On 25 Sep 2004 20:32:26 -0700, (mr c deckard)
wrote:

what's so bad about a variac? i'm in the process of putting variacs
on both motors of a 2motor leslie . . .

I think all these caveats are just good practical conservativism. No
motors like being throttled back, including gasoline auto engines.

The difference is that auto engines are designed to survive it.
Ordinary electric motors must suffer in silence.

No solution, including variac, phase angle or cycle counting is
without some penalty to the motor, and the relative penalties vary
with the amount of speed reduction.

Has anybody done a conversion to synchronous or stepping motor?
Maybe a modern "DC" motor would be easier.

Chris Hornbeck

On 25 Sep 2004 20:32:26 -0700, (mr c deckard)
wrote:

what's so bad about a variac? i'm in the process of putting variacs
on both motors of a 2motor leslie . . .

I think all these caveats are just good practical conservativism. No
motors like being throttled back, including gasoline auto engines.

The difference is that auto engines are designed to survive it.
Ordinary electric motors must suffer in silence.

No solution, including variac, phase angle or cycle counting is
without some penalty to the motor, and the relative penalties vary
with the amount of speed reduction.

Has anybody done a conversion to synchronous or stepping motor?
Maybe a modern "DC" motor would be easier.

Chris Hornbeck

In article ,
(Scott Dorsey) wrote:

In article znr1096034459k@trad, Mike Rivers wrote:
I have ever heard of.

Could it have something to do with the fact that typically an
oscilloscope has one side of its input connected to the scope ground
which gets back to the AC power ground through the chassis? Connecting
one side of the output of the Hampton Motor Control to the power
neutral (though the ground-to-neutral bond) might make it unhappy.

That's why you got the differential input module on Tek scopes. Of course,
since the AC power ground _is_ tied to the reference ground, you don't really
need it and you can just pick off the black wire on the output with the
high-Z probe and let the ground pin on the probe float.

....or for those without fancy differential plugins, try a plain 2
channel vertical amp set to add ch 1 and 2 and set ch2 to invert. You
get a cheap diff input, as stock on most every dual channel scope. You
do need two probes though, but you should have that already.


To the OP variable speed leslie control, I've seen players "duty
cycle modulate" the fast/slow switch and achieve quite a wide range of
leslie speeds as well as musically interesting rotor speed trajectories.
A true varispeed sounds like a cop out to me with a big limitation: you
miss out on all of the fun possibilities of having a non constant rotor
speed... ;-)


Regards,

Monte McGuire

In article ,
(Scott Dorsey) wrote:

In article znr1096034459k@trad, Mike Rivers wrote:
I have ever heard of.

Could it have something to do with the fact that typically an
oscilloscope has one side of its input connected to the scope ground
which gets back to the AC power ground through the chassis? Connecting
one side of the output of the Hampton Motor Control to the power
neutral (though the ground-to-neutral bond) might make it unhappy.

That's why you got the differential input module on Tek scopes. Of course,
since the AC power ground _is_ tied to the reference ground, you don't really
need it and you can just pick off the black wire on the output with the
high-Z probe and let the ground pin on the probe float.

....or for those without fancy differential plugins, try a plain 2
channel vertical amp set to add ch 1 and 2 and set ch2 to invert. You
get a cheap diff input, as stock on most every dual channel scope. You
do need two probes though, but you should have that already.


To the OP variable speed leslie control, I've seen players "duty
cycle modulate" the fast/slow switch and achieve quite a wide range of
leslie speeds as well as musically interesting rotor speed trajectories.
A true varispeed sounds like a cop out to me with a big limitation: you
miss out on all of the fun possibilities of having a non constant rotor
speed... ;-)


Regards,

Monte McGuire

"Chris Hornbeck"

what's so bad about a variac? i'm in the process of putting variacs
on both motors of a 2motor leslie . . .

I think all these caveats are just good practical conservativism. No
motors like being throttled back, including gasoline auto engines.


** Utter bull****.


The difference is that auto engines are designed to survive it.
Ordinary electric motors must suffer in silence.


** Only a fool argues from analogies that are wrong themselves.



No solution, including variac, phase angle or cycle counting is
without some penalty to the motor, and the relative penalties vary
with the amount of speed reduction.



** Fools always compound their errors, in Horbeck's case - ad
infinitum.




................ Phil

"Chris Hornbeck"

what's so bad about a variac? i'm in the process of putting variacs
on both motors of a 2motor leslie . . .

I think all these caveats are just good practical conservativism. No
motors like being throttled back, including gasoline auto engines.


** Utter bull****.


The difference is that auto engines are designed to survive it.
Ordinary electric motors must suffer in silence.


** Only a fool argues from analogies that are wrong themselves.



No solution, including variac, phase angle or cycle counting is
without some penalty to the motor, and the relative penalties vary
with the amount of speed reduction.



** Fools always compound their errors, in Horbeck's case - ad
infinitum.




................ Phil

Phil Allison wrote:

"Chris Hornbeck"

what's so bad about a variac? i'm in the process of putting variacs
on both motors of a 2motor leslie . . .

I think all these caveats are just good practical conservativism. No
motors like being throttled back, including gasoline auto engines.



** Utter bull****.

** Utter bull****.

Oh look, we both provided the same level of _informative_ rebuttal
that helps others know why they're wrong instead of just insisting
that we're right. I guess that means that as of now, the argument
is tied one to one.

- Logan

Phil Allison wrote:

"Chris Hornbeck"

what's so bad about a variac? i'm in the process of putting variacs
on both motors of a 2motor leslie . . .

I think all these caveats are just good practical conservativism. No
motors like being throttled back, including gasoline auto engines.



** Utter bull****.

** Utter bull****.

Oh look, we both provided the same level of _informative_ rebuttal
that helps others know why they're wrong instead of just insisting
that we're right. I guess that means that as of now, the argument
is tied one to one.

- Logan

"Logan Shaw"
Phil Allison wrote:
Chris Hornbeck
I think all these caveats are just good practical conservativism. No
motors like being throttled back, including gasoline auto engines.



** Utter bull****.

** Utter bull****.

Oh look, we both provided the same level of _informative_ rebuttal



** An unsupported ( plus ridiculous ) assertion needs no rebuttal.

In legal terms there is simply "no case to answer".

The makers of such assertions needs to provide **their** reasoning.



that helps others know why they're wrong instead of just insisting
that we're right.


** Then why not ask Hornbeck to justify his mad assertion ???

I cannot be bothered since the dude is a raving nut case.



I guess that means that as of now, the argument
is tied one to one.



** What you "guess" is a just as smelly as anything else you blow out your
backside.





................ Phil

"Logan Shaw"
Phil Allison wrote:
Chris Hornbeck
I think all these caveats are just good practical conservativism. No
motors like being throttled back, including gasoline auto engines.



** Utter bull****.

** Utter bull****.

Oh look, we both provided the same level of _informative_ rebuttal



** An unsupported ( plus ridiculous ) assertion needs no rebuttal.

In legal terms there is simply "no case to answer".

The makers of such assertions needs to provide **their** reasoning.



that helps others know why they're wrong instead of just insisting
that we're right.


** Then why not ask Hornbeck to justify his mad assertion ???

I cannot be bothered since the dude is a raving nut case.



I guess that means that as of now, the argument
is tied one to one.



** What you "guess" is a just as smelly as anything else you blow out your
backside.





................ Phil