200e

>
>    Any plans from BAS for a reissue of the Easel?
> > Seems like the components are already being made (and I suspect,
> > succesfully sold...), so a more compact one-piece sound source to which
> > the Thunder could be added would make sense.....better yet, a 25-key
> > touch plate board with (here I go again!) a chromatic layout would be
> > highly coveted (I'll take two, please! ;-)<).
> >
> > Ezra?? Any comments?
> >
> 
> nc, sorry...
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

>
> Let me play devil's advocate for a minute. Much as I would love to see
> an 208 reissue or reinterpretation, couldn't similar functionality be
> had in similar space with existing 200e modules? It seems to me that
> the combo of a 261e, 282e, 292e and the new 206e fits in the same
> space as the Easel, and generates a similar sonic palette, and
> provides presets, too, albeit ones that you can't fondle.
>
> There are a handful of important things missing when trying to
> recreate the 208 in the same panel space: random voltages, sequencer /
> pulser, spring reverb, envelope detector, and doubtless some things
> I'm forgetting.
>
> What are the reasons people would like to see a 208e? What are the
> features of the original 208 that would make you want a reissue?
>
> For me, they include:
>  - immediate control of a nice little voice architecture
>  - sliders provide fast manipulation of multiple parameters
> simultaneously
>  - uncorrelated random outputs a really nice touch
>
> -C
>
> Chris Muir
> cbm@well.com
> http://www.xfade.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

>
> Chris Muir wrote:
> > What are the reasons people would like to see a 208e? What are the  
> > features of the original 208 that would make you want a reissue?
>

>
> I am trying to see if a doepfer spring reverb tank will fit into the 
> buchla if so, and I can work the power out , I will pop it behind a 
> blank panel:-)
> Actually thinking about it now maybe a Ken STone Real Ring mod too
> 
> Ross
> 
> >
> >
>

> I'm forgetting.
> 
> What are the reasons people would like to see a 208e? What are the  
> features of the original 208 that would make you want a reissue?
> 
> For me, they include:
>   - immediate control of a nice little voice architecture
>   - sliders provide fast manipulation of multiple parameters  
> simultaneously
>   - uncorrelated random outputs a really nice touch
> 
> -C
> 
> Chris Muir
> cbm@...	
> http://www.xfade.com
>

From: JB <ringmodulator@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [200e] eASEL?
To: 200e@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, November 23, 2008, 8:16 AM










    
            208e would be really tempting but i would prefer a 296e



jb



2008/11/23 Chris Muir <cbm@well.com>:

>

> Let me play devil's advocate for a minute. Much as I would love to see

> an 208 reissue or reinterpretation, couldn't similar functionality be

> had in similar space with existing 200e modules? It seems to me that

> the combo of a 261e, 282e, 292e and the new 206e fits in the same

> space as the Easel, and generates a similar sonic palette, and

> provides presets, too, albeit ones that you can't fondle.

>

> There are a handful of important things missing when trying to

> recreate the 208 in the same panel space: random voltages, sequencer /

> pulser, spring reverb, envelope detector, and doubtless some things

> I'm forgetting.

>

> What are the reasons people would like to see a 208e? What are the

> features of the original 208 that would make you want a reissue?

>

> For me, they include:

>  - immediate control of a nice little voice architecture

>  - sliders provide fast manipulation of multiple parameters

> simultaneously

>  - uncorrelated random outputs a really nice touch

>

> -C

>

> Chris Muir

> cbm@well.com

> http://www.xfade. com

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> ------------ --------- --------- ------

>

> Yahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>

>


      

    
    
	
	 
	
	








	


	
	


      

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> From: amnesia <amni56@tpg.com.au>
> Subject: Re: [200e] eASEL? Scratch That 288e!!!
> To: 200e@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sunday, November 23, 2008, 6:05 PM
> I am trying to see if a doepfer spring reverb tank will fit
> into the 
> buchla if so, and I can work the power out , I will pop it
> behind a 
> blank panel:-)
> Actually thinking about it now maybe a Ken STone Real Ring
> mod too
> 
> Ross
> 
> >
> >

>
> I'd think the 285e for ring mod!
>
> --- On Sun, 11/23/08, amnesia <amni56@tpg.com.au 
> <mailto:amni56%40tpg.com.au>> wrote:
>
> > From: amnesia <amni56@tpg.com.au <mailto:amni56%40tpg.com.au>>
> > Subject: Re: [200e] eASEL? Scratch That 288e!!!
> > To: 200e@yahoogroups.com <mailto:200e%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Sunday, November 23, 2008, 6:05 PM
> > I am trying to see if a doepfer spring reverb tank will fit
> > into the
> > buchla if so, and I can work the power out , I will pop it
> > behind a
> > blank panel:-)
> > Actually thinking about it now maybe a Ken STone Real Ring
> > mod too
> >
> > Ross
> >
> > >
> > >
>
>

From: tmeade1974 <tmeade1974@yahoo.com>
Subject: [200e] Re: eASEL? Scratch That 288e!!!
To: 200e@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, November 23, 2008, 6:14 PM










    
            I'll echo a request for a stereo (or even quad!) delay module that has a modulation 

sequencer like the 291e with control over mix, delay time and feedback.  And maybe have 

a some eq or filter control as well.  I can just imagine that with the feedback patched 

through the new 285e!!!  That right there is a system in itself.



