Doepfer

Hi there!

Since I'm working at the conservatory, in the
sonology department (soldering 2 daysa week,
to pay for college) i'd like to say that if there 
will be modules produced, it will probably be in
a very limited amount...
(think in amounts for students who own a modular
and some extra.........for my baby :)).

There are really cool things in the studios down there,
some which are really worth investigating for use in
eurorack (or any other modular for that matter). 
Will this stuff ever be produced or made available
to anyone? I actually don't think so...
Most of it is actually available already from one
or another. The  things that are not, are things like
Vosim osc's, TMG's and probably some other stuff,
like a really accurate 5 minute (or something) LFO.
Everything's there (designs including all the code 
and stuff for some PICs) but I don't get the feeling 
they really want to get in this market...

I'd love see them produce a lot of those things
(make my modular grow! GROW!!!!) but I don't
expect them to end up all over the place (if they
get produced at all).
Just my 2 cents...

Gr.daan

(PS. just a random thought: maybe doepfer could
team up with the sonology people...? Since they
seem to have the capacity to actually produce stuff
and the sonology department has some pretty cool
designs. Don't know if they'd be interested, though...)


_________________________________________________________________
See all the ways you can stay connected to friends and family
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/default.aspx

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

Hey Daan.

It is just an idea that someone higher up had.
Like I said very premature and Limited edition DIY kits.
But I thought I owed it to Dieter to inform him about it.


Ernst

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 12:36 PM, daan Johan <d8utnie@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi there!
>
> Since I'm working at the conservatory, in the
> sonology department (soldering 2 daysa week,
> to pay for college) i'd like to say that if there
> will be modules produced, it will probably be in
> a very limited amount...
> (think in amounts for students who own a modular
> and some extra.........for my baby :)).
>
> There are really cool things in the studios down there,
> some which are really worth investigating for use in
> eurorack (or any other modular for that matter).
> Will this stuff ever be produced or made available
> to anyone? I actually don't think so...
> Most of it is actually available already from one
> or another. The things that are not, are things like
> Vosim osc's, TMG's and probably some other stuff,
> like a really accurate 5 minute (or something) LFO.
> Everything's there (designs including all the code
> and stuff for some PICs) but I don't get the feeling
> they really want to get in this market...
>
> I'd love see them produce a lot of those things
> (make my modular grow! GROW!!!!) but I don't
> expect them to end up all over the place (if they
> get produced at all).
> Just my 2 cents...
>
> Gr.daan
>
> (PS. just a random thought: maybe doepfer could
> team up with the sonology people...? Since they
> seem to have the capacity to actually produce stuff
> and the sonology department has some pretty cool
> designs. Don't know if they'd be interested, though...)
>
> __________________________________________________________
> See all the ways you can stay connected to friends and family
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/default.aspx
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

Of course they don't have the capacity..



On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 12:45 PM, achtung_999
<heinrich.himmelwasser@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey Daan.
>
> It is just an idea that someone higher up had.
> Like I said very premature and Limited edition DIY kits.
> But I thought I owed it to Dieter to inform him about it.
>
>
> Ernst
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 12:36 PM, daan Johan <d8utnie@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi there!
>>
>> Since I'm working at the conservatory, in the
>> sonology department (soldering 2 daysa week,
>> to pay for college) i'd like to say that if there
>> will be modules produced, it will probably be in
>> a very limited amount...
>> (think in amounts for students who own a modular
>> and some extra.........for my baby :)).
>>
>> There are really cool things in the studios down there,
>> some which are really worth investigating for use in
>> eurorack (or any other modular for that matter).
>> Will this stuff ever be produced or made available
>> to anyone? I actually don't think so...
>> Most of it is actually available already from one
>> or another. The things that are not, are things like
>> Vosim osc's, TMG's and probably some other stuff,
>> like a really accurate 5 minute (or something) LFO.
>> Everything's there (designs including all the code
>> and stuff for some PICs) but I don't get the feeling
>> they really want to get in this market...
>>
>> I'd love see them produce a lot of those things
>> (make my modular grow! GROW!!!!) but I don't
>> expect them to end up all over the place (if they
>> get produced at all).
>> Just my 2 cents...
>>
>> Gr.daan
>>
>> (PS. just a random thought: maybe doepfer could
>> team up with the sonology people...? Since they
>> seem to have the capacity to actually produce stuff
>> and the sonology department has some pretty cool
>> designs. Don't know if they'd be interested, though...)
>>
>> __________________________________________________________
>> See all the ways you can stay connected to friends and family
>> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/default.aspx
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>> 
>

Yes, I'd be interested to cooperate with the sonology people. And we would
have the capacity to produce such staff. But after all it's not the question
if we could manage to manufacture a module but if there are sufficient
inquiries. It does not make sense to start a production if one has only a
couple of orders. To keep our price range the minimum quantity of a
production series is 100 pcs. We have a lot of ready designed modules but do
not release them because of the uncertain sales. Remember one has to
pre-finance the complete series incl. front panels, pc boards, electronic
parts, working time for assembly and so on. If one manufactures 100 units
but has only 30 orders it will be a loss (and we had indeed some such losses
in the past, e.g. the A-100CGK, A-138x, A-164-1 or A-186).

Please let me know how we could cooperate (please directly off list). Maybe
there is sufficient interest for one of the designs. For the time being we
will develop the tendency processor and see how many users are interested as
soon as the prototype is working.

Best wishes
Dieter Doepfer

> Hi there!
>
> Since I'm working at the conservatory, in the
> sonology department (soldering 2 daysa week,
> to pay for college) i'd like to say that if there
> will be modules produced, it will probably be in
> a very limited amount...
> (think in amounts for students who own a modular
> and some extra.........for my baby :)).
>
> There are really cool things in the studios down there,
> some which are really worth investigating for use in
> eurorack (or any other modular for that matter).
> Will this stuff ever be produced or made available
> to anyone? I actually don't think so...
> Most of it is actually available already from one
> or another. The  things that are not, are things like
> Vosim osc's, TMG's and probably some other stuff,
> like a really accurate 5 minute (or something) LFO.
> Everything's there (designs including all the code
> and stuff for some PICs) but I don't get the feeling
> they really want to get in this market...
>
> I'd love see them produce a lot of those things
> (make my modular grow! GROW!!!!) but I don't
> expect them to end up all over the place (if they
> get produced at all).
> Just my 2 cents...
>
> Gr.daan
>
> (PS. just a random thought: maybe doepfer could
> team up with the sonology people...? Since they
> seem to have the capacity to actually produce stuff
> and the sonology department has some pretty cool
> designs. Don't know if they'd be interested, though...)

I off course meant Sonology does not have capacity to produce modules
in significant quantities.

