...
doesnt make sense to make a new one. lot of development time. what would you save?
the only point is to do it by interest to understand how it works...
and i think professional cutting houses would not change....
and it is not that expensive...
Would anyone be interested in purchasing a modern Pitch Computer if it packed tighter grooves than a Zuma or Vinylium Ultrapitch?
yes why not ....
What do you dislike about your current pitching system?
I use the original VMS 70 pitch "computer" it leafs too much land , and its in real time
What do you especially like about your current pitching system?
it works and with some tricks does a very nice job, and I can leave the beautiful machine like it is
What features would you like to see in a new ptich computer?
It would be perfect to have the possibility to calculate the pitch in advance. like a simulation of the real cut. this feature would be perfect if it works not in real time but lets say 4 or 6 time faster.
How much would you all be willing to pay for a new ptich computer?
lets say between 1000 € and 2000 €
What kind of design would you like to see? Rack Mount? Small box that could fit inside the VMS lathe body?
I would like to see a software solution like a VST plug which easly can be insertet in every DAW. The plug can adjust the max volume and you can easly calculate which EQ setup is perfect and so on in advance. A small controller box inside the VMS gives the CV out to the motor. So the Lathe can be easly be moded without destroying too much.
yes why not ....
What do you dislike about your current pitching system?
I use the original VMS 70 pitch "computer" it leafs too much land , and its in real time
What do you especially like about your current pitching system?
it works and with some tricks does a very nice job, and I can leave the beautiful machine like it is
What features would you like to see in a new ptich computer?
It would be perfect to have the possibility to calculate the pitch in advance. like a simulation of the real cut. this feature would be perfect if it works not in real time but lets say 4 or 6 time faster.
How much would you all be willing to pay for a new ptich computer?
lets say between 1000 € and 2000 €
What kind of design would you like to see? Rack Mount? Small box that could fit inside the VMS lathe body?
I would like to see a software solution like a VST plug which easly can be insertet in every DAW. The plug can adjust the max volume and you can easly calculate which EQ setup is perfect and so on in advance. A small controller box inside the VMS gives the CV out to the motor. So the Lathe can be easly be moded without destroying too much.
better make a turntable drive motor system
if you have free capacity ...develope a new turntable motor system !!!
high pole brushless dc motor from a washing machine with a nice controller
for 33,45,78 and halfspeed.
that would be really nice and it is definitely missing...
the weakest point of most vms70... or any lathe without a technics sp-02
high pole brushless dc motor from a washing machine with a nice controller
for 33,45,78 and halfspeed.
that would be really nice and it is definitely missing...
the weakest point of most vms70... or any lathe without a technics sp-02
-
blacknwhite
- Posts: 483
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:57 am
- Location: US
SORRY, CLICKED WRONG LINK, accidentally deleted a post... Still have it up in another window...
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:47 pm EST
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:47 pm EST
opcode66 wrote:All good points so far. Thanks for responding everyone.
Modern PICs have a lot more memory than chips from 10 years ago. And, I can build a system based on a chip that supports sampling audio at a resolution of 20 bits. Finally, I can use a 20MHz crystal for the clock that drives the chip. Likely that is faster than the clock of older chips.
Altogether that means I Sample and Store many times the samples that an older chip could. And, each sample would be a more accurate one than a 16 bit system could render. Simply put, that means more accurate map of the upcoming groove. And, that would equate to a net gain in available space per side. I will of course maintain the minimum land required so as to avoid overcuts. But, I do think that shaving a little more space off is possible.
Also, I think I could make a more compact design using modern chips with modern built-in peripherals. Finally, it would be cheap to produce and thus 1/2 the price of a zuma or ultrapitch.
Still in the "toying with the idea" stage. Please if anyone has anymore input do share!
I have the same opinion than flozky
I used 3 lathes , a VMS66 with original pitch , a VMS 80 , also with original pitch , and a AM32 with Stuka/ vinylium ultrapitch .
The more funny is the VMS66 , I love this pitch because it asks you a lot of attention, and if you do it right , gives exelent result.
But the best result I have are with the ultra pitch , not with the pitch of the VMS80.
I realy recommend this pitch control.
I have it since 8 years now , and had different operating system , and it is better and better. Jvo will come to my place during september to install the last operating system ( also new preamps for the feedback control), and I have no doubts than I ll have the possibility to put more time or more level than today ...