-tom



--- In 200e@yahoogroups. com, amnesia <amni56@...> wrote:

>

> I am trying to see if a doepfer spring reverb tank will fit into the 

> buchla if so, and I can work the power out , I will pop it behind a 

> blank panel:-)

> Actually thinking about it now maybe a Ken STone Real Ring mod too

> 

> Ross

> 

> >

> >

>




      

    
    
	
	 
	
	








	


	
	


      

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> From: amnesia <amni56@tpg.com.au>
> Subject: Re: [200e] eASEL? Scratch That 288e!!!
> To: 200e@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sunday, November 23, 2008, 6:12 PM
> HI Don
> yes but the Ken Stone Real Ring Mod is $50 :-)
> 
> But I am sure I will get the Buchla :-)
> 
> don hassler wrote:
> >
> > I'd think the 285e for ring mod!
> >
> > --- On Sun, 11/23/08, amnesia <amni56@tpg.com.au 
> > <mailto:amni56%40tpg.com.au>> wrote:
> >
> > > From: amnesia <amni56@tpg.com.au
> <mailto:amni56%40tpg.com.au>>
> > > Subject: Re: [200e] eASEL? Scratch That 288e!!!
> > > To: 200e@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:200e%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > Date: Sunday, November 23, 2008, 6:05 PM
> > > I am trying to see if a doepfer spring reverb
> tank will fit
> > > into the
> > > buchla if so, and I can work the power out , I
> will pop it
> > > behind a
> > > blank panel:-)
> > > Actually thinking about it now maybe a Ken STone
> Real Ring
> > > mod too
> > >
> > > Ross
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >

>
> a two panel system with a 266e, 261e, 281e, 292e and the 222e would 
> be very close though you don't get the pulser you do get a lot more 
> stuff. The thing I would like to see would be a mini 222 in 2 or 3 
> module space without the rings...a bit more simple. Something to 
> touch that put out velocity, gates and voltages. If you added a 206e 
> to the above modules (assuming a mini 222e existed) you'd have more 
> than an easel. All that said, and NOT even having played an Easel it 
> appears that the consolidated/integrated design of the Easel sound 
> panel is so completely elegant that it's hard to recreate the same 
> thing with individual modules.... 
> 
> --- In 200e@yahoogroups.com, Chris Muir <cbm@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > Let me play devil's advocate for a minute. Much as I would love to 
> see  
> > an 208 reissue or reinterpretation, couldn't similar functionality 
> be  
> > had in similar space with existing 200e modules? It seems to me 
> that  
> > the combo of a 261e, 282e, 292e and the new 206e fits in the same  
> > space as the Easel, and generates a similar sonic palette, and  
> > provides presets, too, albeit ones that you can't fondle.
> > 
> > There are a handful of important things missing when trying to  
> > recreate the 208 in the same panel space: random voltages, 
> sequencer /  
> > pulser, spring reverb, envelope detector, and doubtless some 
> things  
> > I'm forgetting.
> > 
> > What are the reasons people would like to see a 208e? What are the  
> > features of the original 208 that would make you want a reissue?
> > 
> > For me, they include:
> >   - immediate control of a nice little voice architecture
> >   - sliders provide fast manipulation of multiple parameters  
> > simultaneously
> >   - uncorrelated random outputs a really nice touch
> > 
> > -C
> > 
> > Chris Muir
> > cbm@	
> > http://www.xfade.com
> >
>

>
> --- In 200e@yahoogroups.com, Chris Muir <cbm@> wrote:
> 
> > What are the reasons people would like to see a 208e? What are the  
> > features of the original 208 that would make you want a reissue?
> > 
> > For me, they include:
> >   - immediate control of a nice little voice architecture
> >   - sliders provide fast manipulation of multiple parameters  
> > simultaneously
> >   - uncorrelated random outputs a really nice touch
> 
> Those sound like pretty good reasons to me!  I'd like a 208 re-release
> or updated equivalent because it would be (even) more portable than a
> 200e system, and because it would have MORE LIMITED functionality. 
> That's a good thing.  It is easier to have a complete grasp of the
> sonic potential with a less open-ended architecture.
>