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 2:25 PM,  <yahoo@doepfer.de> wrote:
> Yes, I'd be interested to cooperate with the sonology people. And we would
> have the capacity to produce such staff. But after all it's not the question
> if we could manage to manufacture a module but if there are sufficient
> inquiries. It does not make sense to start a production if one has only a
> couple of orders. To keep our price range the minimum quantity of a
> production series is 100 pcs. We have a lot of ready designed modules but do
> not release them because of the uncertain sales. Remember one has to
> pre-finance the complete series incl. front panels, pc boards, electronic
> parts, working time for assembly and so on. If one manufactures 100 units
> but has only 30 orders it will be a loss (and we had indeed some such losses
> in the past, e.g. the A-100CGK, A-138x, A-164-1 or A-186).
>
> Please let me know how we could cooperate (please directly off list). Maybe
> there is sufficient interest for one of the designs. For the time being we
> will develop the tendency processor and see how many users are interested as
> soon as the prototype is working.
>
> Best wishes
> Dieter Doepfer
>
>> Hi there!
>>
>> Since I'm working at the conservatory, in the
>> sonology department (soldering 2 daysa week,
>> to pay for college) i'd like to say that if there
>> will be modules produced, it will probably be in
>> a very limited amount...
>> (think in amounts for students who own a modular
>> and some extra.........for my baby :)).
>>
>> There are really cool things in the studios down there,
>> some which are really worth investigating for use in
>> eurorack (or any other modular for that matter).
>> Will this stuff ever be produced or made available
>> to anyone? I actually don't think so...
>> Most of it is actually available already from one
>> or another. The things that are not, are things like
>> Vosim osc's, TMG's and probably some other stuff,
>> like a really accurate 5 minute (or something) LFO.
>> Everything's there (designs including all the code
>> and stuff for some PICs) but I don't get the feeling
>> they really want to get in this market...
>>
>> I'd love see them produce a lot of those things
>> (make my modular grow! GROW!!!!) but I don't
>> expect them to end up all over the place (if they
>> get produced at all).
>> Just my 2 cents...
>>
>> Gr.daan
>>
>> (PS. just a random thought: maybe doepfer could
>> team up with the sonology people...? Since they
>> seem to have the capacity to actually produce stuff
>> and the sonology department has some pretty cool
>> designs. Don't know if they'd be interested, though...)
>
>

. If one manufactures 100 units
  but has only 30 orders it will be a loss (and we had indeed some such 
losses
  in the past, e.g. the A-100CGK, A-138x, A-164-1 or A-186).
....

  hello
I do not want to be critical to much
but instead of few option of expanding mixers from 138 family
one stereo with more inputs and pan cv would be just top
and I think sell okay, theres so many people performing on A100
and neets something portable and small.
I cant take furniture on tour.
And mixer did not apear, and still no manufactur do it.
strange heh?

best
robert



www.musicagenera.net
www.myspace.com/robertpiotrowicz

Hello Robert

> I do not want to be critical to much
> but instead of few option of expanding mixers from 138 family
> one stereo with more inputs and pan cv would be just top
> and I think sell okay, 
No it won't sell okay, because there are mixers on the market for under 
70 Euros, which offer - though not CV controlled - much more (mic pre 
amps, aux sends, level meter, pfl,...). And in the end of the day, the 
people will buy the Behringer for 70 Euros instead of the Doepfer for 
100 Euros (or even more (think e.g. of the A-129-3 as equivalent in the 
production costs), which won't have all these features. No I fear you 
will be the only customer to buy it.

Florian

hello Frorian!

On 2009-02-12, at 18:02, Florian Anwander wrote:

And in the end of the day, the
  people will buy the Behringer for 70 Euros instead of the Doepfer for
  100 Euros (or even more (think e.g. of the A-129-3 as equivalent in the
  production costs), which won't have all these features. No I fear you
  will be the only customer to buy it.

yes, this I agree but this is not a synth mixer,
this is just a adio mixer.(I also use audio mixer on the end of my 
system)
and I meant synth mixer which by Pan CV makes  this machines STEREO,
strange that nobody need that

Anyway bad news for me, shame (Serge and I think Buchla has it in their 
lines.)
best
r

> If one manufactures 100 units but has only 30 orders it will be a loss
(and we had indeed some such
> losses in the past, e.g. the A-100CGK, A-138x, A-164-1 or A-186).
> ....
>
> hello
> I do not want to be critical to much but instead of few option of
expanding mixers from 138 family
> one stereo with more inputs and pan cv would be just top
> and I think sell okay, theres so many people performing on A100
> and neets something portable and small. I cant take furniture on tour.
> And mixer did not apear, and still no manufactur do it. strange heh?
>
> best
> robert

Robert,

you do not criticize me but the poll results ! Many (but not all) of the
latest modules are based on suggestions by customers of this group. For the
A-138x everything started end of 2006 because some customers wanted to have
more than only 4 inputs for their A-138 mixers. The poll results for the
mixer expander A-138x from December 15, 2006 were these:

POLL QUESTION: Would you like Doepfer to release a "Mixing Expander" module
that would be used to add 5 more inputs to A-138a/b? [It will be about
20-30% cheaper than an A-138a/b, as no integrated circuits and no power
supply are necessary for such a simple module]

CHOICES AND RESULTS
- Yes!, 19 votes, 67.86%
- maybe..., 4 votes, 14.29%
- No., 5 votes, 17.86%


Best wishes
Dieter Doepfer

> yes, this I agree but this is not a synth mixer, this is just a adio
mixer.(I also use audio mixer on the end of my
> system) and I meant synth mixer which by Pan CV makes  this machines
STEREO, strange that nobody need that
>
> Anyway bad news for me, shame (Serge and I think Buchla has it in their
lines.)
> best
> r

Look at the A-135-2 module/sub-system. Maybe this is what you are looking
for. All versions (two different 4-fold modules and the sub-system approach)
shown on our website have been built as prototypes and work as they should.
But the inquiries are very poor so for (not sufficient to start the
production).

Best wishes
Dieter Doepfer

I can't believe that a simple uncontrolled poll of only 29 users is meaningful to you to base  
your product planning around it. I bet that only those who are emotionally invested will 
bother to vote and most everyone else will ignore the poll. It's meaningless data.

It's like asking a 29 people what food they like and opening a restaurant menu based on 
that. I think you're better off to rely on your vision, business and marketing expertise than 
these useless polls. 


