I agree with just about everything our mysterious anonymous guest writes, what puzzles me is this anonymity biz, but thats he's thing. For my own part I do feel a bit embarrassed to been conned into buying the Regelwerk, but not much enough to make me hide my name ;) After reading the sales line "and also functions as a simple step sequencer usiong the 8 cv outs..." I thought "ok, an 8 track step sequencer is just what i need and even though expensive it is worth it". I should have read the by that date only in german manual first and discovered the fixed notes lenght and no pattern chaining. Then of course I would have bought something else or perhaps just a big midi-cv converter. I stayed clear of the shaltwerk simply cause I thought it was way overpriced when I did get a demo of it. Also a thanx to our mystery guest for the tip to Future Retro, the mobius seems just like what i should have bought in the first place. But does it only have one cv out? Single track seems a little limited to me. What midi-cv or cv-seqencing solutions do you guys you by the way? A poll perhaps? /Andreas Lindholm ----- Original Message ----- From: "ringmod45" <ringmod45@yahoo.com> To: <Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2002 5:31 PM Subject: [Doepfer_a100] Re: Schaltwerk > --- In Doepfer_a100@y..., Florian Anwander <Florian.Anwander@c...> > wrote: > > Hi RM > > > > first of all: please sign with a real name. This is a requirement > in the > > usenet and should be good taste in a forum like this too. (Btw: If > I would > > be D. Döpfer, I would not care for a post of someone, who does not > stand > > for his name. But I don't speak for Doepfer). > > > hi florian, i do not mean or want to disrespect you or the members of > this group. i wish to keep my identity private and personal. if mr. > Doepfer wishes to contact personally, i would be glad to do so. the > reason mr. Doepfer should take me very seriously is the simple fact > that i have well over $10,000 USD invested in his equipment. > > 24U of A100 modules (2 portables including a full spec. vocoder and 2 > 6U rack units), MAQ 16/3, Regelwerk, Schaltwerk and a Drehbabank. > > i would say that me puts me in the top tier of users out there. > Second, this also means i am firm supporter the Doepfer company, not > a newbie who just purchased his first synth and midi sequencer with > cv and gates. > > i have been evangelizing Doepfer products since i first discovered > them. i have helped bring at least $7000 USD of business to his > company, simply by letting other people having a go with my gear. > > to give you an example, 10 days ago a few friends of mine got > together to socialize at my place( i.e. have a few beers and listen > to music). one of them had never seen my studio before. we are all > people who make music using both hardware and software. when he > walked in, the first thing he noticed was the MAQ. he said he > previously owned one, but was disappointed with the unit. my friend > has a sick modular that makes mine look like an SH_101 in comparison. > he asked how i liked it. i said great. i turned on the MAQ. i pressed > play and he noticed the PA4 in the event field. he said i have never > seen or used it in that mode. why? the manual is not clear, plus the > fact that you can't access it when the MAQ is in run mode and if you > turn the dial to go to the PA and PR fields in the MAQ ,from NA1 > let's say. once you start turning the dial in run mode to GO to the > PA and PR fields, when you reach the T32 field it throws the sync of > the channel right off then it speeds up and slows down for a few > notes. IS THIS A FLAW OR BUG? i don't know, you tell me. sure seems > like a bug. the only way to access the PA and PR fields is when the > MAQ is in stop mode, then you turn the dial all the way to the end to > get the PA and PR fields. the golden question is why are the PA and > PR fields at the back of the event field? shouldn't they be right > after the NA and NR fields,so you don't throw the sync between the 3 > channels out. Everybody i talked to has never used the MAQ this way. > my assumption from the few people i have met that have used the MAQ, > is that the majority of MAQ owners would only be using the MAQ in the > NA and NR modes and constantly triggering 16th notes. > > it would be nice, Bakkis for you to create a poll to see how many > members have an MAQ 16/3 and use the MAQ in the NA and NR fields only > or use the NA,NR and PA,PR fields. and also to see if other members > have the flaw or bug i reported above. > > then my friend complained about sync and timing. i showed him how > tight the MAQ is. i slaved the MAQ to the TR-909 and used the MAQ to > trigger my Kawai XD-5 and vice versa. the result was he couldn't > find any difference, it was smack on. i have never tried to measure > them in logic. > > to conclude this segment. my friend is thinking of purchasing the MAQ > again. DID I SHOW HIM MY SCHALTWERK? THE ANSWER IS NO. i am too > embarrassed to say i even own one. > > > > > > So now to the topic: I am one of the first Schaltwerk users and > Betatester > > (mine is that old, that is has no CV interface). Chris Assall (the > software > > engineer at Doepfer) received a four pages of bugreport for the > Schaltwerk. > > We talked a five hours about it. The result was: the processor is > on the > > end of his power. So this is the truth as you stated. > > > > > > > > The following is MY PERSONAL OPINION - nothing I know from Doepfer. > > > > The Schaltwerk was assumingly an economic disaster: Originally > developped > > as an addition to the MAQ for Kraftwerk (and with a lot less > features), > > they decided to make a complete product out of it. Then there were > a lot of > > unnexpected problems (hardware and software). > > why bother to develop and release a product if major problems arise. > most companies do R & D on future products. if