So , personaly , I won t change for something else.
I think the black point of a AM66 or a AM32 is the turntable motor.
And if vinylium , or somebody else, build a new motor I ll buy it .
And probably a lot of owner of am xx , or other systems will buy it,
I used 3 lathes , a VMS66 with original pitch , a VMS 80 , also with original pitch , and a AM32 with Stuka/ vinylium ultrapitch .
The more funny is the VMS66 , I love this pitch because it asks you a lot of attention, and if you do it right , gives exelent result.
But the best result I have are with the ultra pitch , not with the pitch of the VMS80.
I realy recommend this pitch control.
I have it since 8 years now , and had different operating system , and it is better and better. Jvo will come to my place during september to install the last operating system ( also new preamps for the feedback control), and I have no doubts than I ll have the possibility to put more time or more level than today ...
So , personaly , I won t change for something else.
I think the black point of a AM66 or a AM32 is the turntable motor.
And if vinylium , or somebody else, build a new motor I ll buy it .
And probably a lot of owner of am xx , or other systems will buy it,
-
dietrich10
- Posts: 842
- Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 2:18 pm
- Location: usa
- Contact:
I have minimal complaints about my Zuma right now. It going down after being in use since 1979 is my concern. $7000 for a Pitch98 is tough to swallow to replace it when the Zuma is working. I've cut at least a dozen 28 minute sides this year with no problems.
$2000 pitch98 would be installed here and confidence in the future with it.
An Opcode2010 that I knew how easy to replace chips etc for say $2000 I might buy as well.
$2000 pitch98 would be installed here and confidence in the future with it.
An Opcode2010 that I knew how easy to replace chips etc for say $2000 I might buy as well.
cutting lacquers-vms70 system
when we started pitch98 i used a pic 16c73 with 16MHz
now they use a 16F876 on 20 MHz still a quite good processor.
it is all coded in assembler. so even compared to newer dsp chips (most people code dsp's with c or any other language which automatically makes code less efficient) i think it does the job quite good.
and you make a major thinking error it is not processor speed that counts.
on pitch98 you can go even faster. with delay time to a quarter revolution and even shorter. noone is doing that.in practical cutting. if you go shorter than a quarter revolution time you start modulating the groove with your pitch controller.
this is the limit. and half a revolution preview time is quite a good compromise
also 60-70 percent of music is cut today has almost no dynamics. there even with the best pitch controller you save little to nothing.
i was also thinking to do it once with dsp. you are right you can do riaa curve whatever with a newer dsp chip.save a lot of the hardware make it simpler. cheaper thats right. but what does the electronicst cost? $300-$500? i dont know.it is not a mass product. it doenst matter if it is 300-500 or even 800. it is the software. the installation of the system that costs money. and thats what is all included in the $6000-7000. jvo comes over and install all. works on your lathe for a few days...
but for pitch98 it doesnt make sense to change hardware. the riaa encoder is a quad op amp for $0.70 and a few resistors,caps. the layout is done .it works perfectly.
so to programm all new on a dsp and to develope a new hardware costs lots of time and money and then bugs and problems show up after month , years.it is a big development. so if i cut professional i would choose a prooved product..and $6000 -7000 is 700 a year if you use the machine for 10 years... not that much for a professional cutting place.
the plugin.
also the plug in idea i like and i almost wanted to do that. jvo's pitch algorithm is theoreticaly modular and can be ported to a plugin very easy. you can even bring out the pitch cv signal on a regular soundcard output...but then....
you need a good servo motor.one with dc tacho is best. thats a fact.all other gives you additional noise. so a quality dc servo motor with tacho costs at least $500 plus electronics.plus mechanics to adapt on the vms70..
also you need buttons for lead in lead out, microswitches whatever.
the cv out and feed into the vms70 is just a compromise. then you have a great pitch cv signal but you carry all the other problems.
a main problem is the servo motor electronics in the vms70.this is just the wrong hardware for fast and powrfull pitch.
and again for such a developement.
how big is the market?
when i started with that there was no choise. nothing.something had to be done.
lets assume there are 200 VMS 70 out. maybe 50 scullys with the needs of a powerfull pitch.