--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, <yahoo@...> wrote:

>
> > If one manufactures 100 units but has only 30 orders it will be a loss
> (and we had indeed some such
> > losses in the past, e.g. the A-100CGK, A-138x, A-164-1 or A-186).
> > ....
> >
> > hello
> > I do not want to be critical to much but instead of few option of
> expanding mixers from 138 family
> > one stereo with more inputs and pan cv would be just top
> > and I think sell okay, theres so many people performing on A100
> > and neets something portable and small. I cant take furniture on tour.
> > And mixer did not apear, and still no manufactur do it. strange heh?
> >
> > best
> > robert
> 
> Robert,
> 
> you do not criticize me but the poll results ! Many (but not all) of the
> latest modules are based on suggestions by customers of this group. For the
> A-138x everything started end of 2006 because some customers wanted to have
> more than only 4 inputs for their A-138 mixers. The poll results for the
> mixer expander A-138x from December 15, 2006 were these:
> 
> POLL QUESTION: Would you like Doepfer to release a "Mixing Expander" module
> that would be used to add 5 more inputs to A-138a/b? [It will be about
> 20-30% cheaper than an A-138a/b, as no integrated circuits and no power
> supply are necessary for such a simple module]
> 
> CHOICES AND RESULTS
> - Yes!, 19 votes, 67.86%
> - maybe..., 4 votes, 14.29%
> - No., 5 votes, 17.86%
> 
> 
> Best wishes
> Dieter Doepfer
>

It's better than not doing it!  Doepfer is one of the most democratic
companies I know.

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 11:09 AM, laryn91 <caymus91@mac.com> wrote:

>   I can't believe that a simple uncontrolled poll of only 29 users is
> meaningful to you to base
> your product planning around it. I bet that only those who are emotionally
> invested will
> bother to vote and most everyone else will ignore the poll. It's
> meaningless data.
>
> It's like asking a 29 people what food they like and opening a restaurant
> menu based on
> that. I think you're better off to rely on your vision, business and
> marketing expertise than
> these useless polls.
>
> --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com <Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com>,
> <yahoo@...> wrote:
> >
> > > If one manufactures 100 units but has only 30 orders it will be a loss
> > (and we had indeed some such
> > > losses in the past, e.g. the A-100CGK, A-138x, A-164-1 or A-186).
> > > ....
> > >
> > > hello
> > > I do not want to be critical to much but instead of few option of
> > expanding mixers from 138 family
> > > one stereo with more inputs and pan cv would be just top
> > > and I think sell okay, theres so many people performing on A100
> > > and neets something portable and small. I cant take furniture on tour.
> > > And mixer did not apear, and still no manufactur do it. strange heh?
> > >
> > > best
> > > robert
> >
> > Robert,
> >
> > you do not criticize me but the poll results ! Many (but not all) of the
> > latest modules are based on suggestions by customers of this group. For
> the
> > A-138x everything started end of 2006 because some customers wanted to
> have
> > more than only 4 inputs for their A-138 mixers. The poll results for the
> > mixer expander A-138x from December 15, 2006 were these:
> >
> > POLL QUESTION: Would you like Doepfer to release a "Mixing Expander"
> module
> > that would be used to add 5 more inputs to A-138a/b? [It will be about
> > 20-30% cheaper than an A-138a/b, as no integrated circuits and no power
> > supply are necessary for such a simple module]
> >
> > CHOICES AND RESULTS
> > - Yes!, 19 votes, 67.86%
> > - maybe..., 4 votes, 14.29%
> > - No., 5 votes, 17.86%
> >
> >
> > Best wishes
> > Dieter Doepfer
> >
>
>  
>


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

polls are not useless. they can help in many ways,
but i admit that sometimes the results can be
misleading, thinking about the poor sales of some
"wanted" modules. the past has proven that sometimes
it is better to think twice before producing a module
that is "wanted" by the forum, even when there
are 20 positive votes in a poll.
polls are good to decide about the features of
a module, but it is not a good indicator for
the sales of a module.

best wishes

ingo



--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "laryn91" <caymus91@...> wrote:
>
> I can't believe that a simple uncontrolled poll of only 29 users is
meaningful to you to base  
> your product planning around it. I bet that only those who are
emotionally invested will 
> bother to vote and most everyone else will ignore the poll. It's
meaningless data.
> 
> It's like asking a 29 people what food they like and opening a
restaurant menu based on 
> that. I think you're better off to rely on your vision, business and
marketing expertise than 
> these useless polls. 
> 
> 
> --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, <yahoo@> wrote:
> >
> > > If one manufactures 100 units but has only 30 orders it will be
a loss
> > (and we had indeed some such
> > > losses in the past, e.g. the A-100CGK, A-138x, A-164-1 or A-186).
> > > ....
> > >
> > > hello
> > > I do not want to be critical to much but instead of few option of
> > expanding mixers from 138 family
> > > one stereo with more inputs and pan cv would be just top
> > > and I think sell okay, theres so many people performing on A100
> > > and neets something portable and small. I cant take furniture on
tour.
> > > And mixer did not apear, and still no manufactur do it. strange heh?
> > >
> > > best
> > > robert
> > 
> > Robert,
> > 
> > you do not criticize me but the poll results ! Many (but not all)
of the
> > latest modules are based on suggestions by customers of this
group. For the
> > A-138x everything started end of 2006 because some customers
wanted to have
> > more than only 4 inputs for their A-138 mixers. The poll results
for the
> > mixer expander A-138x from December 15, 2006 were these:
> > 
> > POLL QUESTION: Would you like Doepfer to release a "Mixing
Expander" module
> > that would be used to add 5 more inputs to A-138a/b? [It will be about
> > 20-30% cheaper than an A-138a/b, as no integrated circuits and no
power

> > supply are necessary for such a simple module]
> > 
> > CHOICES AND RESULTS
> > - Yes!, 19 votes, 67.86%
> > - maybe..., 4 votes, 14.29%
> > - No., 5 votes, 17.86%
> > 
> > 
> > Best wishes
> > Dieter Doepfer
> >
>

the polls are not useless.

they have helped, many many times, in the past, for Doepfer to decide features included in their designs and decisions about their forthcoming modules.

ok, of course, they are not always really valid due to the low number of participants (that's why i am always asking for the member to vote!) but they are indeed useful many times.


Bakis Sirros - Parallel Worlds / Interconnected / Memory Geist

[Doepfer_a100] group owner

www. parallel - worlds - music. com

www. myspace. com/ parallelworldsmusic

www. myspace. com/ interconnectedmusic

www. myspace. com/ memorygeist

www. DiN. org. uk

www. musicamaximamagnetica. com

www. shimarecords. co. uk

www. rubberrecords. gr

Athens - Greece

--- On Thu, 2/12/09, Monroe Eskew <monroe.eskew@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Monroe Eskew <monroe.eskew@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Doepfer_a100] Re: popular or not
To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, February 12, 2009, 9:56 PM











    
            It's better than not doing it!  Doepfer is one of the most democratic

companies I know.



On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 11:09 AM, laryn91 <caymus91@mac. com> wrote:



>   I can't believe that a simple uncontrolled poll of only 29 users is

> meaningful to you to base

> your product planning around it. I bet that only those who are emotionally

> invested will

> bother to vote and most everyone else will ignore the poll. It's

> meaningless data.

>

> It's like asking a 29 people what food they like and opening a restaurant

> menu based on

> that. I think you're better off to rely on your vision, business and

> marketing expertise than

> these useless polls.