they can't make a > vaible product or find a suitable market and price point, they simply > don't release them. you do not see a company release a poor product > to try and recoup their R&D because they failed to execute it > properly. > > > >The developement time > > exceeded any reasonable amount. So they had to make it quite > expensive. > > This caused, that sales did not run. > > the sales did not run because they were trying to sell apples in a > golden basket. look at the Future Retro Mobius. There are 256 > recordable patterns available. Each recording note duration, pitch, > accent , glide, loop point, and time signature. Pattern editing > features include copy/paste, pattern shifting, pattern transposing, > multiple pattern cueing, and LED chase. Pattern editing and recording > can be done while the sequencer is running, and it will automatically > save all your edits so you don't have to stop creating! > > people this unit sells for $325 usd. if they can manufacture the > entire unit for that price, you mean to tell me that Doepfer can not > produce a new cpu, memory and software upgrade to include some of the > above functions and all the ones mentioned in the Doepfer EZ board > forum for $150 to $200 usd. i don't buy it for a moment. they have > admitted defeat and shafted all the schaltwerk owners out there, my > self included. i am sure that all the schaltwerk owners would gladly > pay that sum to salvage their machines instead selling them for less > than half of what they originally paid for them and actually start > using them for creative uses, intead of sending only 16th notes. > > > > > They tried to get some value return, by creating the Regelwerk > (which we > > can describe as the original idea: combination of Schaltwerk and > MAQ). > > tell me why the regelwerk is short on memory, CPU power and > functions.this is were they should have picked up the pieces and run > with it.no siree. they could have built a new cpu logic PCB with more > memory and a better OS . they could have built one board to do both > the schaltwerk and the regelwerk and have written code for each > machine separately to accomadate their respective hardware surfaces > and functions. again no, they chose to limit them. > > > > It sold better and did not cost that much, since half of the > development > > was done already for the Schaltwerk. So it had a little better, but > not > > very good cash return. > > > > So they had to invest energy, time and money into products, which > give > > better sales. > > right, we failed and you bite the bullet. we will ignore you in the > meantime,then dangle the software revision carrot to pacify you.but > hey you can buy the new and improved version with BLUE LEDS.the > bullshit has to STOP. fix it and watch people buy them and be happy > they purchased one in the first place. > > > And they had to do this immediately, since the sales from > > other products (Keyboards, MS404, basic A100) had reached their max > count > > of possible sales. So they developped lowbudget versions of a > faderbox. > > This took all their manpower. > > manpower that was misspent in my mind. there are 4 versions of the > product, plus one with blue leds. what's so hard about having a > version 2 of the schaltwerk. there is a version 3 of the MAQ 16/3 > which users of version 1 had to pay for a board replacement for the > upgrade to version 3. when i saw Kraftwerk live in '97, they were not > using black face version 1 MAQ's on stage. i would bet the bank they > would love to have their schaltwerk upgraded to a version 2 that can > tie and slide notes. remember they tied and slid notes with Roland > MC4B's before Doepfer made any products. > > > > > For such a small enterprise like Doepfer an unsuccessful product > like the > > Schaltwerk can be a killer problem. > > they can remedy the situation and the problem will go away.the > benefit will be a happy customer base that evanglize their products > which will then generate more sales. more sales means they recuop > thew losses from their inherit miscaculation from the start. > > > This would cause nine people becoming > > unemployed. > > Future Retro are basically two people who run the show. they do > upgrade their products,when needed. i don't see any notices of them > going unemployed. > > >So I can accept that they invest in better selling products > > instead of bugfixing of older products, which do not return any > buck. > > they did it with the MAQ 16/3, why not with the schaltwerk. i don't > see a notice of Doepfer discontinuing the MAQ 16/3 any time soon. > seems it served Doepfer well to uprade the MAQ 16/3 > > > > > > > So far these are my private theories. > > Florian, i respect what have you written. the above replies and > opinions, are how strong i feel toward the Schaltwerk. i feel sad > that the machine has not reached its full potential, which it truly > deserves. something should been done immediately. plus ,why do all of > their sequencers trigger only 16th notes? i did not spend two hours > of my life writing this post top slag Doepfer. i wrote it to some how > inspire them to fulfill the schaltwerk's due course. > > Regards, > RM > > > > > > > > In fact I know that the bugfixes are still on the to do list at > Doepfer. > > Chris Assall called me last year, whether I had further complaints. > So I > > know it is deferred, but not kicked out. > > > > > > Florian > > > > -- > > Florian Anwander |ConSol* HP-Support > > Tel. +49.89.45841-133 |Consulting&Solutions Software > GmbH > > Fax +49.89.45841-139 |Franziskanerstr. 38, D-81669 > München > > email: florian.anwander@c... |http://www.consol.de > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > doepfer_a100-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > >
Message
Re: [Doepfer_a100] Re: Schaltwerk
2002-02-23 by Andreas Lindholm
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.