Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

WG: [Doepfer_a100] Re: discontinuation of all modules with CEM3320, CEM3340 and

Expand Messages
  • herwig.krass
    ... Hi i am new here (nevertheless watching this for months). I wouldn t add to much features to A111-2 because A100 is a modular system. In my opinon the
    Message 1 of 20 , Aug 5, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Bakis Sirros <synth_freak_2000@...> wrote:
      >
      > well, you can always add a linear vca into your patch.
      > or, Dieter, you may add it into the A111-2 itself.
      > it should not be very difficult, probably...?
      >
      > best regards,
      > Bakis.
      >  

      Hi i am new here (nevertheless watching this for months).

      I wouldn't add to much features to A111-2 because A100 is a modular system. In my opinon
      the A111-2 is big enough already.

      ciao herw
    • selfoscillate
      ... hello chris, i don t see a problem here. you can just add a vca of your choice to the patch to get dynamic fm. imho separate vca s give the best
      Message 2 of 20 , Aug 5, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Chris Muir <cbm@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > On Aug 4, 2008, at 4:56 AM, <hardware@...>
        > <hardware@...> wrote:
        >
        > > But I think
        > > we will continue with the A-111-2, even because I stand by this
        > > module. And
        > > I noticed in the past that this is sometimes more important than poll
        > > results or customer inquiries :-)
        >
        >
        > That's certainly true.
        >
        > My biggest complaint with the A-111-2, FWIW, is that the linear FM to
        > the VCO section is not "dynamic depth," which means that for a large
        > class of FM sounds an external VCA would have to be patched in.
        >
        > -C
        >
        > Chris Muir
        > cbm@...
        > http://www.xfade.com
        >


        hello chris,

        i don't see a problem here. you can just add a vca of your
        choice to the patch to get dynamic fm.
        imho separate vca's give the best flexibility, as you can use
        them for other purposes too, if you don't use dynamic fm
        in your actual patch. however, the built-in vca on the a111/2
        is only there because it is present on the cem-chip anyway,
        but due to the architecture of the cem-chip it cannot be used
        at the lin fm input of the same a111/2, only at its final output.

        best wishes

        ingo
      • Anthony Rolando
        I agree with Ingo. It is best to have utility circuits such as VCAs as separate modules so that they may be used elsewhere. Tony ...
        Message 3 of 20 , Aug 5, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          I agree with Ingo. It is best to have utility circuits such as VCAs as separate modules so that they may be used elsewhere.

          Tony

          > To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
          > From: synaptic_music@...
          > Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 08:51:41 +0000
          > Subject: WG: [Doepfer_a100] Re: discontinuation of all modules with CEM3320, CEM3340 and
          >
          > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Chris Muir <cbm@...> wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > > On Aug 4, 2008, at 4:56 AM, <hardware@...>
          > > <hardware@...> wrote:
          > >
          > > > But I think
          > > > we will continue with the A-111-2, even because I stand by this
          > > > module. And
          > > > I noticed in the past that this is sometimes more important than poll
          > > > results or customer inquiries :-)
          > >
          > >
          > > That's certainly true.
          > >
          > > My biggest complaint with the A-111-2, FWIW, is that the linear FM to
          > > the VCO section is not "dynamic depth," which means that for a large
          > > class of FM sounds an external VCA would have to be patched in.
          > >
          > > -C
          > >
          > > Chris Muir
          > > cbm@...
          > > http://www.xfade.com
          > >
          >
          >
          > hello chris,
          >
          > i don't see a problem here. you can just add a vca of your
          > choice to the patch to get dynamic fm.
          > imho separate vca's give the best flexibility, as you can use
          > them for other purposes too, if you don't use dynamic fm
          > in your actual patch. however, the built-in vca on the a111/2
          > is only there because it is present on the cem-chip anyway,
          > but due to the architecture of the cem-chip it cannot be used
          > at the lin fm input of the same a111/2, only at its final output.
          >
          > best wishes
          >
          > ingo
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > ------------------------------------
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >

          _________________________________________________________________
          Your PC, mobile phone, and online services work together like never before.
          http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/108587394/direct/01/

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Chris Muir
          ... It s certainly true that you can patch a VCA into FM in. I mentioned that in my original message. A complex vco like the A-111-2 is all about integration.
          Message 4 of 20 , Aug 5, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            On Aug 5, 2008, at 1:51 AM, selfoscillate wrote:
            > i don't see a problem here. you can just add a vca of your
            > choice to the patch to get dynamic fm.
            > imho separate vca's give the best flexibility, as you can use
            > them for other purposes too, if you don't use dynamic fm
            > in your actual patch.


            It's certainly true that you can patch a VCA into FM in. I mentioned
            that in my original message.