>

> --- In Doepfer_a100@ yahoogroups. com <Doepfer_a100% 40yahoogroups. com>,

> <yahoo@...> wrote:

> >

> > > If one manufactures 100 units but has only 30 orders it will be a loss

> > (and we had indeed some such

> > > losses in the past, e.g. the A-100CGK, A-138x, A-164-1 or A-186).

> > > ....

> > >

> > > hello

> > > I do not want to be critical to much but instead of few option of

> > expanding mixers from 138 family

> > > one stereo with more inputs and pan cv would be just top

> > > and I think sell okay, theres so many people performing on A100

> > > and neets something portable and small. I cant take furniture on tour.

> > > And mixer did not apear, and still no manufactur do it. strange heh?

> > >

> > > best

> > > robert

> >

> > Robert,

> >

> > you do not criticize me but the poll results ! Many (but not all) of the

> > latest modules are based on suggestions by customers of this group. For

> the

> > A-138x everything started end of 2006 because some customers wanted to

> have

> > more than only 4 inputs for their A-138 mixers. The poll results for the

> > mixer expander A-138x from December 15, 2006 were these:

> >

> > POLL QUESTION: Would you like Doepfer to release a "Mixing Expander"

> module

> > that would be used to add 5 more inputs to A-138a/b? [It will be about

> > 20-30% cheaper than an A-138a/b, as no integrated circuits and no power

> > supply are necessary for such a simple module]

> >

> > CHOICES AND RESULTS

> > - Yes!, 19 votes, 67.86%

> > - maybe..., 4 votes, 14.29%

> > - No., 5 votes, 17.86%

> >

> >

> > Best wishes

> > Dieter Doepfer

> >

>

>  

>



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




 

      

    
    
	
	 
	
	








	


	
	


      

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

Look at the A-135-2 module/sub-system. Maybe this is what you are
  looking
  for. All versions (two different 4-fold modules and the sub-system
  approach)
  shown on our website have been built as prototypes and work as they
  should.
  But the inquiries are very poor so for (not sufficient to start the
  production).

  yes this I know, the best option for me is last proposal

  with A-135-2a and A-135-2c

  then everybody can decide how much of A-135-2a you need

  do youhave any pre production modules I could have as custom from
  Doepfer?


  thanks

  and all the best

  r


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

I can see how *discussions* on this list can be sometimes useful for feature planning. 
Users can bring up features and issues that Dieter may not have considered.

But I can't see how an uncontrolled poll of 28 users means anything other than just the 
personal desires of the unknown 28 users. It has no relation to the actual market or 
mainstream modular users. The error margin is probably close to 100%!

Otherwise from the poll below, 75% of modular customers would have bought the 138x!



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

>
> 
> polls are not useless. they can help in many ways,
> but i admit that sometimes the results can be
> misleading, thinking about the poor sales of some
> "wanted" modules. the past has proven that sometimes
> it is better to think twice before producing a module
> that is "wanted" by the forum, even when there
> are 20 positive votes in a poll.
> polls are good to decide about the features of
> a module, but it is not a good indicator for
> the sales of a module.
> 
> best wishes
> 
> ingo
> 
> 
> 
> --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "laryn91" <caymus91@> wrote:
> >
> > I can't believe that a simple uncontrolled poll of only 29 users is
> meaningful to you to base  
> > your product planning around it. I bet that only those who are
> emotionally invested will 
> > bother to vote and most everyone else will ignore the poll. It's
> meaningless data.
> > 
> > It's like asking a 29 people what food they like and opening a
> restaurant menu based on 
> > that. I think you're better off to rely on your vision, business and
> marketing expertise than 
> > these useless polls. 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, <yahoo@> wrote:
> > >
> > > > If one manufactures 100 units but has only 30 orders it will be
> a loss
> > > (and we had indeed some such
> > > > losses in the past, e.g. the A-100CGK, A-138x, A-164-1 or A-186).
> > > > ....
> > > >
> > > > hello
> > > > I do not want to be critical to much but instead of few option of
> > > expanding mixers from 138 family
> > > > one stereo with more inputs and pan cv would be just top
> > > > and I think sell okay, theres so many people performing on A100
> > > > and neets something portable and small. I cant take furniture on
> tour.
> > > > And mixer did not apear, and still no manufactur do it. strange heh?
> > > >
> > > > best
> > > > robert
> > > 
> > > Robert,
> > > 
> > > you do not criticize me but the poll results ! Many (but not all)
> of the
> > > latest modules are based on suggestions by customers of this
> group. For the
> > > A-138x everything started end of 2006 because some customers
> wanted to have
> > > more than only 4 inputs for their A-138 mixers. The poll results
> for the
> > > mixer expander A-138x from December 15, 2006 were these:
> > > 
> > > POLL QUESTION: Would you like Doepfer to release a "Mixing
> Expander" module
> > > that would be used to add 5 more inputs to A-138a/b? [It will be about
> > > 20-30% cheaper than an A-138a/b, as no integrated circuits and no
> power
> > > supply are necessary for such a simple module]
> > > 
> > > CHOICES AND RESULTS
> > > - Yes!, 19 votes, 67.86%
> > > - maybe..., 4 votes, 14.29%
> > > - No., 5 votes, 17.86%
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Best wishes
> > > Dieter Doepfer
> > >
> >
>

> I can't believe that a simple uncontrolled poll of only 29 users
> is meaningful to you to base
> your product planning around it. I bet that only those who are
> emotionally invested will
> bother to vote and most everyone else will ignore the poll. It's
> meaningless data.
>
> It's like asking a 29 people what food they like and opening a
> restaurant menu based on
> that. I think you're better off to rely on your vision, business
> and marketing expertise than
> these useless polls.

Of course the polls from the group are not the only criterion for the
decision of new modules. We also discuss new designs with musicians outside
the Yahoo group and - believe it or not - some are even our own ideas. When
you take a look at the list of the latest new modules there are a couple of
devices that were not discussed in or suggested by the group (e.g. the XP
VCF A-106-6, the Dual lin/exp VCA A-132-3, the Dual VC Crossfader A-132-2,
the Wave Multiplier II, the new Midi interface A-190-2 or the Synthesizer
Voice A-111-5). But in the past the poll results were very helpful (e.g. for
the BBD modules A-188-x, the Vactrol modules A-101-X, the SOU modules
A-149-x, the morphing filter A-107 or the bit modifier A-189-1).

After all the poor sales of some newer modules did not surprise me and of
course it was also my own mistake. I should have listened to my inner voice
:-)  I was not convinced by some of the polls but have been persuaded by a
couple of users to manufacture the modules. I think in the future I will
listen more carefully to my inner voice. I made the experience that if I was
convinced by a new module myself more than 95% of the users had the same
assessment.

Best wishes
Dieter Doepfer

>   Look at the A-135-2 module/sub-system. Maybe this is what you are
>   looking
>   for. All versions (two different 4-fold modules and the sub-system
>   approach)
>   shown on our website have been built as prototypes and work as they
>   should.
>   But the inquiries are very poor so for (not sufficient to start the
>   production).
>
>   yes this I know, the best option for me is last proposal
>
>   with A-135-2a and A-135-2c
>
>   then everybody can decide how much of A-135-2a you need
>
>   do youhave any pre production modules I could have as custom from
>   Doepfer?

