Oh, your hype is beautiful, oh the price...I C O N I C

 Well, in a coda to my Tandy Tampura article of last year, and echoing my sentiments in the article, it appears that the home of hype and greed in the service of the price inflation of music gear has decreed that this rhythm box is now "iconic", with "sonic territories" waiting to be explored (and presumably prices to be gouged) by issuing a sample pack. It's hilarious that they try to make you believe this was ever worth 24 bucks, when it takes longer for you to read the legal terms and conditions PDF than it probably did for a person to assemble this entire "extensive" sample package, but here it is.

You honestly can't make this stuff up. Bonus points for recording a piece of 40-year old consumer-grade ephemera with a recording setup you could probably use for classical music recording. Says it all about the vintage gear hype cycle, really!

When people sell fake parts as new it makes me a very SAD Panda (plus MXR shMXR)

So...as we already saw, my RS09 needs a bit of open-heart surgery to get back to full health, with the transplant required being the most costly one possible after the master octave generator,  an SAD-512 BBD chip.

Here is a close up of the deceased piece of metal-oxide coated silicon in question.

So...despite being out of production for decades, this chip appears to be for sale in bulk lots from China, at high prices, as "new". Normally I wouldn't go near the Chinese aftermarket for silicon, as chips pulled from electronics recycling are often sold as new, and sometimes chips are even relabelled to look like more expensive and desirable models-which doesn't make them work like the more expensive brethren!

Therefore, I did what anyone would do, find a crummy piece of gear that used the chip that I would have no qualms about sacrificing. Picking up courage, I waded into that wretched hive of scum and villainy known as Reverb. Hmmmmmmmmmm.....

As crummy but useful things go, an MXR "Commande" chorus pedal from the early 80s is about the ideal, containing a SAD512D BBD and costing about $100 shipped. This was an abortive attempt to compete with the Japanese onslaught from Boss and Maxon/Ibanez, which saw affordable, well-made pedals in rugged die cast enclosures flood the US market. Well, at least MXR tried to match them on price, pity about the rest.

This pedal even looks cheap, from the poor screen-printing on the enclosure, to the enclosure made out of two bits of plastic held together with a single screw, with even the battery door on a plastic hinge...ugh

The innards sort of match the outside, with a cheapo fibre PCB. Surprising use of metal film resistors for the time though, even if they are 5%. The transistors appear to be Japanese types with flat chamfered cases, which may be a giveaway as to where this was made.

Note the (single) socketed BBD inner the switch-this unit generates a chorus by modulating a single BBD with a single LFO against the source signal, which is a far cry from the RS09's ensemble. Also note the (thankfully obsolete) American-style minijack power connector.

The back of the PCB-it appears someone has tried to repair the battery snap, and ripped traces off the board, requiring link wires to keep it working. Blechhhh....

At first sight I thought the socketed SAD512D and the appearance of rubbing on it meant that the unit had been repaired and a dodgy "reconditioned" part had been substituted. Looking at other units, it appears that this is standard ex-factory on both counts - as is the messy soldering of the pots.

Well, it works OK, but I would never use this seriously in music, so the chip is a good candidate for the RS09. That leaves the chorus pedal as a perfect testbed for other chips, even cheapo Chinese clones....hmmmmm

(to be continued)

Zing went the strings

As mentioned before, I have a Roland RS09. Recently I took advantage of an online sale to add a Behringer VC340 to my collection. It seems to be the universal opinion that the VC340 *is* the reincarnation of the Roland Vocoder Plus version 2, and I'm very happy with it. I realised I now own two of the "big three" 1978-9 stringer designs by Roland, the other being the now-ridiculously-overpriced Paraphonic 505. These broke the mould of triple chorus "Solina wannabes" set bv the earlier RS202 stringer, introducing Roland's own four-chorus take on the ensemble effect. So putting aside the considerable differences in other aspects of their designs, what are their differences as stringers? No-one seems to have done a direct comparison of all three, there is misinformation around, and some comparisons have an almost comical confirmation bias towards expensive purchases, so here goes.

Note 1: all schematics are the 1979 "rocker tab" versions which all used SAD512 BBDs in the ensemble circuit. These chips are now very expensive to replace if they die!

Note 2: Sustain in the schematics is actually "release" on the panels and in modern parlance. 

Mode I means that pressing a key while another is held will not cut off any note tails that are still sounding, but pressing a key after all others have been released will cancel all sounding notes. This is useful for vocoders or paraphony where you do not want note smearing when the VCF envelope (or the speech signal) re-articulates. 

Mode II means that note tails will not get interrupted by new notes, and is best for pretty much anything else.

