Doepfer

Hi ja,

The MAQ is a good machine that does it's job very well, except for 
the fact that it does not do tied notes a la tb303. If you plan doing 
music with a 16th note base all day , it's great. However, if you 
have an interest in more musical note values, I would recommed the P3 
Sequencer from Colin Fraser, url below.

http://www.p3sequencer.com/

Check out the website, it is more interactive than the MAQ. It has 
more tracks and you can do the 606 and 303 style programming, read 
the manual and see if it is more useful for you. I am waiting for the 
new boards to arrive so I can order and build one, they also 
available as ready built units now.

If you are Apple inclined, I would recommend Numerology from Five12. 
It is an OSX program which is basically a modular step sequencer with 
lots of variety. This program and a good midi2cv box will give you a 
very powerful sequencer setup.

http://www.five12.com/

Hope this helps.
RM


--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "jauer9" <jauer9@e...> wrote:
> I am new to Doepfer, and I am seeking more info on the build 
quality 
> from all the experienced users here. 
> 
> My first excursion will be a MAQ16, but I have heard that the 
quality 
> of these devices is poor: legends rub off, MIDI loses sync, the 
> rotary encoder wears out quickly. Admittedly, this opinion comes 
from 
> only one or two websites in the UK, so there may be some 
unmentioned 
> bias happening in the background from these sources.
> 
> Nonetheless, I would greatly appreciate anyone's comments about the 
> overall quality of Doepfer instruments, the MAQ in particular.
> 
> Would anyone suggest the blue LED version? Would it be more 
reliable? 
> (blue LEDs draw less current, as I understand it, so less taxing on 
> power supply...maybe)
> 
> There are two other "MAQ" Yahoo groups, but there is no activity 
> there and few members and many SPAM porn posts.
> 
> I looked into SoftStep, but this is a completely different beast 
and 
> although similar to the MAQ, lacks some of it's features (but adds 
> lots more for algorithmic composition) SoftStep can't replace the 
> MAQ, IMHO.
> 
> I don't really need bells and whistles, just a basic SQ-10-like box 
> to get me started in modular synthesis control.
> 
> I have some old modular CV stuff, but would like to go towards all-
> Doepfer eventually.
> 
> Again, anyone's comments would be greatly appreciated. I mean, if 
> these products are well made, this should be made known! If the 
> quality is not-so-hot, this should be stated, too.
> 
> Thanks to all!!
> 
> (and sorry for the newbie 'tude)
> 
> ja