Sorry - we have only the prototypes. And we give away prototypes not before
the regular productions has been started (for reference, in case that there
are problems during the series production).

Best wishes
Dieter Doepfer

and i have to admit that i am one to blame for some misleading poll results...

i always was quite positive in my votes, hoping that most modules would be useful to many people and would sell ok...

for the A186-1 (OR combiner), i was the one that said it would be very very useful, because it is, indeed, useful for me,  (i have two of them) and i thought that most people would want this module, as you just combine it with an A161 clock sequencer (that most users have, i guess) and you get a Gate Sequencer for a rediculous price! 

but, i guess not many people thought of that (or cared about that)...


Bakis Sirros - Parallel Worlds / Interconnected / Memory Geist

[Doepfer_a100] group owner

www. parallel - worlds - music. com

www. myspace. com/ parallelworldsmusic

www. myspace. com/ interconnectedmusic

www. myspace. com/ memorygeist

www. DiN. org. uk

www. musicamaximamagnetica. com

www. shimarecords. co. uk

www. rubberrecords. gr

Athens - Greece

--- On Fri, 2/13/09, yahoo@doepfer.de <yahoo@doepfer.de> wrote:

From: yahoo@doepfer.de <yahoo@doepfer.de>
Subject: AW: [Doepfer_a100] Re: popular or not
To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, February 13, 2009, 10:22 AM











    
            > I can't believe that a simple uncontrolled poll of only 29 users

> is meaningful to you to base

> your product planning around it. I bet that only those who are

> emotionally invested will

> bother to vote and most everyone else will ignore the poll. It's

> meaningless data.

>

> It's like asking a 29 people what food they like and opening a

> restaurant menu based on

> that. I think you're better off to rely on your vision, business

> and marketing expertise than

> these useless polls.



Of course the polls from the group are not the only criterion for the

decision of new modules. We also discuss new designs with musicians outside

the Yahoo group and - believe it or not - some are even our own ideas. When

you take a look at the list of the latest new modules there are a couple of

devices that were not discussed in or suggested by the group (e.g. the XP

VCF A-106-6, the Dual lin/exp VCA A-132-3, the Dual VC Crossfader A-132-2,

the Wave Multiplier II, the new Midi interface A-190-2 or the Synthesizer

Voice A-111-5). But in the past the poll results were very helpful (e.g. for

the BBD modules A-188-x, the Vactrol modules A-101-X, the SOU modules

A-149-x, the morphing filter A-107 or the bit modifier A-189-1).



After all the poor sales of some newer modules did not surprise me and of

course it was also my own mistake. I should have listened to my inner voice

:-)  I was not convinced by some of the polls but have been persuaded by a

couple of users to manufacture the modules. I think in the future I will

listen more carefully to my inner voice. I made the experience that if I was

convinced by a new module myself more than 95% of the users had the same

assessment.



Best wishes

Dieter Doepfer




 

      

    
    
	
	 
	
	








	


	
	


      

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

Hello Bakis

> and i have to admit that i am one to blame for some misleading poll results...
I think this tells us, that the questions asked in the polls are not good.

For future polls you should always provide selections like that:

1.) I will buy this module
2.) I think this module is useful, but I won't buy it (at least not now)
3.) I think Doepfer should NOT offer this module
4.) I have no opinion on this module

Selection 1 should result in the minimum sales Dieter will have

Selection 2 will show a general positive direction. Modules with this 
voting will assumingly have an allover chance of success, though the 
affirmation within the is not that good.

Selection 3 will separate the "no"s caused by individual aversion ("this 
module is only useful for techno and I hate techno") from more general
signs of unsuccessfulness.

Selection 4 sounds not very expressive, but this may be the most clear 
signal to not produce this module.



We already had some polls with those selections, and they always showed 
a much clearer (often less affirmative) picture.

Florian

hmm, i am not very sure that these selections will give clearer results, maybe you're right though...

Dieter, what is your opinion regarding the poll selections/ options i should offer?

i really want the polls to be as useful as possible for Doepfer (although, i strongly suggest that Dieter should also follow his own instinct regarding which module should be manufactured and which not).

btw, if more people cared to vote (and not only 50, out of more than 1200 members! ) then the polls would give much clearer results for sure. but...

the actual polls are Not useless, they are MADE rather useless, when only 50 people care to vote. IMHO.


Bakis Sirros - Parallel Worlds / Interconnected / Memory Geist

[Doepfer_a100] group owner

www. parallel - worlds - music. com

www. myspace. com/ parallelworldsmusic

www. myspace. com/ interconnectedmusic

www. myspace. com/ memorygeist

www. DiN. org. uk

www. musicamaximamagnetica. com

www. shimarecords. co. uk

www. rubberrecords. gr

Athens - Greece

--- On Fri, 2/13/09, Florian Anwander <fanwander@mnet-online.de> wrote:

From: Florian Anwander <fanwander@mnet-online.de>
Subject: Re: [Doepfer_a100] about polls, was: popular or not
To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, February 13, 2009, 11:36 AM











    
            Hello Bakis



> and i have to admit that i am one to blame for some misleading poll results...

I think this tells us, that the questions asked in the polls are not good.



For future polls you should always provide selections like that:



1.) I will buy this module

2.) I think this module is useful, but I won't buy it (at least not now)

3.) I think Doepfer should NOT offer this module

4.) I have no opinion on this module



Selection 1 should result in the minimum sales Dieter will have



Selection 2 will show a general positive direction. Modules with this 

voting will assumingly have an allover chance of success, though the 

affirmation within the is not that good.



Selection 3 will separate the "no"s caused by individual aversion ("this 

module is only useful for techno and I hate techno") from more general

signs of unsuccessfulness.



Selection 4 sounds not very expressive, but this may be the most clear 

signal to not produce this module.



We already had some polls with those selections, and they always showed 

a much clearer (often less affirmative) picture.



Florian


 

      

    
    
	
	 
	
	








	


	
	


      

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

> hmm, i am not very sure that these selections will give clearer 
> results, maybe you're right though...
> 
> Dieter, what is your opinion regarding the poll selections/ 
> options i should offer?

I'd prefer Florian's version.
Dieter

Hi Bakis

> btw, if more people cared to vote (and not only 50, out of more than 1200 members! ) then the polls would give much clearer results for sure. but...

I think one problem is, that the list of open polls is endless.
The polls last too long. If you don't respond direct to the initial poll 
requesting mail, it is close to impossible to find a decent poll in this 
loooooong list. Also you should remove old closed polls from the list.

Also the public interest on a question gets lost, if the answer takes 
too long.