            A complex vco like the A-111-2 is all about integration. By your
            logic, why have an integrated filter or waveshaper? Wouldn't a
            separate filter [waveshaper] be more flexible?

            All I was saying was that for a large class of FM sounds, dynamic
            depth is important, and that, at least for me, having this VCA
            integrated into the oscillator would be a good thing.

            Chris Muir
            cbm@...
            http://www.xfade.com
          • Guy D2
            The reason I voted no to the A111-2 in the poll, is twofold. To me, modular synthesis is all about modularity (d oh). One exception to that would be the
            Message 5 of 20 , Aug 5, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              The reason I voted "no" to the A111-2 in the poll, is twofold.

              To me, modular synthesis is all about modularity (d'oh).
              One exception to that would be the "patch-programmability"
              of the Serge & Buchla systems, but that is not the case here.

              All of the functionality of that complex VCO can easily be
              replicated with other modules, with the added benefit of
              having those modules still available to other tasks.
              A truly modular system with one dedicated function-per-module
              is always more flexible than a semi-modular or semi-integrated system.

              Another thing with the A111-2 which throws up a few questions,
              is its estimated price-point. I'm just wondering about the overall
              sound quality of such module if you integrate a VCO, VCA,
              VCF and Waveshaper in one go for about €250, when a
              single decent VCO or VCF hovers around the same price
              or just slightly below... (no offence, Dieter!)

              And another - somewhat lesser point - would be the technical
              quality of such a module; talking about bleed-through and
              crosstalk and such... though I'm not technically proficient
              enough to have a solid opinion on this... just a question.



              -gd2

              www.guyd2.com [photography]
              www.sweetcucumber.com [blog]
              www.pillion.be [music]


              On 05 Aug 2008, at 18:07, Chris Muir wrote:
              > On Aug 5, 2008, at 1:51 AM, selfoscillate wrote:
              > > i don't see a problem here. you can just add a vca of your
              > > choice to the patch to get dynamic fm.
              > > imho separate vca's give the best flexibility, as you can use
              > > them for other purposes too, if you don't use dynamic fm
              > > in your actual patch.
              >
              > It's certainly true that you can patch a VCA into FM in. I mentioned
              > that in my original message.
              >
              > A complex vco like the A-111-2 is all about integration. By your
              > logic, why have an integrated filter or waveshaper? Wouldn't a
              > separate filter [waveshaper] be more flexible?
              >
              > All I was saying was that for a large class of FM sounds, dynamic
              > depth is important, and that, at least for me, having this VCA
              > integrated into the oscillator would be a good thing.
              >
              > Chris Muir
              > cbm@...
              > http://www.xfade.com
              >
            • Anthony Rolando
              GD2, I believe the VCF and VCA is contained on the CEM chip being used for the VCO, thus the lower price, and probably the reason to include all such things in
              Message 6 of 20 , Aug 5, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                GD2, I believe the VCF and VCA is contained on the CEM chip being used for the VCO, thus the lower price, and probably the reason to include all such things in one module. Perhaps somebody could confirm this...

                Tony

                > To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
                > From: guy@...
                > Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 18:27:38 +0200
                > Subject: Re: WG: [Doepfer_a100] Re: discontinuation of all modules with CEM3320, CEM3340 and
                >
                > The reason I voted "no" to the A111-2 in the poll, is twofold.
                >
                > To me, modular synthesis is all about modularity (d'oh).
                > One exception to that would be the "patch-programmability"
                > of the Serge & Buchla systems, but that is not the case here.
                >
                > All of the functionality of that complex VCO can easily be
                > replicated with other modules, with the added benefit of
                > having those modules still available to other tasks.
                > A truly modular system with one dedicated function-per-module
                > is always more flexible than a semi-modular or semi-integrated system.
                >
                > Another thing with the A111-2 which throws up a few questions,
                > is its estimated price-point. I'm just wondering about the overall
                > sound quality of such module if you integrate a VCO, VCA,
                > VCF and Waveshaper in one go for about �250, when a
                > single decent VCO or VCF hovers around the same price
                > or just slightly below... (no offence, Dieter!)
                >
                > And another - somewhat lesser point - would be the technical
                > quality of such a module; talking about bleed-through and
                > crosstalk and such... though I'm not technically proficient
                > enough to have a solid opinion on this... just a question.
                >
                >
                >
                > -gd2
                >
                > www.guyd2.com [photography]
                > www.sweetcucumber.com [blog]
                > www.pillion.be [music]
                >
                >
                > On 05 Aug 2008, at 18:07, Chris Muir wrote:
                > > On Aug 5, 2008, at 1:51 AM, selfoscillate wrote:
                > > > i don't see a problem here. you can just add a vca of your
                > > > choice to the patch to get dynamic fm.
                > > > imho separate vca's give the best flexibility, as you can use
                > > > them for other purposes too, if you don't use dynamic fm
                > > > in your actual patch.
                > >
                > > It's certainly true that you can patch a VCA into FM in. I mentioned
                > > that in my original message.
                > >
                > > A complex vco like the A-111-2 is all about integration. By your
                > > logic, why have an integrated filter or waveshaper? Wouldn't a
                > > separate filter [waveshaper] be more flexible?
                > >
                > > All I was saying was that for a large class of FM sounds, dynamic
                > > depth is important, and that, at least for me, having this VCA
                > > integrated into the oscillator would be a good thing.
                > >
                > > Chris Muir
                > > cbm@...
                > > http://www.xfade.com
                > >
                >
                >
                >
                > ------------------------------------
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >

                _________________________________________________________________
                Get Windows Live and get whatever you need, wherever you are. Start here.
                http://www.windowslive.com/default.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Home_082008

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Bakis Sirros
                not all features can be dublicated with other modules. the linear FM of the filter frequency is Unique to the A111-2. also, patch-programmability have many of
                Message 7 of 20 , Aug 5, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  not all features can be dublicated with other modules.

                  the linear FM of the filter frequency is Unique to the A111-2.

                  also, patch-programmability have many of the doepfer modules (for example: the a143-1 can do many things depending on how it is patched. it can even process audio...
                  but even this vco has patch-programmability. many connections can be made within the module and do change the sound dramatically.

                  so, bottom-line: patch-programmable IS this A111-2 vco, too.


                  Bakis Sirros - Parallel Worlds / Interconnected / Memory Geist
                  [Doepfer_a100] group owner
                  www. parallel - worlds - music. com
                  www. myspace. com/ parallelworldsmusic
                  www. myspace. com/ interconnectedmusic
                  www. myspace. com/ memorygeist
                  www. DiN. org. uk
                  www. musicamaximamagnetica. com
                  www. shimarecords. co. uk
                  www. rubberrecords. gr
                  Athens - Greece


                  --- On Tue, 8/5/08, Guy D2 <guy@...> wrote:

                  > From: Guy D2 <guy@...>
                  > Subject: Re: WG: [Doepfer_a100] Re: discontinuation of all modules with CEM3320, CEM3340 and
                  > To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
                  > Date: Tuesday, August 5, 2008, 7:27 PM
                  > The reason I voted "no" to the A111-2 in the poll,
                  > is twofold.
                  >
                  > To me, modular synthesis is all about modularity
                  > (d'oh).
                  > One exception to that would be the
                  > "patch-programmability"
                  > of the Serge & Buchla systems, but that is not the case
                  > here.
                  >
                  > All of the functionality of that complex VCO can easily be
                  > replicated with other modules, with the added benefit of
                  > having those modules still available to other tasks.
                  > A truly modular system with one dedicated
                  > function-per-module
                  > is always more flexible than a semi-modular or
                  > semi-integrated system.
                  >
                  > Another thing with the A111-2 which throws up a few
                  > questions,
                  > is its estimated price-point. I'm just wondering about
                  > the overall
                  > sound quality of such module if you integrate a VCO, VCA,
                  > VCF and Waveshaper in one go for about €250, when a
                  > single decent VCO or VCF hovers around the same price
                  > or just slightly below... (no offence, Dieter!)
                  >
                  > And another - somewhat lesser point - would be the
                  > technical
                  > quality of such a module; talking about bleed-through and
                  > crosstalk and such... though I'm not technically
                  > proficient
                  > enough to have a solid opinion on this... just a question.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > -gd2
                  >
                  > www.guyd2.com [photography]
                  > www.sweetcucumber.com [blog]
                  > www.pillion.be [music]
                  >
                  >
                  > On 05 Aug 2008, at 18:07, Chris Muir wrote:
                  > > On Aug 5, 2008, at 1:51 AM, selfoscillate wrote:
                  > > > i don't see a problem here. you can just add
                  > a vca of your
                  > > > choice to the patch to get dynamic fm.
                  > > > imho separate vca's give the best
                  > flexibility, as you can use
                  > > > them for other purposes too, if you don't use
                  > dynamic fm
                  > > > in your actual patch.
                  > >
                  > > It's certainly true that you can patch a VCA into
                  > FM in. I mentioned
                  > > that in my original message.
                  > >
                  > > A complex vco like the A-111-2 is all about
                  > integration. By your
                  > > logic, why have an integrated filter or waveshaper?
                  > Wouldn't a
                  > > separate filter [waveshaper] be more flexible?
                  > >
                  > > All I was saying was that for a large class of FM
                  > sounds, dynamic
                  > > depth is important, and that, at least for me, having
                  > this VCA
                  > > integrated into the oscillator would be a good thing.
                  > >
                  > > Chris Muir
                  > > cbm@...
                  > > http://www.xfade.com
                  > >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ------------------------------------
                  >
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                • selfoscillate
                  ... hello chris, i totally agree with you that dynamic depth fm is great, but including such a function would be nothing else than adding a vca, which is
                  Message 8 of 20 , Aug 5, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Chris Muir <cbm@...> wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    > On Aug 5, 2008, at 1:51 AM, selfoscillate wrote:
                    > > i don't see a problem here. you can just add a vca of your
                    > > choice to the patch to get dynamic fm.
                    > > imho separate vca's give the best flexibility, as you can use
                    > > them for other purposes too, if you don't use dynamic fm
                    > > in your actual patch.
                    >
                    >
                    > It's certainly true that you can patch a VCA into FM in. I mentioned
                    > that in my original message.
                    >
                    > A complex vco like the A-111-2 is all about integration. By your
                    > logic, why have an integrated filter or waveshaper? Wouldn't a
                    > separate filter [waveshaper] be more flexible?
                    >
                    > All I was saying was that for a large class of FM sounds, dynamic
                    > depth is important, and that, at least for me, having this VCA
                    > integrated into the oscillator would be a good thing.
                    >
                    > Chris Muir
                    > cbm@...
                    > http://www.xfade.com
                    >