50 of the vms70 are allready converted.maybe 10 scullys. another 30-40 use a zuma. which will hopefully work for another few years.
then there are at least 100 vms70 out , where the owners even dont spend a few $ chanching ball bearings or the rubber belts for new ones.. you can order them at vinylium. but i have seen how many people do that.. its a joke..normally you shoudl change belts at least every year.. so noone is doing that...
not to speak about worn out tacho generators of original vms70...
yes looks quite attractive a pitch for $1000.
would be nice. but guess lots of works not the big money into.
so still my opinion use your skills for fixing the last few gaps in cutting technology....
now they use a 16F876 on 20 MHz still a quite good processor.
it is all coded in assembler. so even compared to newer dsp chips (most people code dsp's with c or any other language which automatically makes code less efficient) i think it does the job quite good.
and you make a major thinking error it is not processor speed that counts.
on pitch98 you can go even faster. with delay time to a quarter revolution and even shorter. noone is doing that.in practical cutting. if you go shorter than a quarter revolution time you start modulating the groove with your pitch controller.
this is the limit. and half a revolution preview time is quite a good compromise
also 60-70 percent of music is cut today has almost no dynamics. there even with the best pitch controller you save little to nothing.
i was also thinking to do it once with dsp. you are right you can do riaa curve whatever with a newer dsp chip.save a lot of the hardware make it simpler. cheaper thats right. but what does the electronicst cost? $300-$500? i dont know.it is not a mass product. it doenst matter if it is 300-500 or even 800. it is the software. the installation of the system that costs money. and thats what is all included in the $6000-7000. jvo comes over and install all. works on your lathe for a few days...
but for pitch98 it doesnt make sense to change hardware. the riaa encoder is a quad op amp for $0.70 and a few resistors,caps. the layout is done .it works perfectly.
so to programm all new on a dsp and to develope a new hardware costs lots of time and money and then bugs and problems show up after month , years.it is a big development. so if i cut professional i would choose a prooved product..and $6000 -7000 is 700 a year if you use the machine for 10 years... not that much for a professional cutting place.
the plugin.
also the plug in idea i like and i almost wanted to do that. jvo's pitch algorithm is theoreticaly modular and can be ported to a plugin very easy. you can even bring out the pitch cv signal on a regular soundcard output...but then....
you need a good servo motor.one with dc tacho is best. thats a fact.all other gives you additional noise. so a quality dc servo motor with tacho costs at least $500 plus electronics.plus mechanics to adapt on the vms70..
also you need buttons for lead in lead out, microswitches whatever.
the cv out and feed into the vms70 is just a compromise. then you have a great pitch cv signal but you carry all the other problems.
a main problem is the servo motor electronics in the vms70.this is just the wrong hardware for fast and powrfull pitch.
and again for such a developement.
how big is the market?
when i started with that there was no choise. nothing.something had to be done.
lets assume there are 200 VMS 70 out. maybe 50 scullys with the needs of a powerfull pitch.
50 of the vms70 are allready converted.maybe 10 scullys. another 30-40 use a zuma. which will hopefully work for another few years.
then there are at least 100 vms70 out , where the owners even dont spend a few $ chanching ball bearings or the rubber belts for new ones.. you can order them at vinylium. but i have seen how many people do that.. its a joke..normally you shoudl change belts at least every year.. so noone is doing that...
not to speak about worn out tacho generators of original vms70...
yes looks quite attractive a pitch for $1000.
would be nice. but guess lots of works not the big money into.
so still my opinion use your skills for fixing the last few gaps in cutting technology....
-
dietrich10
- Posts: 842
- Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 2:18 pm
- Location: usa
- Contact:
I was not critizing price of Pitch98. From a Zuma user to get say 10% better control ad results...not worth the price to change.
For Opcode if he just made a better and similar machine to Zuma that I could just replace zuma with....that is interesting or at least a nice safety to have on the shelf
For Opcode if he just made a better and similar machine to Zuma that I could just replace zuma with....that is interesting or at least a nice safety to have on the shelf
cutting lacquers-vms70 system
A direct plug in replacement for a Zuma would be very welcome. It's getting harder to keep them going. I would rather not rip the lathe apart to install another pitch and depth system.
I think Zuma got it right by not disabling the stock system. If the Zuma goes down the stock system is only a dummy plug away. And the stock system is easy to find parts for and maintain.