So: Keep a poll open for 7 days, send a closing warning (again with full 
link to the poll!) 24 hours before closing and then really close it. 
Make a thing happen fast and clear - this makes the thing interesting 
(thats what I leared at the university, and thats what every marketing 
specialist will tell you).


Florian

ok.



Bakis Sirros - Parallel Worlds / Interconnected / Memory Geist

[Doepfer_a100] group owner

www. parallel - worlds - music. com

www. myspace. com/ parallelworldsmusic

www. myspace. com/ interconnectedmusic

www. myspace. com/ memorygeist

www. DiN. org. uk

www. musicamaximamagnetica. com

www. shimarecords. co. uk

www. rubberrecords. gr

Athens - Greece

--- On Fri, 2/13/09, yahoo@doepfer.de <yahoo@doepfer.de> wrote:

From: yahoo@doepfer.de <yahoo@doepfer.de>
Subject: AW: [Doepfer_a100] about polls, was: popular or not
To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, February 13, 2009, 12:03 PM











    
            > hmm, i am not very sure that these selections will give clearer 

> results, maybe you're right though...

> 

> Dieter, what is your opinion regarding the poll selections/ 

> options i should offer?



I'd prefer Florian's version.

Dieter


 

      

    
    
	
	 
	
	








	


	
	


      

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

On 13 Feb 2009, at 10:36, Florian Anwander wrote:

> Hello Bakis
>
> > and i have to admit that i am one to blame for some misleading  
> poll results...
> I think this tells us, that the questions asked in the polls are not  
> good.
>
> For future polls you should always provide selections like that:
>
> 1.) I will buy this module
> 2.) I think this module is useful, but I won't buy it (at least not  
> now)
> 3.) I think Doepfer should NOT offer this module
> 4.) I have no opinion on this module
>
> Selection 1 should result in the minimum sales Dieter will have
>

Not necessarily.
For instance, I tick this choice simply because I like the idea of  
this module and I *might* buy it some time in the future, but because  
the way this poll is worded, I have no other choice of selecting this  
option if I like this module (even if I'm not gonna buy it, for some  
reason or another ~ say, I ran out of money).

> Selection 2 will show a general positive direction. Modules with this
> voting will assumingly have an allover chance of success, though the
> affirmation within the is not that good.
>

This option is rather useless, since it doesn't tell anyone anything  
really.
Let's assume that ALL modules are useful (and indeed, in theory, they  
are -- there will always be at least one person who'd like to use/have  
such a module), but that doesn't necessarily make them financially  
interesting for Doepfer...
So, choices 1 and 2 are actually the same: I am interested in this  
module [but in fact that is no guarantee that I'm going to buy it].
Reasoning:
	- choice 1 is not a 100% guarantee for a sale
	- choice 2 *just might* become a sale
	So, regardless if 1 or 2 are chosen, in Doepfer's eyes these both say  
"maybe a sale".


> Selection 3 will separate the "no"s caused by individual aversion  
> ("this
> module is only useful for techno and I hate techno") from more general
> signs of unsuccessfulness.
>
Again, not necessarily.
There can be no real reason in saying that a module should not be  
offered -- what's the point, if you know that at least one person is  
interested (the one whom suggested the module in the first place), and  
you yourself simply don't care about this module ? "Not caring about"  
does not translate to "should not"...


> Selection 4 sounds not very expressive, but this may be the most clear
> signal to not produce this module.
>
Choise 4 is a bit too abstract to use as a viable selection model.
My bet is that quite a few members simply select this choice because  
they wanted to show their support as a member by voting, but don't  
care about this particular module. So in reality this option does not  
tell Doepfer anything, except for the fact that there are members who  
are willing to express the opinion that they don't have an opinion.  
Hmm...


To me, a good poll is nothing more than a "rating system", a pointer,  
to show Doepfer the amount of interest in a particular module.
Therefore, any hints towards "buying" or "not buying" should be left  
out, just as any emotional tendencies should be left out as well.

I feel that a simple rating system going from "not interested" over  
"mildly interested" to "interested" and arriving at "strongly  
interested" will tell Doepfer all that can possibly be extracted from  
such polls.

_g

>
>
> We already had some polls with those selections, and they always  
> showed
> a much clearer (often less affirmative) picture.
>
> Florian
>

i agree with Guy.


Bakis Sirros - Parallel Worlds / Interconnected / Memory Geist

[Doepfer_a100] group owner

www. parallel - worlds - music. com

www. myspace. com/ parallelworldsmusic

www. myspace. com/ interconnectedmusic

www. myspace. com/ memorygeist

www. DiN. org. uk

www. musicamaximamagnetica. com

www. shimarecords. co. uk

www. rubberrecords. gr

Athens - Greece

--- On Fri, 2/13/09, Guy Drieghe D. <guy@guyd2.com> wrote:

From: Guy Drieghe D. <guy@guyd2.com>
Subject: Re: [Doepfer_a100] about polls, was: popular or not
To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, February 13, 2009, 12:16 PM











    
            

On 13 Feb 2009, at 10:36, Florian Anwander wrote:



> Hello Bakis

>

> > and i have to admit that i am one to blame for some misleading  

> poll results...

> I think this tells us, that the questions asked in the polls are not  

> good.

>

> For future polls you should always provide selections like that:

>

> 1.) I will buy this module

> 2.) I think this module is useful, but I won't buy it (at least not  

> now)

> 3.) I think Doepfer should NOT offer this module

> 4.) I have no opinion on this module

>

> Selection 1 should result in the minimum sales Dieter will have

>



Not necessarily.

For instance, I tick this choice simply because I like the idea of  

this module and I *might* buy it some time in the future, but because  

the way this poll is worded, I have no other choice of selecting this  

option if I like this module (even if I'm not gonna buy it, for some  

reason or another ~ say, I ran out of money).



> Selection 2 will show a general positive direction. Modules with this

> voting will assumingly have an allover chance of success, though the

> affirmation within the is not that good.

>



This option is rather useless, since it doesn't tell anyone anything  

really.

Let's assume that ALL modules are useful (and indeed, in theory, they  

are -- there will always be at least one person who'd like to use/have  

such a module), but that doesn't necessarily make them financially  

interesting for Doepfer...

So, choices 1 and 2 are actually the same: I am interested in this  

module [but in fact that is no guarantee that I'm going to buy it].

Reasoning:

	- choice 1 is not a 100% guarantee for a sale

	- choice 2 *just might* become a sale

	So, regardless if 1 or 2 are chosen, in Doepfer's eyes these both say  

"maybe a sale".



> Selection 3 will separate the "no"s caused by individual aversion  

> ("this

> module is only useful for techno and I hate techno") from more general

> signs of unsuccessfulness.

>

Again, not necessarily.

There can be no real reason in saying that a module should not be  

offered -- what's the point, if you know that at least one person is  

interested (the one whom suggested the module in the first place), and  

you yourself simply don't care about this module ? "Not caring about"  

does not translate to "should not"...



