Monster case, standard case, ... opinions wanted
2008-02-22 by José Sogo Flores
Yahoo Groups archive
Index last updated: 2026-04-29 00:15 UTC
Thread
2008-02-22 by José Sogo Flores
Hi, The time is come to start thinking about expanding my Doepfer system. Now we have 4 options: monster case, standard rack case, portable case and low-cost case. Considering money is not an issue and you are thinking in terms of having at the end about 4-6 times the number of modules in a standard case, wich pros and cons do you find for every option? I don't need the Doepfer to be rackmounted. Thanks for your opinions in advance. Best regards Jose [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2008-02-22 by Floppy
why dont you just buy them all ? José Sogo Flores schrieb: > > Hi, > > The time is come to start thinking about expanding my Doepfer system. > Now we > have 4 options: monster case, standard rack case, portable case and > low-cost > case. Considering money is not an issue and you are thinking in terms of > having at the end about 4-6 times the number of modules in a standard > case, > wich pros and cons do you find for every option? I don't need the > Doepfer to > be rackmounted. > > Thanks for your opinions in advance. > > Best regards > > Jose > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2008-02-22 by Florian Anwander
Hi Jose, if you want to transport the system to stage or other venues, you shouldn't take anything else but the portable suitcase. The Monsterrack is not very comfortable, if you have to transport it on your own. If you want to use it only in the studio I'd suggest something like the standard racks in a self built frame or something completely DIY'ed like those: http://www.doepfer.de/A100_custom.htm I have two standard racks built in a simple cabinet-like wood rack for my studio (http://fa.utfs.org/img/rack_A100_blitz.jpg), one Doepfer portable rack for live, and finally I use a single rack as real portable system http://fa.utfs.org/diy/a100/index.html (or http://weltklang-music.de/html/body_langenacht2004.html) Florian José Sogo Flores wrote: > Hi, > > The time is come to start thinking about expanding my Doepfer system. Now we > have 4 options: monster case, standard rack case, portable case and low-cost > case. Considering money is not an issue and you are thinking in terms of > having at the end about 4-6 times the number of modules in a standard case, > wich pros and cons do you find for every option? I don't need the Doepfer to > be rackmounted. > > Thanks for your opinions in advance. > > Best regards > > Jose > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > -- Florian Anwander |ConSol Tel. +49(89)45841-133 |Consulting&Solutions Software GmbH Fax +49(89)45841-111 |Franziskanerstr. 38, D-81669 München email: florian.anwander@consol.de |http://www.consol.de
2008-02-22 by hardware@doepfer.de
> if you want to transport the system to stage or other venues, you > shouldn't take anything else but the portable suitcase. The Monsterrack > is not very comfortable, if you have to transport it on your own. That's true for the double monster. But the single monster can be carried by one person. OK - not for miles, but from the car to the stage it will work. I did it several times during the last year. In any case a trolley makes things easier. Best wishes Dieter Doepfer
2008-02-22 by Silas Johansen
I would go with G6 cases. First two I would put in a slanted tabletop rack, next two in another rack, and if I were to get any more after that I would build, or have somebody build me, two racks with a slanted front for the lower 12 units and a vertical front for the upper 6 units, then mount three G6 cases in each. This would be portable, but more geared towards studio use. A word on ergonomics: I personally find slanted surfaces nicer to work with, except when I get above shoulder hight where vertical is nicer. Ideally, I wouldn't want to go above four or five rows (two G6 and possibly a G3) in hight, but if I ever extend my synth to a large enough size it might be necessary - I would probably put stuff that I didn't need to tweak a lot near the top - say, a standard patch with two-three VCO's, mixer, VCF, VCA and of course a couple of envelopes and LFO's - I would probably leave this patched up nearly all the time and only do minor stuff like changing LFO rates, VCF frequency and envelope settings. Another word on ergonomics: You don't want patch cable clutter in front of modules that you tweak all the time. I work a lot with a sequencer, and for that reason it is placed on the top row. So is my manual CV source and an LFO - all easily accessible. Modules along the rightmost edge are also easy to tweak as jacks are generally to the left on most modules, another point worth considering. However, don't forget that short patch cords make less clutter, so putting mixers between