Doepfer

hello list,

i'd like to start a poll, but want to collect
additional ideas first.

the preliminary frontpanel design of the a111/2 dynamic vco
offers two knobs for tuning: coarse tune and fine tune.
lets say, that this is option 1.

actually there are two other ideas regarding the tuning controls.

option 2:
an additional octave switch (like on the a111),
so we would have three controls for tuning.

option 3:
a single multiturn tuning knob (similar to the zeroscillator
tuning knob, but probably not that big in size), so
we would have only one knob for tuning. this would be the
most expensive solution tough.

any other suggestions?

btw, from my personal preference i would prefer option 2.

best wishes

ingo

Hi Ingo,

Here are some extra suggestions.

Option 2, should have a switch that switches between octave control 
plus with regular coarse and fine tune knobs, and no octave control 
with regular coarse and fine tune knobs. This way you have the 
option to sweep the oscillator through its full range with the 
coarse tune pot. 

Option 3, I would disagree with a single 10 turn pot to control the 
frequency, as it would make wide frequency sweeps impossible. The 
reason for a multi-turn pot on the frequency is to have a wider  
range of control over the frequency range to pick off harmonic 
intervals between 2 oscillators or for microtonal tunings. That 
said, you can use a multi-turn pot for the fine tune control to a 
greater range of precision. You could use a 3 turn pot instead of a 
10 turn, to save money on the part, and you will have the best of 
both worlds. 

You will have a coarse tune control for a wide range frequency and a 
3 turn fine tune control for precise control of the frequency. Now, 
add switchable octave control and you truly have a versatile 
oscillator. This will definitely add to the price of the oscillator, 
but also flexibility to control it.

Regards,
RM



--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "selfoscillate" 
<synaptic_music@...> wrote:

>
> 
> hello list,
> 
> i'd like to start a poll, but want to collect
> additional ideas first.
> 
> the preliminary frontpanel design of the a111/2 dynamic vco
> offers two knobs for tuning: coarse tune and fine tune.
> lets say, that this is option 1.
> 
> actually there are two other ideas regarding the tuning controls.
> 
> option 2:
> an additional octave switch (like on the a111),
> so we would have three controls for tuning.
> 
> option 3:
> a single multiturn tuning knob (similar to the zeroscillator
> tuning knob, but probably not that big in size), so
> we would have only one knob for tuning. this would be the
> most expensive solution tough.
> 
> any other suggestions?
> 
> btw, from my personal preference i would prefer option 2.
> 
> best wishes
> 
> ingo
>

hello ingo,
option 2 is best and the most practical!!
but, if the multiturn knob looks realy nice (like on
the ems vcs3) i would prefer the multiturn knob...
anyway, for me, option 2 or option 3 are better than
option 1 for sure!
best regards,
Bakis.



--- selfoscillate <synaptic_music@yahoo.com> wrote:

> 
> hello list,
> 
> i'd like to start a poll, but want to collect
> additional ideas first.
> 
> the preliminary frontpanel design of the a111/2
> dynamic vco
> offers two knobs for tuning: coarse tune and fine
> tune.
> lets say, that this is option 1.
> 
> actually there are two other ideas regarding the
> tuning controls.
> 
> option 2:
> an additional octave switch (like on the a111),
> so we would have three controls for tuning.
> 
> option 3:
> a single multiturn tuning knob (similar to the
> zeroscillator
> tuning knob, but probably not that big in size), so
> we would have only one knob for tuning. this would
> be the
> most expensive solution tough.
> 
> any other suggestions?
> 
> btw, from my personal preference i would prefer
> option 2.
> 
> best wishes
> 
> ingo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


Bakis Sirros - Parallel Worlds
[Doepfer_a100] group owner
http://www.parallel-worlds-music.com
http://www.myspace.com/parallelworldsmusic
http://www.shimarecords.co.uk
http://www.rubber.gr
Athens-Greece

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

I have had experience with a couple of synths with multi turn VCO  
tuning. I've had 3 EMS Synthi (2 AKS and a VCS3) and a 2 and 4 voice  
Oberheim. Both units did not have real mult-turn pots but instead had  
multi turn knobs that geared down to standard pots (a much cheaper  
solution). The Oberheim units were the easiest to use. The outer big  
knob were coarse and the inner were fine. That way you didn't have to  
move your hand position and the panel space was less. The multi turn  
EMS pot was a drag when you wanted to go from one end to the other  
(this was somewhat compensated for with the EMS's huge 0.32v/oct CV  
range). I dislike switches cause it always seem like I would tune to  
one end of the pot, find it isn't far enough, flip the switch, then  
have to go back to the other end of the pot for that little bit that  
I almost got to. I vote for Coarse/Fine.
-James


On Sep 11, 2006, at 4:41 AM, selfoscillate wrote:

>
> hello list,
>
> i'd like to start a poll, but want to collect
> additional ideas first.
>
> the preliminary frontpanel design of the a111/2 dynamic vco
> offers two knobs for tuning: coarse tune and fine tune.
> lets say, that this is option 1.
>
> actually there are two other ideas regarding the tuning controls.
>
> option 2:
> an additional octave switch (like on the a111),
> so we would have three controls for tuning.
>
> option 3:
> a single multiturn tuning knob (similar to the zeroscillator
> tuning knob, but probably not that big in size), so
> we would have only one knob for tuning. this would be the
> most expensive solution tough.
>
> any other suggestions?
>
> btw, from my personal preference i would prefer option 2.
>
> best wishes
>
> ingo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


James Husted
The ErsatZ Planet Graphics and Sound
http://homepage.mac.com/ersatzplanet/
james.husted@mac.com

"Welcome to the first day of the rest of your money..."

i agree fully....

James Husted <ersatzplanet@mac.com> wrote:          I have had experience with a couple of synths with multi turn VCO 
tuning. I've had 3 EMS Synthi (2 AKS and a VCS3) and a 2 and 4 voice 
Oberheim. Both units did not have real mult-turn pots but instead had 
multi turn knobs that geared down to standard pots (a much cheaper 
solution). The Oberheim units were the easiest to use. The outer big 
knob were coarse and the inner were fine. That way you didn't have to 
move your hand position and the panel space was less. The multi turn 
EMS pot was a drag when you wanted to go from one end to the other 
(this was somewhat compensated for with the EMS's huge 0.32v/oct CV 
range). I dislike switches cause it always seem like I would tune to 
one end of the pot, find it isn't far enough, flip the switch, then 
have to go back to the other end of the pot for that little bit that 
I almost got to. I vote for Coarse/Fine.
-James

On Sep 11, 2006, at 4:41 AM, selfoscillate wrote:

>
> hello list,
>
> i'd like to start a poll, but want to collect
> additional ideas first.
>
> the preliminary frontpanel design of the a111/2 dynamic vco
> offers two knobs for tuning: coarse tune and fine tune.
> lets say, that this is option 1.
>
> actually there are two other ideas regarding the tuning controls.
>
> option 2:
> an additional octave switch (like on the a111),
> so we would have three controls for tuning.
>
> option 3:
> a single multiturn tuning knob (similar to the zeroscillator
> tuning knob, but probably not that big in size), so
> we would have only one knob for tuning. this would be the
> most expensive solution tough.
>
> any other suggestions?
>
> btw, from my personal preference i would prefer option 2.
>
> best wishes
>
> ingo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

James Husted
The ErsatZ Planet Graphics and Sound
http://homepage.mac.com/ersatzplanet/
james.husted@mac.com

"Welcome to the first day of the rest of your money..."



         


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