> Selection 4 sounds not very expressive, but this may be the most clear

> signal to not produce this module.

>

Choise 4 is a bit too abstract to use as a viable selection model.

My bet is that quite a few members simply select this choice because  

they wanted to show their support as a member by voting, but don't  

care about this particular module. So in reality this option does not  

tell Doepfer anything, except for the fact that there are members who  

are willing to express the opinion that they don't have an opinion.  

Hmm...



To me, a good poll is nothing more than a "rating system", a pointer,  

to show Doepfer the amount of interest in a particular module.

Therefore, any hints towards "buying" or "not buying" should be left  

out, just as any emotional tendencies should be left out as well.



I feel that a simple rating system going from "not interested" over  

"mildly interested" to "interested" and arriving at "strongly  

interested" will tell Doepfer all that can possibly be extracted from  

such polls.



_g



>

>

> We already had some polls with those selections, and they always  

> showed

> a much clearer (often less affirmative) picture.

>

> Florian

>


 

      

    
    
	
	 
	
	








	


	
	


      

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

Hi Guy

>> 1.) I will buy this module
>> 2.) I think this module is useful, but I won't buy it (at least not  
>> now)

> Not necessarily.
> For instance, I tick this choice simply because I like the idea of  
> this module and I *might* buy it some time in the future, 
Your choice has to be selection 2. Your position is exactly what is 
meant there: "I like it, but I won't buy it now (but may be in the future)".

(even if I'm not gonna buy it, for some
> reason or another ~ say, I ran out of money).
Runnig out of money can happen to everyone in the world at any time - 
<evil grin>ask Lehmans Brothers</evil grin>.

Florian

Hiya Florian,


On 13 Feb 2009, at 11:36, Florian Anwander wrote:

> Hi Guy
>
>> >> 1.) I will buy this module
>> >> 2.) I think this module is useful, but I won't buy it (at least  
>> not
>> >> now)
>>
>> > Not necessarily.
>> > For instance, I tick this choice simply because I like the idea of
>> > this module and I *might* buy it some time in the future,
>>
> Your choice has to be selection 2. Your position is exactly what is
> meant there: "I like it, but I won't buy it now (but may be in the  
> future)".
>
I know what you mean, but both 1 and 2 overlap, because "buying" is an  
abstract thought linked to a momentary situation (unless of course  
your wealth is in the order of "my name is Dagobert Duck", and you'd  
buy anything with knobs anyway).
The overlapping of both choices comes from the fact that "I will buy"  
is still not a 100% guarantee, and likewise "I won't buy it (for now)"  
is not a 100% guarantee that you won't buy it... As a statistical  
result, both choices cancel out each other, and thusly are redundant.

>> (even if I'm not gonna buy it, for some
>> > reason or another ~ say, I ran out of money).
>>
> Runnig out of money can happen to everyone in the world at any time -
> <evil grin>ask Lehmans Brothers</evil grin>.
>
Yeah. I wanted to buy two Monster Bases, but my money was on a bank in  
Reykjavik. :-)

_g

>
>
> Florian

> hello
> I do not want to be critical to much but instead of few option of expanding mixers from 138 family
> one stereo with more inputs and pan cv would be just top and I think sell okay, theres so many people performing on A100
> and neets something portable and small.
I completely agree!  I've been wanting a module of this sort for years
without having to spend almost $800US for a Cwejman.  Something like
this in a compact module would be very useful, almost a necessity if
you consider that a performing musician wants to take as little
equipment as possible with the most capability. As a matter of fact, I
still wish there was a bit more consideration of performance modules
and interfaces at this point over expanding a module class that
already has plenty of options (filters, for example).  In my mind,
there are many areas where there is room for useful expansion: stereo
(or quad/surround) mixer, patch matrix, arpeggiator, multi-touch
performance surfaces (keyboard or not), digital oscillator, X/Y pad, a
smaller and more affordable version of something like a Continuum
(complete with it's own mountable multi CV out interface).


> > . If one manufactures 100 units
> > but has only 30 orders it will be a loss (and we had indeed some such
> > losses in the past, e.g. the A-100CGK, A-138x, A-164-1 or A-186).
I have one of the A-100 CGKs and I think it is a fantastic keyboard
both in feel and build quality.  But in truth, for a performing
keyboardist, it lacks two very common controls: modulation and pitch
bend.  Surprising that this was overlooked when even the cheapest of
MIDI controllers have this?  Not only that, but the octave transpose
is limited to only 1 octave (???)  I'd like to see a Rev. 2 of the
A100CGK with more capability and where the seldom used options on the
left hand panel were moved to the back (or changed via a computer
editor) and replaced with performance controllers: X/Y Pad, pitch,
modulation, et al.

Kindest regards,
John

Hello John

> keyboardist, it lacks two very common controls: modulation and pitch
> bend.  
The A100CGK is built for very small dimensions. Thats the reason why it 
does not contain it. In the A-100 range there are already moduls like 
the joysticks or the theremins, which can replace this.

The elektronik itself supports wheels:
Quote from http://www.doepfer.de/MKE.htm:

"These units can be connected to MKE:
     * Standard keyboard manufactured by FATAR/Italy with 2, 3, 4 or 5 
octaves (keyboard types TP/7, TP/8 or TP/9, with velocity)
     * Pitch bend wheel (special spring-loaded rotary potentiometer)
     * Modulation wheel (special rotary potentiometer)
Remark: Because of technical reasons only the single modulation wheels 
of our accessories list can be used in combination with MKE but not the 
modulation wheel set !
     * Rotary or fader potentiometer for loudness/volume control (Midi CC#7)
     * After touch sensor or socket for sustain switch or another 
potentiometer for any Midi controller"

Either you connect the announced A-174-2 to it or you add some diy 
stuff: http://www.doepfer.de/zubeh_e.htm#modulation%20wheels


Florian

The main problem I see with the polls is there is lack of participation. There are 1207 
members and usually it's only 20-30 people who reply. And I suspect it's the same small 
group who vote in every poll.

So it may be a tiny group influencing your product designs. Suppose this group is mostly 
newbies who want only grunge and fat bass sounds. That's going to steer the product in a 
specific direction and may reject many good mainstream ideas.

To increase participation, people need an incentive. Cash is always a good incentive. If 
you want better data from these polls, it won't come free. Also include a small 
questionnaire so you know something about the poll-takers to weigh the results.