I have some ideas on how to improve it but just getting a replacement would be wonderful. I'll put in my order now.
I think Zuma got it right by not disabling the stock system. If the Zuma goes down the stock system is only a dummy plug away. And the stock system is easy to find parts for and maintain.
I have some ideas on how to improve it but just getting a replacement would be wonderful. I'll put in my order now.
-
dietrich10
- Posts: 842
- Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 2:18 pm
- Location: usa
- Contact:
I'm going at least make one for myself. If it works well than I would be willing to make copies for those who are interested. I will be working with a guy who uses a Zuma. So, I will have someone with experience to test the unit.
I can create USB based devices using a PIC16F887 fairly easily. Additionally, I've coded my own basic VST plugins. I could write a VST/RTAS plugin that could be assigned to the preview track that would normall be output to the pitch computer. It could ananlyse the sound and send messages to the box over the USB cable. The box could then send the correct voltage for the pitch and current for the depth.
So, would you prefer a Zuma replacement? Or would you rather have the DAW Plugin connected to a breakout box via USB?
I can create USB based devices using a PIC16F887 fairly easily. Additionally, I've coded my own basic VST plugins. I could write a VST/RTAS plugin that could be assigned to the preview track that would normall be output to the pitch computer. It could ananlyse the sound and send messages to the box over the USB cable. The box could then send the correct voltage for the pitch and current for the depth.
So, would you prefer a Zuma replacement? Or would you rather have the DAW Plugin connected to a breakout box via USB?
Zuma Replacement
I am in for 4 zuma replacements as per Paul Gold Dietrich etc etc etc Go for it Opcode
The 98 its great but cost is an issue for 4 units and 10 years it a long time for me any way
Plug ins are not my bag I would have thought that other zuma users would have the same view
Direct replacement its the way to go as a first step Motor redesign as a second
Flo is right about the motor issues However it still works OK as it has for many years now
It is the pitch control which would be my first choice and it seems that the zuma user base out there is hankering for a direct replacement
At fair price I can see around 30-50 units including my 4 which would go on VMS 70's
Cheers
The 98 its great but cost is an issue for 4 units and 10 years it a long time for me any way
Plug ins are not my bag I would have thought that other zuma users would have the same view
Direct replacement its the way to go as a first step Motor redesign as a second
Flo is right about the motor issues However it still works OK as it has for many years now
It is the pitch control which would be my first choice and it seems that the zuma user base out there is hankering for a direct replacement
At fair price I can see around 30-50 units including my 4 which would go on VMS 70's
Cheers
Chris
-
blacknwhite
- Posts: 483
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:57 am
- Location: US
OK opcode66, sounds like you're maybe really going to do this -
As a consumer then, I will put forth this humble request - PLEASE include an option to cut "universally compatible vinyl" - the SHORT version is, "strong bass in shallow grooves cannot be tracked by many older, or cheaper, record players and jukeboxes", and "not everyone plays records with a high-compliance magnetic pickup"...
So please include the option to allow the cutter who has variable-depth capabilities on the lathe, to GO VERY DEEP on bass (i.e. twice as deep is what I've seen on audiophile releases, which plays Excellently on All old record players, even with thundering bass), or at least space the grooves out wider on strong bass if the lathe cannot cut deeper.
MAJOR skipping problems on older players, and newer cheaper players, when "minimum-suggested-depth" (shallow) grooves contain thundering bass.
No, I am not a pro cutter, and I do not have a Neumann lathe; I am just waiting in line for one of Flo's Caruso's as my first stereo cutterhead... but I & others buy a hell of a lot of vinyl new releases to play on vintage 1950s-70s restored vintage players & jukeboxes, and after all, vinyl consumers are the ones who pays everyone's meal ticket, right...
FYI, The "long version" of the "argument" for playability of vinyl on older non-magnetic pickups, is in this thread... scroll down to all the pictures...
https://lathetrolls.com/viewtopic.php?t=1915&mforum=lathetrolls
Thanks for taking into consdieration,
- Bob
As a consumer then, I will put forth this humble request - PLEASE include an option to cut "universally compatible vinyl" - the SHORT version is, "strong bass in shallow grooves cannot be tracked by many older, or cheaper, record players and jukeboxes", and "not everyone plays records with a high-compliance magnetic pickup"...
