Synth-DIY Yahoo! Groups Archives

Thread

Question about the future A-143-4

2009-01-28 by Henrik Medquist

I looked at the page for the future A-143-4 Quad VCLFO/VCO module (http://www.doepfer.de/a1434.htm), and it really seems to become a very useful and versatile module. Just one question: would it be difficult/expensive to add Reset inputs to the LFOs, perhaps instead of the second (or rather, first) CV in? IMO that would be a very useful addition, and much more useful than having two CV ins per LFO. Also a common Reset input for all LFOs would be very nice.

Best regards,
Henrik

Re: [Doepfer_a100] Question about the future A-143-4

2009-01-28 by Denis Gökdag

Agreed, reset ins would be very cool.

d

Show quoted textHide quoted text

On Jan 28, 2009, at 9:47 AM, Henrik Medquist wrote:

> I looked at the page for the future A-143-4 Quad VCLFO/VCO module (http://www.doepfer.de/a1434.htm 
> ), and it really seems to become a very useful and versatile module.  
> Just one question: would it be difficult/expensive to add Reset  
> inputs to the LFOs, perhaps instead of the second (or rather, first)  
> CV in? IMO that would be a very useful addition, and much more  
> useful than having two CV ins per LFO. Also a common Reset input for  
> all LFOs would be very nice.
>
> Best regards,
> Henrik
>

Re: Question about the future A-143-4

2009-01-28 by astroschnautzer

I think this module is going to be a hit.

Re: Question about the future A-143-4

2009-01-28 by a_wetterberg

I would prefer that that layout did not change one bit - having an
attenuator for a secondary input is critical, imo - 1v/oct + a
modulation input, for instance. 

andreas.

--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Henrik Medquist
<longforparade@...> wrote:
>
> I looked at the page for the future A-143-4 Quad VCLFO/VCO module
(http://www.doepfer.de/a1434.htm), and it really seems to become a
very useful and versatile module. Just one question: would it be
difficult/expensive to add Reset inputs to the LFOs, perhaps instead
of the second (or rather, first) CV in? IMO that would be a very
useful addition, and much more useful than having two CV ins per LFO.
Also a common Reset input for all LFOs would be very nice.

Show quoted textHide quoted text

> 
> Best regards,
> Henrik
>

Re: Question about the future A-143-4

2009-01-28 by Doug

I agree with Andreas, FWIW. 

--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "a_wetterberg" <a@...> wrote:

Show quoted textHide quoted text

>
> I would prefer that that layout did not change one bit - having an
> attenuator for a secondary input is critical, imo - 1v/oct + a
> modulation input, for instance. 
> 
> andreas.
>

Re: [Doepfer_a100] Re: Question about the future A-143-4

2009-01-28 by Richard Scott

thirded - two CVs is cool, also for crazyass LFO patterns

Richard

Show quoted textHide quoted text

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Doug 
  To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 7:15 PM
  Subject: [Doepfer_a100] Re: Question about the future A-143-4


  I agree with Andreas, FWIW. 

  --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "a_wetterberg" <a@...> wrote:
  >
  > I would prefer that that layout did not change one bit - having an
  > attenuator for a secondary input is critical, imo - 1v/oct + a
  > modulation input, for instance. 
  > 
  > andreas.
  > 



   

-- 
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
We are a community of 5.9 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 1161 of my spam emails to date.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len

The Professional version does not have this message


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