Note 3: Ensemble Mode I: animated from slow triangle LFOs and fast sine LFOs both being applied (think classic stringer)

Ensemble Mode II: slow sweeps from just the slow triangle LFOs (think goth icescapes like the Cure's Funeral Party)

Ensemble Mode III: Mode I but with feedback loops on the right and left chorus groups, meant to emulate rotary speakers but sounds more flanger-ish

Parameter	RS09 Organ/Strings mk1	Vocoder Plus mk1	Paraphonic 505
Schematic date	Dec 78	Sep 79	Sep 78
US Price 1979	$795	$2695	$1695
Keys	44	49	49
Keysplit	none	upper/lower	upper/lower
Master Oscillator transpose	Octave down switch, fixed /2 divider	variable bend slider, range adjustable up to an octave down	variable bend slider, range adjustable up to an octave down
Master Oscillator divider ranges	8',4',2',1'	8',4'	8',4' 16' (bass only)
Ensemble modes	I,II	I	I,II,III
Ensemble LFO rates	6.7 sec, 5.5 sec 210ms, 170ms	3.9 sec, 4.6 sec 150ms, 175ms	6 sec, 7 sec 160ms, 180ms
Ensemble external inputs	Yes	Vocoder carrier only	Yes
String assign to Ensemble	switchable on/off	fixed on	fixed on
String footages and waveshapes	4'- 3-bit saw 8'- 4-bit saw summed from divided square waves, "log curve" global waveshaping	4' - spaced sharktooth circuit on each key	4', 8' - spaced sharktooth circuit on each key
String filters	high on 4' tabswitch low on 8' tabswitch	global	high on upper tabswitch, low on lower tabswitch
String footage selection	two tabswitches	none	4'<-> 8' cross-fader into each filter
String LFO vibrato	yes	no, vocoder and voice vibrato modulated via SAD1024 BBD delay	yes
Release modes	I,II (panel switch)	I (fixed)	I,II (Mode II only engaged on connection of footswitch)
Polyphonic Release control	yes, release start level, foot switch control	yes, release start level, no foot switch	yes, true variable release time, foot switch control
Paraphonic attack control	yes, strings only	yes, independent for strings and voice	yes, strings only
Tone control	yes, pre-main output, common with organ	yes, individual pre-chorus	yes, post-chorus, on back panel
Synth connections	gatebus out, "raw organ" (unfiltered) out	No	gatebus out, trigger out (retriggers on additional keypresses)
Phones out	yes, stereo, master fade	yes, mono, separate fade, transformer isolated	none

As can be seen, there is surprising commonality between the RS09 and its (then and now) expensive siblings, even surpassing them in some respects. All three can effectively layer other sections to "thicken up" the strings' low end-the RS09 has organ, the Vocoder has 8' human voice, and the RS505 has an actual mono bass section. Interesting also to note that the prices are for sure a reflection of a time when electronics cost far more than the metal-and-woodwork that housed it, as the lightweight, utilitarian RS09 was not that much cheaper than the deluxe wood-cased RS505.

Also interesting to note that both the most expensive and cheapest of these three survived into the 80s in a revised version with touch switch controls and updated Panasonic MN BBD chips, and the RS505 didn't. Maybe on the eve of affordable true polysynths (the Jupiter 4 was out at the same time for $2795), the RS505, with its "synth" section with just a single VCF that didn't track the keyboard and a single VCA, simply turned out to be neither fish nor fowl. 

Moreover, for about the same price people could have had an RS09 and an SH09 synth combo, which for roughly the same price could either provide strings and a mono bass/lead with filter tracking and actual portamento, or when patched together, paraphonic filter and VCA articulation. 

The RS09's low price earned it thousands of sales, a place on all three of the Cure's "dark trilogy" of 17 Seconds, Faith and Pornography, and even a failed, market-misreading spinoff in the Saturn 09 organ (ah Roland, you've done it again!). The fact that layering the organ onto the strings along with Mode II ensemble gives a passable synth-like pad sound would not have hurt the RS09's sales, either.

As for the Vocoder Plus, the string section was obviously a cheap and easy add-on to the insanely complex vocoder that, along with its unique analogue voice synth (hey, why not add another 7 bandpass filters while we're at it?), gave it the ability to replace the Mellotrons of the rich and famous on tour, and earning it a place in the rigs of people who never even used the vocoder, like Tony Banks. The vocoder does feature on 80s hits both groundbreaking (O Superman and Behind the Mask) and timelessly cheesy (Mr Roboto).

To close with a bit of subjectivity, if you can get a good deal on it, the Behringer VC340 is well worth the asking price, and better value new than any of the above after 40 years of use, as well as adding DIN and USB midi control. It sounds "off" through a mono signal chain, but godlike if you can keep in in stereo and keep levels well down to avoid overloading artifacts.