Doepfer

What you describe is totally different from the planned module which is
planned as a simple 8 track trigger sequencer but not an analog sequencer
with record function. And there are no plans to include Midi or USB. We want
to keep it simple, easy and low-cost.

Best wishes
Dieter Doepfer


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com]Im Auftrag von John V. Talbert
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. April 2009 13:19
> An: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
> Betreff: Re: [Doepfer_a100] comments on the mini-schaltwerk module?
>
>
> Thanks for the detailed information, Dieter!  Wonderful looking module.
>
> Since it's early in the development stage, maybe I can interject a
> recommendation.  How about considering the addition of one MIDI (or
> CV) input, a CV output per row, a record toggle and a row select so
> that it might be possible to "record" a pattern on-the-fly from a
> keyboard?  What I'm imagining is that in "record" mode, it would work
> somewhat like an SH-101 step sequencer where the first note is
> recorded to the first cell, the second to the second cell, etc. -
> until recording is stopped or the row is full.  The number of notes
> would define the length of the pattern for that row.  I think this
> could make the module even more powerful, even if it might mean a
> smaller number of sequencer rows available to fit the space
> constraint.  Or maybe this could be implemented in two models: one
> specialized for triggers and another for CV which when paired together
> (synced or not) would allow some pretty complex and interesting
> patterns to be created!
>
> Another approach could be to have a USB port to allow patterns to be
> loaded as simple mono, 8-16 step .MID files via a USB drive.  MIDI
> files would be selectable by a simple inc/dec button/CV or numeric
> keypad (meaning restricting the names to 00-99.MID) .  So one could
> take the modular on the road and have access to tons of patterns
> without the need of a computer.  It might be a little less ideal for
> on-the-fly performance than my previous approach, but it might also be
> less expensive to implement and manufacture.
>
> Just a thought.
>
> Kindest regards,
> John
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 4:26 AM,  <yahoo@doepfer.de> wrote:
> > It's a very early prototype of the planned module named "honey
> I shrunk the
> > schaltwerk" ;-)
> > [...]
> > Best wishes
> > Dieter Doepfer
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>