So please include the option to allow the cutter who has variable-depth capabilities on the lathe, to GO VERY DEEP on bass (i.e. twice as deep is what I've seen on audiophile releases, which plays Excellently on All old record players, even with thundering bass), or at least space the grooves out wider on strong bass if the lathe cannot cut deeper.
MAJOR skipping problems on older players, and newer cheaper players, when "minimum-suggested-depth" (shallow) grooves contain thundering bass.
No, I am not a pro cutter, and I do not have a Neumann lathe; I am just waiting in line for one of Flo's Caruso's as my first stereo cutterhead... but I & others buy a hell of a lot of vinyl new releases to play on vintage 1950s-70s restored vintage players & jukeboxes, and after all, vinyl consumers are the ones who pays everyone's meal ticket, right...
FYI, The "long version" of the "argument" for playability of vinyl on older non-magnetic pickups, is in this thread... scroll down to all the pictures...
https://lathetrolls.com/viewtopic.php?t=1915&mforum=lathetrolls
Thanks for taking into consdieration,
- Bob
Hey opcode - I'd be in for one too. You should also contact Bob and Jason over at Chicago Mastering Service near you and see if they're interested.
Josh Bonati
www.bonatimastering.com
www.bonatimastering.com
But the other function of a pitch computer is to keep overcuts from happening. So, in a fixed pitch system at high volumes you might create overcuts that would be avoided with a pitch control system. I'm sure you know that but others might not.markrob wrote:Hi Flo,
Seems like a pretty difficult problem to solve. I can see why there was a good deal of time spent on software revisions. My question is, with modern music, with its lack of dynamics, how much space can you really save vs. a fixed pitch cut?
Mark
Ultimately, Flo is right, if I were to sample too many points and make too many corrections I would create a modulated goove. However, if I were to take a lot of points and mathematically smooth them it might work out better. It might not. I want to play around with it a bit. If not to just understand the physical aspects and mathematics behind all of this. And, to try to supply a reasonably priced alternative. 10K is a bit much in my opinion. 3-4K USD would be more reasonable.
But as Flo also clearly pointed out, Zuma and Pitch98 have been developed for 10 - 12 years. It will take me some time to even get a Beta 1 going. And, of course I would have revisions as well. Thinking that incorporting USB jack would make flash updates a sinch. You could pay a nominal charge for me to send an update on a USB Flash Drive. Insert the USB Drive into the USB jack on the box. Then watch the LCD panel as it confirms the update and then proceeds. Not sure what the procedure for updating the Zuma or Pitch98 is????
Thanks for the continued input and interest.
Can you give me some specific examples of hardware I can test on? Headshells/Cartridges/Turntables??? Will be some time before I would get to that point. But, if I had an idea as to what to track down in the meantime I could test appropriately down the road.blacknwhite wrote:OK opcode66, sounds like you're maybe really going to do this -
As a consumer then, I will put forth this humble request - PLEASE include an option to cut "universally compatible vinyl" - the SHORT version is, "strong bass in shallow grooves cannot be tracked by many older, or cheaper, record players and jukeboxes", and "not everyone plays records with a high-compliance magnetic pickup"...
So please include the option to allow the cutter who has variable-depth capabilities on the lathe, to GO VERY DEEP on bass (i.e. twice as deep is what I've seen on audiophile releases, which plays Excellently on All old record players, even with thundering bass), or at least space the grooves out wider on strong bass if the lathe cannot cut deeper.
MAJOR skipping problems on older players, and newer cheaper players, when "minimum-suggested-depth" (shallow) grooves contain thundering bass.
No, I am not a pro cutter, and I do not have a Neumann lathe; I am just waiting in line for one of Flo's Caruso's as my first stereo cutterhead... but I & others buy a hell of a lot of vinyl new releases to play on vintage 1950s-70s restored vintage players & jukeboxes, and after all, vinyl consumers are the ones who pays everyone's meal ticket, right...
FYI, The "long version" of the "argument" for playability of vinyl on older non-magnetic pickups, is in this thread... scroll down to all the pictures...
https://lathetrolls.com/viewtopic.php?t=1915&mforum=lathetrolls
Thanks for taking into consdieration,
- Bob