Yes, I agree. Duty Cycle Pulses were Stan's method of controlling this sustained polarization and bursting amplitudes.
Also, most people never realize the great inhibition on tuning pulses and core saturation, that a percentage based duty cycle adjustment causes. All your signal generators are flawed, making it nearly impossible to tune replications of Stan's circuits due to all the differences in the VIC Matrix caused by parasitics and ideal vs real component behaviors.
Only having independent width and spacing control circumvents this flaw. I'm writing an article on my research on this subject that I will share sometime soon. 
What you mean? With flawed signal generators? What would make it impossible to tune? To have mark space is not hard… even the pll can be made to have variable duty cycle… the fracture cell also Is some very good for the abilities
When you increase frequency (to get more pulse count), you indirectly decrease BOTH the width (ontime) and the spacing (offtime) equally.
When you adjust duty cycle % (to get more on-time) you indirectly decrease the spacing (off-time)
When you increase gate frequency to reduce pulse count, you indirectly reduce T3A (and T4A) making the gate period shorter.
Compounded by the AND gate logic required, every adjustment you make results in a tradeoff of "parameters" for the rest of the pulse, train, and gate.
What if you wanted to reduce spacing, but keep the same width? (PWM is current flow, which is directly related to managing core saturation per pulse/train)
What if you weren't bound to such shackles?
[youtube]https://youtu.be/me39I__5WjM[/youtube]