VCO's and filters, VCA's on the other side of the filters and EG's and LFO's where you need them most often also makes a lot of sense. Experiment with your layout and don't be afraid to move modules around. /Silas On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Florian Anwander <Florian.Anwander@consol.de> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi Jose, > > if you want to transport the system to stage or other venues, you > shouldn't take anything else but the portable suitcase. The Monsterrack > is not very comfortable, if you have to transport it on your own. > > If you want to use it only in the studio I'd suggest something like the > standard racks in a self built frame or something completely DIY'ed like > those: http://www.doepfer.de/A100_custom.htm > > I have two standard racks built in a simple cabinet-like wood rack for > my studio (http://fa.utfs.org/img/rack_A100_blitz.jpg), one Doepfer > portable rack for live, and finally I use a single rack as real portable > system http://fa.utfs.org/diy/a100/index.html (or > http://weltklang-music.de/html/body_langenacht2004.html) > > Florian > > > José Sogo Flores wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > The time is come to start thinking about expanding my Doepfer system. Now > we > > have 4 options: monster case, standard rack case, portable case and > low-cost > > case. Considering money is not an issue and you are thinking in terms of > > having at the end about 4-6 times the number of modules in a standard > case, > > wich pros and cons do you find for every option? I don't need the Doepfer > to > > be rackmounted. > > > > Thanks for your opinions in advance. > > > > Best regards > > > > Jose > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > -- > Florian Anwander |ConSol > Tel. +49(89)45841-133 |Consulting&Solutions Software GmbH > Fax +49(89)45841-111 |Franziskanerstr. 38, D-81669 München > email: florian.anwander@consol.de |http://www.consol.de >
2008-02-22 by hardware@doepfer.de
> A word on ergonomics: I personally find slanted surfaces nicer to work > with, except when I get above shoulder hight where vertical is nicer. We will show a bottom section for the A-100 suitcase and monster case at Frankfurt. It will be equipped with one horizontal aligned row of modules (mainly for controlling modules like joystick, Theremin, wheels, light controlled voltages and so on) and a second slanted row with 135 degrees to the horizontal and vertical modules (these are module mounted in the monster or suitcase). We are waiting for the prototypes from our case manufacturer. Pictures will follow as soon as they arrive next week. Best wishes Dieter Doepfer
2008-02-22 by partlydrone
yup, that might just stop me going DIY. although sheesh, all that silver and black, don't you have trees in germany? --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Guy D2 <guy@...> wrote:
> > > Yes ! Exactly what I was waiting for. > > I was already designing a similar setup (controls on a slanted surface > in front of the other modules), but now I can spare myself the trouble, > sit back, and wait... > > Thanks, Dieter ! > > -g > > > > > We will show a bottom section for the A-100 suitcase and monster > > case at > > Frankfurt. It will be equipped with one horizontal aligned row of > > modules > > (mainly for controlling modules like joystick, Theremin, wheels, light > > controlled voltages and so on) and a second slanted row with 135 > > degrees to > > the horizontal and vertical modules (these are module mounted in the > > monster > > or suitcase). We are waiting for the prototypes from our case > > manufacturer. > > Pictures will follow as soon as they arrive next week. > > > > Best wishes > > Dieter Doepfer > > >
2008-02-22 by Guy D2
Yes ! Exactly what I was waiting for. I was already designing a similar setup (controls on a slanted surface in front of the other modules), but now I can spare myself the trouble, sit back, and wait... Thanks, Dieter ! -g
> We will show a bottom section for the A-100 suitcase and monster > case at > Frankfurt. It will be equipped with one horizontal aligned row of > modules > (mainly for controlling modules like joystick, Theremin, wheels, light > controlled voltages and so on) and a second slanted row with 135 > degrees to > the horizontal and vertical modules (these are module mounted in the > monster > or suitcase). We are waiting for the prototypes from our case > manufacturer. > Pictures will follow as soon as they arrive next week. > > Best wishes > Dieter Doepfer >
2008-02-22 by Florian Anwander
Hi > all that silver and black, don't you have trees in germany? We more like to have a nice picnic under the tree than cutting it and building synths from it. :-) Florian
2008-02-22 by James Husted