                    hello chris,

                    i totally agree with you that dynamic depth fm is great,
                    but including such a function would be nothing else than
                    adding a vca, which is already available in many incarnations.

                    so why including a filter and a waveshaper on the a111/2?
                    because they are already on the cem chip, so it would be
                    a waste not to use them.

                    best wishes

                    ingo
                  • laryn91
                    Several people have posted that because the CEM has a filter and VCAs ,we re somehow getting the features for free (or even low cost). Look at all the
                    Message 9 of 20 , Aug 5, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Several people have posted that because the CEM has a filter and VCAs ,we're somehow
                      getting the features for free (or even low cost). Look at all the additional pots, knobs,
                      jacks, connections and circuit boards required to implement these additional functions!

                      Ask any DIYer, usually the overwhelming cost and time is in those passive components -
                      not the semiconductors.


                      --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "selfoscillate" <synaptic_music@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Chris Muir <cbm@> wrote:
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > On Aug 5, 2008, at 1:51 AM, selfoscillate wrote:
                      > > > i don't see a problem here. you can just add a vca of your
                      > > > choice to the patch to get dynamic fm.
                      > > > imho separate vca's give the best flexibility, as you can use
                      > > > them for other purposes too, if you don't use dynamic fm
                      > > > in your actual patch.
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > It's certainly true that you can patch a VCA into FM in. I mentioned
                      > > that in my original message.
                      > >
                      > > A complex vco like the A-111-2 is all about integration. By your
                      > > logic, why have an integrated filter or waveshaper? Wouldn't a
                      > > separate filter [waveshaper] be more flexible?
                      > >
                      > > All I was saying was that for a large class of FM sounds, dynamic
                      > > depth is important, and that, at least for me, having this VCA
                      > > integrated into the oscillator would be a good thing.
                      > >
                      > > Chris Muir
                      > > cbm@
                      > > http://www.xfade.com
                      > >
                      >
                      > hello chris,
                      >
                      > i totally agree with you that dynamic depth fm is great,
                      > but including such a function would be nothing else than
                      > adding a vca, which is already available in many incarnations.
                      >
                      > so why including a filter and a waveshaper on the a111/2?
                      > because they are already on the cem chip, so it would be
                      > a waste not to use them.
                      >
                      > best wishes
                      >
                      > ingo
                      >
                    • ilanode
                      Yes, it s relativly costly to bring those features out. On the other hand you get a highly normalized VCO which enables you to try various dynamic waveshaping
                      Message 10 of 20 , Aug 5, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Yes, it's relativly costly to bring those features out. On the other
                        hand you get a highly normalized VCO which enables you to try various
                        dynamic waveshaping on the fly which can be very inspiring and thus
                        might pay off. Rgds, Ingo

