1.5 released

[bg]

The ring modulator sounds much different from 1.2.  I'm reserving comment until I work with it more.

Please correct me if I'm wrong:
The ring modulator on a CS-80 is mono.
CS-80V RM before 1.5 was mono.

CS-80V 1.5 RM is stereo.  In addition to being inauthentic, it is distracting.  The overall perceived loudness of a note changes as the MOD lever is moved.  This is not good.  Try this as an example:  Leave the RM Attack, Decay, Depth, and Speed sliders off.  Turn >M< on and while you're playing move the MOD lever from off to around 50%.  Hear how the power of the sound diminishes?  My guess is because the sound is being modulated in the stereo field, instead of staying unified.  Also, clicking the >M< while a note is sounding creates an audible click!

[omissis]

I don't know if CS-80V RM was stereo and I too noticed the volume difference at mid modulation...
but....now the MOD parameter behaves exactly like the CS-80 in the way the modulator level is added to carrier.
The switchable >M< was conceived to bring the synth an always active envelope. like it was on original CS-80, while before v 1.5 the MOD parameter :
1. had a perceivable artifact due to routing ( I called it a "PWM" artifact )

2. MOD lever when at zero acted as a switch on therefore if you wanted a modulation in the middle of a note the envelope always started from the beginning!!

[bg]

Please correct me if I'm wrong:
The ring modulator on a CS-80 is mono.
CS-80V RM before 1.5 was mono.

I installed CS-80V 1.2 on another computer and can confirm the Ring Modulator is mono.  Apparently, the original CS-80 RM is also mono, as evidenced by this mp3 example by Richard Lawson:
http://www.rlmusic.co.uk/mals_site/mp3s/cs80_700.mp3

I tried to imitate the ring modulation which occurs at 0:08-0:19 in Richard's recording using CS-80V 1.2 and 1.5.  Version 1.2 sounds more like the CS-80.   On the 1.5 version, you can hear the bottom drop out as I increase the MOD level.  Also, I was not able to get the "motor boat" effect as well using 1.5.  In addition, there is a harmonic sweep in the original that I could not achieve with either version.  Note, I believe the original was performed using only the MOD and SPEED levers.

If we can agree that Richard's mp3 is an ideomatic example of CS-80 RM, then I challenge anyone to post an audio example that sounds remotely like it using CS-80V 1.5.

My attempts using 1.5 and 1.2 are posted in the files section at arturiacs-80v.
http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/arturiacs-80v/