I use my portable cases laying on a slanted display shelf I found in a surplus store. Some of the Guitar amps my company sells have fold out legs to prop them at an angle to aim up at the performer. A system like this would also work and be a very cheap add-on to the existing designs. We also sell some Guitar stands, whose designs don't rely on holding the guitar by means of the head stock, that could be modified slightly to hold the portable cases easily (the lower brackets made to be as deep as the P-cabinets). I had a stand that held my AKSs whose design was very similar. A inexpensive tripod like stand would be great and very flexible (and useable by current P- case owners). Something like this (around $30USD): http:// www.activemusician.com/item--MC.6042 Or this one (Around $15USD): http://www.wholenote.com/item--MF.454318 Designs like these could easily hold the P-cases at adjustable angles which is a big bonus to me. -James
On Feb 22, 2008, at 6:19 AM, hardware@doepfer.de wrote: >> A word on ergonomics: I personally find slanted surfaces nicer to >> work >> with, except when I get above shoulder hight where vertical is nicer. > > We will show a bottom section for the A-100 suitcase and monster > case at > Frankfurt. It will be equipped with one horizontal aligned row of > modules > (mainly for controlling modules like joystick, Theremin, wheels, light > controlled voltages and so on) and a second slanted row with 135 > degrees to > the horizontal and vertical modules (these are module mounted in > the monster > or suitcase). We are waiting for the prototypes from our case > manufacturer. > Pictures will follow as soon as they arrive next week. > > Best wishes > Dieter Doepfer > > similar
2008-02-23 by Stu Grimshaw
>However, don't > forget that short patch cords make less clutter, so putting mixers > between VCO's and filters, VCA's on the other side of the filters interesting :) i find that cables that have to turn round and go back in front of me get in the way more than long ones that disappear of the sides/top/bottom and come back again i.e. lots of flat-lying parallel cables rather than shorter ones that stick out the whole time. that said, i would add that this is more for live work, where tweaking is more important than rerouting, and the rack is only two rows high. but if anyone wants to swap a fistful of short black ones for a fistful of long red and blue ones, i'm up for it :) stu
2008-03-03 by hardware@doepfer.de
> Yes ! Exactly what I was waiting for. > > I was already designing a similar setup (controls on a slanted surface > in front of the other modules), but now I can spare myself the trouble, > sit back, and wait... > > Thanks, Dieter ! The first pics of the monster base frame are now available (from the news page). Best wishes Dieter Doepfer
2008-03-03 by Florian Anwander
> The first pics of the monster base frame are now available (from the > news page). OAaaaahhh! Thats a kind of dream come true!!!!!!!! http://www.doepfer.de/A100_monster_base_03.jpg http://www.doepfer.de/A100_monster_base_04.jpg Florian
2008-03-03 by Florian Anwander
Dieter > http://www.doepfer.de/a100_monster_base.htm Will this be available as standard case too? Florian
2008-03-03 by hardware@doepfer.de
> Dieter > > > http://www.doepfer.de/a100_monster_base.htm > Will this be available as standard case too? > > Florian Probably yes. So far we have only inquiries/orders for monster base frames. But we could ask our case manufacturer to built a base frame for the standard suitcase (i.e. 84 HP) too. The usable width will be probably 76 HP only as we need about 10 mm (~ HP) one each side for the mechanical construction. Dieter
2008-03-03 by Richard Scott
Yes! I like this idea a lot and the smaller size is a good idea too R
----- Original Message ----- From: hardware@doepfer.de To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 1:45 PM Subject: AW: AW: AW: [Doepfer_a100] Monster case, standard case, ... opinions wanted > Dieter > > > http://www.doepfer.de/a100_monster_base.htm > Will this be available as standard case too? > > Florian Probably yes. So far we have only inquiries/orders for monster base frames. But we could ask our case manufacturer to built a base frame for the standard suitcase (i.e. 84 HP) too. The usable width will be probably 76 HP only as we need about 10 mm (~ HP) one each side for the mechanical construction. Dieter -- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users. It has removed 367 spam emails to date. Paying users do not have this message in their emails. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2008-03-03 by Florian Anwander
Hi Dieter > Probably yes. So far we have only inquiries/orders for monster base frames. > But we could ask our case manufacturer to built a base frame for the > standard suitcase (i.e. 84 HP) too. The usable width will be probably 76 HP > only as we need about 10 mm (~ HP) one each side for the mechanical > construction. Another possibility: the width might be measured to place two standard cases on top. Also another suggestion (for a wide version): install a 3 octave keyboard plus some space for modules in the flat part. Florian