                        --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "laryn91" <caymus91@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Several people have posted that because the CEM has a filter and
                        VCAs ,we're somehow
                        > getting the features for free (or even low cost). Look at all the
                        additional pots, knobs,
                        > jacks, connections and circuit boards required to implement these
                        additional functions!
                        >
                        > Ask any DIYer, usually the overwhelming cost and time is in those
                        passive components -
                        > not the semiconductors.
                        >
                        >
                        > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "selfoscillate"
                        <synaptic_music@> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Chris Muir <cbm@> wrote:
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > On Aug 5, 2008, at 1:51 AM, selfoscillate wrote:
                        > > > > i don't see a problem here. you can just add a vca of your
                        > > > > choice to the patch to get dynamic fm.
                        > > > > imho separate vca's give the best flexibility, as you can use
                        > > > > them for other purposes too, if you don't use dynamic fm
                        > > > > in your actual patch.
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > It's certainly true that you can patch a VCA into FM in. I
                        mentioned
                        > > > that in my original message.
                        > > >
                        > > > A complex vco like the A-111-2 is all about integration. By your
                        > > > logic, why have an integrated filter or waveshaper? Wouldn't a
                        > > > separate filter [waveshaper] be more flexible?
                        > > >
                        > > > All I was saying was that for a large class of FM sounds, dynamic
                        > > > depth is important, and that, at least for me, having this VCA
                        > > > integrated into the oscillator would be a good thing.
                        > > >
                        > > > Chris Muir
                        > > > cbm@
                        > > > http://www.xfade.com
                        > > >
                        > >
                        > > hello chris,
                        > >
                        > > i totally agree with you that dynamic depth fm is great,
                        > > but including such a function would be nothing else than
                        > > adding a vca, which is already available in many incarnations.
                        > >
                        > > so why including a filter and a waveshaper on the a111/2?
                        > > because they are already on the cem chip, so it would be
                        > > a waste not to use them.
                        > >
                        > > best wishes
                        > >
                        > > ingo
                        > >
                        >
                      • Alex Pearson
                        For me... A dynamic VCO would have the following: 1. Ability to reach sub-audio 2. horizontal and vertical waveshaping w/ cv control and attenuation 3.
                        Message 11 of 20 , Aug 5, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          For me... A "dynamic" VCO would have the following:
                          1. Ability to reach sub-audio
                          2. horizontal and vertical waveshaping w/ cv control and attenuation
                          3. linear / exponential fm w/ attenuation
                          4. harmonic automation
                          5. focused on additive rather than subtractive synthesis
                          6. the ability to create new and interesting waveforms

                          but hey, who am I?


                          On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 3:00 PM, ilanode <techmeier@...> wrote:

                          > Yes, it's relativly costly to bring those features out. On the other
                          > hand you get a highly normalized VCO which enables you to try various
                          > dynamic waveshaping on the fly which can be very inspiring and thus
                          > might pay off. Rgds, Ingo
                          >
                          > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com <Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com>,
                          > "laryn91" <caymus91@...> wrote:
                          > >
                          > > Several people have posted that because the CEM has a filter and
                          > VCAs ,we're somehow
                          > > getting the features for free (or even low cost). Look at all the
                          > additional pots, knobs,
                          > > jacks, connections and circuit boards required to implement these
                          > additional functions!
                          > >
                          > > Ask any DIYer, usually the overwhelming cost and time is in those
                          > passive components -
                          > > not the semiconductors.
                          > >
                          > >
                          > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com <Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com>,
                          > "selfoscillate"
                          > <synaptic_music@> wrote:
                          > > >
                          > > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com <Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com>,
                          > Chris Muir <cbm@> wrote:
                          > > > >
                          > > > >
                          > > > > On Aug 5, 2008, at 1:51 AM, selfoscillate wrote:
                          > > > > > i don't see a problem here. you can just add a vca of your
                          > > > > > choice to the patch to get dynamic fm.
                          > > > > > imho separate vca's give the best flexibility, as you can use
                          > > > > > them for other purposes too, if you don't use dynamic fm
                          > > > > > in your actual patch.
                          > > > >
                          > > > >
                          > > > > It's certainly true that you can patch a VCA into FM in. I
                          > mentioned
                          > > > > that in my original message.
                          > > > >
                          > > > > A complex vco like the A-111-2 is all about integration. By your
                          > > > > logic, why have an integrated filter or waveshaper? Wouldn't a
                          > > > > separate filter [waveshaper] be more flexible?
                          > > > >
                          > > > > All I was saying was that for a large class of FM sounds, dynamic
                          > > > > depth is important, and that, at least for me, having this VCA
                          > > > > integrated into the oscillator would be a good thing.
                          > > > >
                          > > > > Chris Muir
                          > > > > cbm@
                          > > > > http://www.xfade.com
                          > > > >
                          > > >
                          > > > hello chris,
                          > > >
                          > > > i totally agree with you that dynamic depth fm is great,
                          > > > but including such a function would be nothing else than
                          > > > adding a vca, which is already available in many incarnations.
                          > > >
                          > > > so why including a filter and a waveshaper on the a111/2?
                          > > > because they are already on the cem chip, so it would be
                          > > > a waste not to use them.
                          > > >
                          > > > best wishes
                          > > >
                          > > > ingo
                          > > >
                          > >
                          >
                          >
                          >


