110 vs 111 (was Re: tuning
- --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Bakis Sirros
> hello matthew,Hi Bakis,
> i don't agree with you.the matrix 6 has DCO's!the a111
> are real vco's.and they sound much better!i owned the
> matrix 6 some yeasrs ago and it's sound was far worse
> than the sound of my a100 modular!ok,the a111 vco's
> sound cleaner than the a110's and the moog vco's,but
> they still sound great.
Yes sir, you are correct! The DCO's of the Matrix 6/1000 are based
on the CEM 3396 chip while the A111 is based on the CEM 3340. To my
ears, they sound similar. We'll have to agree to disagree there!
Please understand that my comments are in no way are meant to suggest
that either the A110 or the A111 sound bad compared Moog or
Oberheim. Rather, I agree that both sound good, just different than
one might expect.
- The A110 and A111 CAN be calibrated to very accurate standards. I
spend a couple of hours every few months checking such things, and
set mine up to track to the cent for 6 full octaves (check with Doug
at Sonic Highway if you think I'm stretching the truth).
That said, I know 6 octaves is anal, but...
- hello gino,
i prefer the a111, mainly because of the better tracking.
soundwise it depends on the waveform in question which
osc sounds better imho. i prefer the a110 sinewave, for
sawtooth and triangle i go for the a111.
the analogue systems oscs are great for pulsewaves.
but as always, it's a matter of taste. if i had to
decide which to buy, a110 or a111, i would go for the a111.
--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "Robair, Gino" <GRobair@p...>
> Someone on the list once said they thought the 110 sounded richer(or "better", though I can't remember the exact word) than the 111,
which I thought was interesting (I don't own a Doepfer...yet....but
working on it). Tuning and tracking issues aside, what are your
opinions on the sound of the two oscillators.