--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, <yahoo@...> wrote:

>
> > I can't believe that a simple uncontrolled poll of only 29 users
> > is meaningful to you to base
> > your product planning around it. I bet that only those who are
> > emotionally invested will
> > bother to vote and most everyone else will ignore the poll. It's
> > meaningless data.
> >
> > It's like asking a 29 people what food they like and opening a
> > restaurant menu based on
> > that. I think you're better off to rely on your vision, business
> > and marketing expertise than
> > these useless polls.
> 
> Of course the polls from the group are not the only criterion for the
> decision of new modules. We also discuss new designs with musicians outside
> the Yahoo group and - believe it or not - some are even our own ideas. When
> you take a look at the list of the latest new modules there are a couple of
> devices that were not discussed in or suggested by the group (e.g. the XP
> VCF A-106-6, the Dual lin/exp VCA A-132-3, the Dual VC Crossfader A-132-2,
> the Wave Multiplier II, the new Midi interface A-190-2 or the Synthesizer
> Voice A-111-5). But in the past the poll results were very helpful (e.g. for
> the BBD modules A-188-x, the Vactrol modules A-101-X, the SOU modules
> A-149-x, the morphing filter A-107 or the bit modifier A-189-1).
> 
> After all the poor sales of some newer modules did not surprise me and of
> course it was also my own mistake. I should have listened to my inner voice
> :-)  I was not convinced by some of the polls but have been persuaded by a
> couple of users to manufacture the modules. I think in the future I will
> listen more carefully to my inner voice. I made the experience that if I was
> convinced by a new module myself more than 95% of the users had the same
> assessment.
> 
> Best wishes
> Dieter Doepfer
>

Hi, Florian

>>  it lacks two very common controls: modulation and pitch
>> bend.
> The A100CGK is built for very small dimensions. Thats the reason why it
> does not contain it. In the A-100 range there are already moduls like
> the joysticks or the theremins, which can replace this.
> Either you connect the announced A-174-2 to it or you add some diy
> stuff: http://www.doepfer.de/zubeh_e.htm#modulation%20wheels
I understand what you're saying, Florian.  But when we're talking
about why the keyboard might have been a poor seller, missing standard
controls like these could be one of those factors.  I really have not
much free time for DIY type projects and I suspect there may be others
with that same limitation.  Additionally, Dieter has already said that
DIY kits are also not good sellers either.  Again, this is my favorite
"synth" keyboard contoller, but in reality for $600 it can't compete
with other (much cheaper) MIDI controllers on the market due to
missing basic features (> 1 oct transpose and performance controls)
for more "normal" use.   It also doesn't look very aesthetically
pleasing to piece together functionality via DIY efforts  :-)   And to
be a successful product (not counting people like me who actually
bought one!), it needs to both look good, perform well and be a better
value than the competition.

From what I can see, there is plenty of room where the large LED and
configuration buttons are situated that could have *instead* been used
for important performance controls while moving these rarely used
configuration stuff to the back or to a computer interface.  Changing
the mode, retrig and hold options during a real performance are highly
unlikely so they don't need to be immediately accessible.  With some
kind of performance controls, this keyboard would have been my main
synth MIDI controller (and modular controller) - because I REALLY
REALLY love the keyboard for the feel and solid construction!!   But
now I still need to use something else for that does include
modulation and pitch controls.  And yes I did try performing a live
jazz/fusion set with the CGK and an A100P case-mounted joystick and I
can tell you was awkward.  Not to mention I had to waste the module
space for a joystick.

When I'm home with my Monster Case wearing my "mad scientist" hat (or
lab coat, if you will) creating crazy sonic experiments, I don't care
where the controllers are located because I'm using the system
differently.  But when I'm wearing my "keyboardist" hat playing
traditional (i.e., melodic) music in a live setting, I need the
performance controls nearby. Can you image playing a guitar but having
to reach to the amp head when you need to bend a note or add vibrato?
Sure, I could take a cheap MIDI controller to gigs instead, but
hooking up some plastic Emu or M-Audio thing to a $2000+ analog
modular system just seems so dirty to me!  :-P

Kindest regards,
John

On 2009-02-13, at 13:58, John V. Talbert wrote:

 > hello
  > I do not want to be critical to much but instead of few option of 
expanding mixers from 138 family
  > one stereo with more inputs and pan cv would be just top and I think 
sell okay, theres so many people performing on A100
  > and neets something portable and small.
In my mind,
  there are many areas where there is room for useful expansion: stereo
  (or quad/surround) mixer, patch matrix, arpeggiator, multi-touch
  performance surfaces (keyboard or not), digital oscillator, X/Y pad, a
  smaller and more affordable version of something like a Continuum
  (complete with it's own mountable multi CV out interface).
YES YES YES!

there is so much development on very detailed determined module
but almost nothing as great stereo output mix / procesor
there is noting which can be helpfull
and I know some users who do not even know
about this list and performing on A100 or just modulars
and pretty sure they need good stereo mixer or something.

what I read from post, most of people here
just work on in in strudio (I am partly too)
so most of oppinions are studio oriented
of course I might be wrong.
 From other point of view a lot of musicians
uses it as very experimental sonic tool,
and complex stereophony is just more than welcome

thanks ad all the best
r

ps. on myspace profile you can listen to one of my solo concerts 
recording
where stereo and paning is the thing (name CTMcut or something)

www.myspace.com/robertpiotrowicz

On 2009-02-13, at 13:58, John V. Talbert wrote:

 > hello
  > I do not want to be critical to much but instead of few option of 
expanding mixers from 138 family
  > one stereo with more inputs and pan cv would be just top and I think 
sell okay, theres so many people performing on A100
  > and neets something portable and small.
In my mind,
  there are many areas where there is room for useful expansion: stereo
  (or quad/surround) mixer, patch matrix, arpeggiator, multi-touch
  performance surfaces (keyboard or not), digital oscillator, X/Y pad, a
  smaller and more affordable version of something like a Continuum
  (complete with it's own mountable multi CV out interface).
YES YES YES!

there is so much development on very detailed determined module
but almost nothing as great stereo output mix / procesor
there is noting which can be helpfull
and I know some users who do not even know
about this list and performing on A100 or just modulars
and pretty sure they need good stereo mixer or something.

what I read from post, most of people here
just work on in in strudio (I am partly too)
so most of oppinions are studio oriented
of course I might be wrong.
 From other point of view a lot of musicians
uses it as very experimental sonic tool,
and complex stereophony is just more than welcome

thanks ad all the best
r

ps. on myspace profile you can listen to one of my solo concerts 
recording
where stereo and paning is the thing (name CTMcut or something)

www.myspace.com/robertpiotrowicz


www.musicagenera.net
www.myspace.com/robertpiotrowicz

--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "laryn91" <caymus91@...> wrote:
>
> The main problem I see with the polls is there is lack of participation. 


What has struck me is the way the questions are phrased.  Maybe instead of "Should Doepfer 
manufacture X", it should ask a bit more directly, "Would you buy X if Doepfer manufactured 
it".  After all, that's really what Dieter wants to know with these polls, and it's only indirectly 
implied in the way the questions are currently phrased.

(I wonder how many people may have thought Doepfer "should" manufacture a particular 
module, in the abstract, but then not bought it when it came out.)

> (I wonder how many people may have thought Doepfer "should" manufacture a
> particular
> module, in the abstract, but then not bought it when it came out.)


Oh, I had that several times.
I thought that it was a nice idea but not for my way of working.