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • selfoscillate
                          you re absolutely right, tony. the basic functions of the a111/2 (vco, vcf, vca, crossfader) are all integrated in one cem chip. thats why all these functions
                          Message 12 of 20 , Aug 5, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            you're absolutely right, tony.
                            the basic functions of the a111/2 (vco, vcf, vca, crossfader) are
                            all integrated in one cem chip. thats why all these functions
                            are available, thats why the unit is so affordable, thats why
                            crosstalk is not really an issue. if we would pay per function
                            than the a111/2 would be much more expensive, but luckily we
                            just have to pay for the parts and the development effort.

                            best wishes

                            ingo



                            --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Anthony Rolando <goldenechos@...>
                            wrote:
                            >
                            >
                            > GD2, I believe the VCF and VCA is contained on the CEM chip being
                            used for the VCO, thus the lower price, and probably the reason to
                            include all such things in one module. Perhaps somebody could confirm
                            this...
                            >
                            > Tony
                          • laryn91
                            I think there s already a good dynamic VCO available that s pretty close to that - the Zeroscillator.
                            Message 13 of 20 , Aug 5, 2008
                            • 0 Attachment
                              I think there's already a good dynamic VCO available that's pretty close to that - the
                              Zeroscillator.

                              --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Pearson" <alexpears@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > For me... A "dynamic" VCO would have the following:
                              > 1. Ability to reach sub-audio
                              > 2. horizontal and vertical waveshaping w/ cv control and attenuation
                              > 3. linear / exponential fm w/ attenuation
                              > 4. harmonic automation
                              > 5. focused on additive rather than subtractive synthesis
                              > 6. the ability to create new and interesting waveforms
                              >
                              > but hey, who am I?
                              >
                              >
                              > On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 3:00 PM, ilanode <techmeier@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > > Yes, it's relativly costly to bring those features out. On the other
                              > > hand you get a highly normalized VCO which enables you to try various
                              > > dynamic waveshaping on the fly which can be very inspiring and thus
                              > > might pay off. Rgds, Ingo
                              > >
                              > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com <Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com>,
                              > > "laryn91" <caymus91@> wrote:
                              > > >
                              > > > Several people have posted that because the CEM has a filter and
                              > > VCAs ,we're somehow
                              > > > getting the features for free (or even low cost). Look at all the
                              > > additional pots, knobs,
                              > > > jacks, connections and circuit boards required to implement these
                              > > additional functions!
                              > > >
                              > > > Ask any DIYer, usually the overwhelming cost and time is in those
                              > > passive components -
                              > > > not the semiconductors.
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com <Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com>,
                              > > "selfoscillate"
                              > > <synaptic_music@> wrote:
                              > > > >
                              > > > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com <Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com>,
                              > > Chris Muir <cbm@> wrote:
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > On Aug 5, 2008, at 1:51 AM, selfoscillate wrote:
                              > > > > > > i don't see a problem here. you can just add a vca of your
                              > > > > > > choice to the patch to get dynamic fm.
                              > > > > > > imho separate vca's give the best flexibility, as you can use
                              > > > > > > them for other purposes too, if you don't use dynamic fm
                              > > > > > > in your actual patch.
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > It's certainly true that you can patch a VCA into FM in. I
                              > > mentioned
                              > > > > > that in my original message.
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > A complex vco like the A-111-2 is all about integration. By your
                              > > > > > logic, why have an integrated filter or waveshaper? Wouldn't a
                              > > > > > separate filter [waveshaper] be more flexible?
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > All I was saying was that for a large class of FM sounds, dynamic
                              > > > > > depth is important, and that, at least for me, having this VCA
                              > > > > > integrated into the oscillator would be a good thing.
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > Chris Muir
                              > > > > > cbm@
                              > > > > > http://www.xfade.com
                              > > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > > hello chris,
                              > > > >
                              > > > > i totally agree with you that dynamic depth fm is great,
                              > > > > but including such a function would be nothing else than
                              > > > > adding a vca, which is already available in many incarnations.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > so why including a filter and a waveshaper on the a111/2?
                              > > > > because they are already on the cem chip, so it would be
                              > > > > a waste not to use them.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > best wishes
                              > > > >
                              > > > > ingo
                              > > > >
                              > > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              >
                              >
                              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              >
                            • Alex Pearson
                              There sure is, the AFG comes close too... ;-) But one from Doepfer would be nice, I rather give them my money. Alex ... [Non-text portions of this message have
                              Message 14 of 20 , Aug 5, 2008
                              • 0 Attachment
                                There sure is, the AFG comes close too... ;-)

                                But one from Doepfer would be nice, I rather give them my money.

