The buchla 259 , and buchla modules in general, are special(unique) because of the distinction between CV and signal patching, the signal voltages are 1vpp, and the VCO uses a triangle core. I paraphrase a quote from Mr.Buchla in which he states somthing along the lines if: audio signals are negatively impacted by harmonic distortion and tolerate DC offset nicely, on the other hand control voltages are unaffect by harmonic distortion yet ipacted by DC offset. By distinguising between and designing a ciruit with unique paths for each, the underlying circuitry can be designed for maximum performance of each. That said, it makes no sense for doepfer to clone a 259 in function only since the fidelity, wide range, wave shaping and fm response are the primarily benefits of the module. I suppose if Mr.Doepfer designed a module that had extrordinary fidelity, extrodinary wave shaping capabilities, wide range unswitched tracking, amplitude modulation, wave shaping modulation, and unmatched FM response, then it would be worth it. That said, I doubt Doepfer customers want a Dual VCO that costs $600+ USD like the Cynthia Zeroscillator. Matt --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "selfoscillate" > hehehe yes, i know, sorry for the confusion. > > but i'm still hoping that the guy who posted the > original mail is willing to answer this question. > how would a buchla 259 compare to all those other > vco's out there, in regard of it's basic sound. > i really want to know what makes it superior over > other vco's. > > best wishes > > ingo
Message
Re: buchla 259 is the best oscillator ever made why doesnt doepfer clone it?
2006-05-18 by mritenburg
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.