2008-03-03 by Guy D2
Very cool, Dieter ! Almost perfect. Except for one thing: I designed a similar case (well, not really, only on paper), where there was also room for a built-in ribbon controller (and also possibly some other tactile surface or controller-thingy)... As a non-keyboard player, I see such a contraption as a kind of "control center", where all the joysticks, surfaces, buttons, etc... go. This is very close, though... -g
> > Yes ! Exactly what I was waiting for. > > > > I was already designing a similar setup (controls on a slanted > surface > > in front of the other modules), but now I can spare myself the > trouble, > > sit back, and wait... > > > > Thanks, Dieter ! > > The first pics of the monster base frame are now available (from the > news > page). > > Best wishes > Dieter Doepfer >
2008-03-03 by mritenburg
Dieter, This design is outstanding!!! From a performance perspective, the ergonomics are spot on. Now, if we could get a touch controller that will mount in this frame, we'll be all set!! Sincerely, Matthew Ritenburg --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, <hardware@...> wrote: > > > Yes ! Exactly what I was waiting for. > > > > I was already designing a similar setup (controls on a slanted surface > > in front of the other modules), but now I can spare myself the trouble, > > sit back, and wait... > > > > Thanks, Dieter ! > > The first pics of the monster base frame are now available (from the news
> page). > > Best wishes > Dieter Doepfer >
2008-03-03 by hardware@doepfer.de
> Hi Dieter > > > Probably yes. So far we have only inquiries/orders for monster base frames. > > But we could ask our case manufacturer to built a base frame for the > > standard suitcase (i.e. 84 HP) too. The usable width will be probably 76 HP > > only as we need about 10 mm (~ HP) one each side for the mechanical construction. > Another possibility: the width might be measured to place two standard > cases on top. > > Also another suggestion (for a wide version): install a 3 octave > keyboard plus some space for modules in the flat part. > > Florian Florian, there is a mechanical problem. The overall width of the keybeds is about 165 mm (compared to the 128.5 mm of the A-100 front panel height). A case that is suitable for the installation of a keybed will have to be constructed completely different: one would need an additional top cover (for the rear part of the keys), a bottom construction (the keybed has to be lifted up as they are very flat compared to the depth required for A-100 modules) and an additional construction for the transition between the keybed and the modules (e.g. left of the keybed). It's possible but a bit complicated. We will have to manufacture some custom made metallic and wooden parts to fit both the keybed and the module section. It would be probably easier to built a case that has exactly the same length as one of the keybeds (e.g. 3 octaves) as in this case the constructions would be much easier. After all it's a question of the inquiries as it's impossible for us to have all versions in stock. We will have to find e few standard solutions that can be manufactured in reasonable quantities to keep the costs as low as possible. As a special design everything can be realized - provided that money is not an object. Most customers underestimate the costs of special designs as the working time charges for development and construction have to be payed by one customer only. A lot of these works has to be done by external companies (metal work, wood work, paint shop, silk-screen print shop ...) and will we have to forward the charges from these companies to the customer. Dieter
2008-03-03 by Denis Gökdag
Let me add one more suggestion to add to the confusion ;-) I like the layout of the base frame....but i have no need for it to be portable. "no need" as in "my a-100 has not left my studio even once since 1995 and it NEVER will" ;-) I'd be quite happy with this box in the a-100 standard frame design made of aluminium, no lids etc. The size would be fine for me. Another cool feature would be the option to have the studio version optionally ship with more than two power supplies, to power a-100 frames from it. cheers, d On 03. Mar 2008, at 6:25 PM, <hardware@doepfer.de> <hardware@doepfer.de> wrote: > > Hi Dieter > > > > > Probably yes. So far we have only inquiries/orders for monster > base > frames. > > > But we could ask our case manufacturer to built a base frame > for the > > > standard suitcase (i.e. 84 HP) too. The usable width will be > probably 76 > HP > > > only as we need about 10 mm (~ HP) one each side for the > mechanical > construction. > > Another possibility: the width might be measured to place two > standard > > cases on top. > > > > Also another suggestion (for a wide version): install a 3 octave > > keyboard plus some space for modules in the flat part. > > > > Florian > > Florian, > > there is a mechanical problem. The overall width of the keybeds is > about 165 > mm (compared to the 128.5 mm of the A-100 front panel height). A > case that > is suitable for the installation of a keybed will have to be > constructed > completely different: one would need an additional top cover (for > the rear > part of the keys), a bottom construction (the keybed has to be > lifted up as > they are very flat compared to the depth required for A-100 > modules) and an > additional construction for the transition between the keybed and the > modules (e.g. left of the keybed). It's possible but a bit > complicated. We > will have to manufacture some custom made metallic and wooden parts > to fit > both the keybed and the module section. It would be probably easier > to built > a case that has exactly the same length as one of the keybeds (e.g. 3 > octaves) as in this case the constructions would be much easier. > After all > it's a question of the inquiries as it's impossible for us to have all > versions in stock. > > We will have to find e few standard solutions that can be > manufactured in > reasonable quantities to keep the costs as low as possible. > > As a special design everything can be realized - provided that > money is not > an object. Most customers underestimate the costs of special > designs as the > working time charges for development and construction have to be > payed by > one customer only. A lot of these works has to be done by external > companies > (metal work, wood work, paint shop, silk-screen print shop ...) and > will we > have to forward the charges from these companies to the customer. > > Dieter > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2008-03-03 by partlydrone
that's extremely good, a standard suitcase sized one would definitely tempt me, although the silver robot stuff in general isn't my thing. very pleased to see the buff brown of the low cost suitcase, would be truly great to see this kind of thing in that kind of material, ~80hp wide, would be class. and yes, if you're going to build these you really need to sort out that capacitative touchplate controller for the ultimate faux buchla/serge feel... --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Guy D2 <guy@...> wrote:
> > > Very cool, Dieter ! > > Almost perfect. > > Except for one thing: I designed a similar case (well, not really, > only on paper), > where there was also room for a built-in ribbon controller (and also > possibly > some other tactile surface or controller-thingy)... > As a non-keyboard player, I see such a contraption as a kind of > "control center", where all the joysticks, surfaces, buttons, etc... go. > > This is very close, though... > > -g > > > > > Yes ! Exactly what I was waiting for. > > > > > > I was already designing a similar setup (controls on a slanted > > surface > > > in front of the other modules), but now I can spare myself the > > trouble, > > > sit back, and wait... > > > > > > Thanks, Dieter ! > > > > The first pics of the monster base frame are now available (from the > > news > > page). > > > > Best wishes > > Dieter Doepfer > > >
2008-03-04 by cray5656
HI Dieter and all doepfarians This case looks great, it would be cool with an extra 2 rows above ah la Buchla shape case
2008-03-04 by mritenburg
There is a reason people use this shape often. It is a very useful design. --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "cray5656" <amnesia@...> wrote:
> > HI Dieter and all doepfarians > > This case looks great, it would be cool with an extra 2 rows above ah > la Buchla shape case >
2008-03-04 by Richard Scott
I agree, an extra row or two on top would make it really a monster and maybe it looks a little bit too much like a keyboard gone wrong at the moment Richard
----- Original Message ----- From: cray5656 To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 11:52 AM Subject: Re: [Doepfer_a100] Monster case, standard case, ... opinions wanted HI Dieter and all doepfarians This case looks great, it would be cool with an extra 2 rows above ah la Buchla shape case -- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users. It has removed 368 spam emails to date. Paying users do not have this message in their emails. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2008-03-05 by ErnstKarel
--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Scott" <richard_scott@...> wrote: > > and maybe it looks a little bit too much like a keyboard gone wrong at the moment > That's what's so great about it -- it looks like a demented Fender Rhodes! I really like the looks of this thing....