                                Alex

                                On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 5:46 PM, laryn91 <caymus91@...> wrote:

                                > I think there's already a good dynamic VCO available that's pretty close
                                > to that - the
                                > Zeroscillator.
                                >
                                > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com <Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com>,
                                > "Alex Pearson" <alexpears@...> wrote:
                                > >
                                > > For me... A "dynamic" VCO would have the following:
                                > > 1. Ability to reach sub-audio
                                > > 2. horizontal and vertical waveshaping w/ cv control and attenuation
                                > > 3. linear / exponential fm w/ attenuation
                                > > 4. harmonic automation
                                > > 5. focused on additive rather than subtractive synthesis
                                > > 6. the ability to create new and interesting waveforms
                                > >
                                > > but hey, who am I?
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 3:00 PM, ilanode <techmeier@...> wrote:
                                > >
                                > > > Yes, it's relativly costly to bring those features out. On the other
                                > > > hand you get a highly normalized VCO which enables you to try various
                                > > > dynamic waveshaping on the fly which can be very inspiring and thus
                                > > > might pay off. Rgds, Ingo
                                > > >
                                > > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com <Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com><Doepfer_a100%
                                > 40yahoogroups.com>,
                                > > > "laryn91" <caymus91@> wrote:
                                > > > >
                                > > > > Several people have posted that because the CEM has a filter and
                                > > > VCAs ,we're somehow
                                > > > > getting the features for free (or even low cost). Look at all the
                                > > > additional pots, knobs,
                                > > > > jacks, connections and circuit boards required to implement these
                                > > > additional functions!
                                > > > >
                                > > > > Ask any DIYer, usually the overwhelming cost and time is in those
                                > > > passive components -
                                > > > > not the semiconductors.
                                > > > >
                                > > > >
                                > > > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com <Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com><Doepfer_a100%
                                > 40yahoogroups.com>,
                                > > > "selfoscillate"
                                > > > <synaptic_music@> wrote:
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com<Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com><Doepfer_a100%
                                > 40yahoogroups.com>,
                                > > > Chris Muir <cbm@> wrote:
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > > On Aug 5, 2008, at 1:51 AM, selfoscillate wrote:
                                > > > > > > > i don't see a problem here. you can just add a vca of your
                                > > > > > > > choice to the patch to get dynamic fm.
                                > > > > > > > imho separate vca's give the best flexibility, as you can use
                                > > > > > > > them for other purposes too, if you don't use dynamic fm
                                > > > > > > > in your actual patch.
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > > It's certainly true that you can patch a VCA into FM in. I
                                > > > mentioned
                                > > > > > > that in my original message.
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > > A complex vco like the A-111-2 is all about integration. By your
                                > > > > > > logic, why have an integrated filter or waveshaper? Wouldn't a
                                > > > > > > separate filter [waveshaper] be more flexible?
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > > All I was saying was that for a large class of FM sounds, dynamic
                                > > > > > > depth is important, and that, at least for me, having this VCA
                                > > > > > > integrated into the oscillator would be a good thing.
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > > > Chris Muir
                                > > > > > > cbm@
                                > > > > > > http://www.xfade.com
                                > > > > > >
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > hello chris,
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > i totally agree with you that dynamic depth fm is great,
                                > > > > > but including such a function would be nothing else than
                                > > > > > adding a vca, which is already available in many incarnations.
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > so why including a filter and a waveshaper on the a111/2?
                                > > > > > because they are already on the cem chip, so it would be
                                > > > > > a waste not to use them.
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > best wishes
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > ingo
                                > > > > >
                                > > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                > >
                                >
                                >
                                >


                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • laryn91
                                I suspect going digital is an effective way to make new dynamic VCOs. The Plan B Model 30 looks very interesting. I wish they d hurry up and put up some demo
                                Message 15 of 20 , Aug 5, 2008
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  I suspect going digital is an effective way to make new dynamic VCOs. The Plan B Model 30
                                  looks very interesting. I wish they'd hurry up and put up some demo sounds!


                                  --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Pearson" <alexpears@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > There sure is, the AFG comes close too... ;-)
                                  >
                                  > But one from Doepfer would be nice, I rather give them my money.
                                  >
                                  > Alex
                                  >
                                  > On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 5:46 PM, laryn91 <caymus91@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > > I think there's already a good dynamic VCO available that's pretty close
                                  > > to that - the
                                  > > Zeroscillator.
                                  > >
                                  > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com <Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com>,
                                  > > "Alex Pearson" <alexpears@> wrote:
                                  > > >
                                  > > > For me... A "dynamic" VCO would have the following:
                                  > > > 1. Ability to reach sub-audio
                                  > > > 2. horizontal and vertical waveshaping w/ cv control and attenuation
                                  > > > 3. linear / exponential fm w/ attenuation
                                  > > > 4. harmonic automation
                                  > > > 5. focused on additive rather than subtractive synthesis
                                  > > > 6. the ability to create new and interesting waveforms
                                  > > >
                                  > > > but hey, who am I?
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > > On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 3:00 PM, ilanode <techmeier@> wrote:
                                  > > >
                                  > > > > Yes, it's relativly costly to bring those features out. On the other
                                  > > > > hand you get a highly normalized VCO which enables you to try various
                                  > > > > dynamic waveshaping on the fly which can be very inspiring and thus
                                  > > > > might pay off. Rgds, Ingo
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
                                  <Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com><Doepfer_a100%
                                  > > 40yahoogroups.com>,
                                  > > > > "laryn91" <caymus91@> wrote:
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > Several people have posted that because the CEM has a filter and
                                  > > > > VCAs ,we're somehow
                                  > > > > > getting the features for free (or even low cost). Look at all the
                                  > > > > additional pots, knobs,
                                  > > > > > jacks, connections and circuit boards required to implement these
                                  > > > > additional functions!
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > Ask any DIYer, usually the overwhelming cost and time is in those
                                  > > > > passive components -
                                  > > > > > not the semiconductors.
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
                                  <Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com><Doepfer_a100%
                                  > > 40yahoogroups.com>,
                                  > > > > "selfoscillate"
                                  > > > > <synaptic_music@> wrote:
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > --- In
                                  Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com<Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com><Doepfer_a100%
                                  > > 40yahoogroups.com>,
                                  > > > > Chris Muir <cbm@> wrote:
                                  > > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > > On Aug 5, 2008, at 1:51 AM, selfoscillate wrote:
                                  > > > > > > > > i don't see a problem here. you can just add a vca of your
                                  > > > > > > > > choice to the patch to get dynamic fm.
                                  > > > > > > > > imho separate vca's give the best flexibility, as you can use
                                  > > > > > > > > them for other purposes too, if you don't use dynamic fm
                                  > > > > > > > > in your actual patch.
                                  > > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > > It's certainly true that you can patch a VCA into FM in. I
                                  > > > > mentioned
                                  > > > > > > > that in my original message.
                                  > > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > > A complex vco like the A-111-2 is all about integration. By your
                                  > > > > > > > logic, why have an integrated filter or waveshaper? Wouldn't a
                                  > > > > > > > separate filter [waveshaper] be more flexible?
                                  > > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > > All I was saying was that for a large class of FM sounds, dynamic
                                  > > > > > > > depth is important, and that, at least for me, having this VCA
                                  > > > > > > > integrated into the oscillator would be a good thing.
                                  > > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > > Chris Muir
                                  > > > > > > > cbm@
                                  > > > > > > > http://www.xfade.com
                                  > > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > hello chris,
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > i totally agree with you that dynamic depth fm is great,
                                  > > > > > > but including such a function would be nothing else than
                                  > > > > > > adding a vca, which is already available in many incarnations.
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > so why including a filter and a waveshaper on the a111/2?
                                  > > > > > > because they are already on the cem chip, so it would be
                                  > > > > > > a waste not to use them.
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > best wishes
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > ingo
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  > > >
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  >
                                • hardware@doepfer.de
                                  ... To disclose the secret : the core of the A-111-2 is the CEM3394. This circuit contains a triangle based VCO, a 24 dB VCF with VC resonance, an audio VCA
                                  Message 16 of 20 , Aug 6, 2008
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    > GD2, I believe the VCF and VCA is contained on the CEM chip being
                                    > used for the VCO, thus the lower price, and probably the reason
                                    > to include all such things in one module. Perhaps somebody could
                                    > confirm this...
                                    >
                                    > Tony

                                    To disclose the "secret": the core of the A-111-2 is the CEM3394. This
                                    circuit contains a triangle based VCO, a 24 dB VCF with VC resonance, an
                                    audio VCA and several pre-patched auxiliary VCAs (e.g. for linear FM of
                                    VCO -> VCF or 2 opposite as crossfader working VCAs at the VCF audio input).
                                    The CEM3394 was e.g. used in the Sequential Circuits Sixtrack and some
                                    Simmons drum modules. This explains why the A-111-2 has a filter and VCA
                                    available "for free".

                                    Best wishes
                                    Dieter Doepfer
                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.