Doepfer

Hi,

Greetings from Canada.

I've been `lurking' here for a while, trying to glean as much from 
the list before I build my own A-100.  :-)

I have a few questions, wondering if you guys can help me out:

I'm wondering about the sonic differences between the A-110 
oscillator and the A-111 "High End" oscillator.  

I know that the A-110 is discrete and the A-111 is using a CEM chip 
and has more CV and FM options.  What I'm wondering about is the 
sound characteristics of the two oscillators.  Does the A-110 
sound "fatter" and the A-111 sound "thinner?"  

If someone could upload a sample of both oscillators, I'd really 
appreciate it.  I haven't been able to find many high-quality audio 
samples of the oscillators and filters online.

Also, the A-112 looks great, but how does it sound?  How easy is it 
to create your own wavetables?

Also, I've been trying to decide if I should get the MAQ 16/3 or if I 
should get an A-155 sequencer module?  Is there anything the A-155 
offers that the MAQ doesn't?  I like the idea of being able to use 
the MAQ for driving the A-100 system plus other CV and MIDI synths.  
Just wondering if the A-155 would offer anything more than the MAQ 
would (specifically driving the A-100)?

Is there an FAQ for these types of questions…?

Last question:  What's the most under-rated module Doepfer offers?

Thanks!

Paul

> I'm wondering about the sonic differences between the A-110 
> oscillator and the A-111 "High End" oscillator.  
> 
> I know that the A-110 is discrete and the A-111 is using a CEM chip 
> and has more CV and FM options.  What I'm wondering about is the 
> sound characteristics of the two oscillators.  Does the A-110 
> sound "fatter" and the A-111 sound "thinner?"  
> 
> If someone could upload a sample of both oscillators, I'd really 
> appreciate it.  I haven't been able to find many high-quality audio 
> samples of the oscillators and filters online.

I have both. I think it might be more accurate to say that tha A-110 
sounds "dirtier" and the A-111 sounds "cleaner". The A-111 has a 
dedicated cult following. I currently use 3 A110s, can't justify the 
extra space or expense for the A111s to myself.

> Also, the A-112 looks great, but how does it sound?  How easy is it 
> to create your own wavetables?

I'm not familiar with the A-112. Bakis will probably give you 
comments on it.

> Also, I've been trying to decide if I should get the MAQ 16/3 or if 
I 
> should get an A-155 sequencer module?  Is there anything the A-155 
> offers that the MAQ doesn't?  I like the idea of being able to use 
> the MAQ for driving the A-100 system plus other CV and MIDI synths. 
 
> Just wondering if the A-155 would offer anything more than the MAQ 
> would (specifically driving the A-100)?

The A-155 offers ties rather than just 16th notes. 
The A-155 has a toggle switch for each step, whearas the MAQ 16/3 uses 
the knobs for both pitch and step on/off functions, nowhere near as 
musical or useful. 
The A-155 is easy to sync with Midi, but the MAQ 16/3 is reputed to 
have problems if it's not the master clock.
The A-155 can sequence external audio or CV signals, the MAQ can't.

Having both might be ideal. I use both an A-155 and a Regelwerk for 
step sequencing.

> Is there an FAQ for these types of questions…?

The group archives contain a wealth of information on all these 
topics. Use the Search function.
 
> Last question:  What's the most under-rated module Doepfer offers?

Many people dislike the A-132 dual VCA. I love the thing.

Joe

Excellent choice Joe.  The first thing that came to mind was the 
A132.  It isn't flashy or trendy, but have four of them.

I also agree with you on the differences between A110/111.  I have 
both, but in the future will only buy A110's.

Regards,
Kevin

--- In Doepfer_a100@y..., "Joe Buechler" <buechlerjoe@t...> wrote:
> 
> > I'm wondering about the sonic differences between the A-110 
> > oscillator and the A-111 "High End" oscillator.  
> > 
> > I know that the A-110 is discrete and the A-111 is using a CEM 
chip 
> > and has more CV and FM options.  What I'm wondering about is the 
> > sound characteristics of the two oscillators.  Does the A-110 
> > sound "fatter" and the A-111 sound "thinner?"  
> > 
> > If someone could upload a sample of both oscillators, I'd really 
> > appreciate it.  I haven't been able to find many high-quality 
audio 
> > samples of the oscillators and filters online.
> 
> I have both. I think it might be more accurate to say that tha A-
110 
> sounds "dirtier" and the A-111 sounds "cleaner". The A-111 has a 
> dedicated cult following. I currently use 3 A110s, can't justify 
the 
> extra space or expense for the A111s to myself.
> 
> > Also, the A-112 looks great, but how does it sound?  How easy is 
it 
> > to create your own wavetables?
> 
> I'm not familiar with the A-112. Bakis will probably give you 
> comments on it.
> 
> > Also, I've been trying to decide if I should get the MAQ 16/3 or 
if 
> I 
> > should get an A-155 sequencer module?  Is there anything the A-
155 
> > offers that the MAQ doesn't?  I like the idea of being able to 
use 
> > the MAQ for driving the A-100 system plus other CV and MIDI 
synths. 
>  
> > Just wondering if the A-155 would offer anything more than the 
MAQ 
> > would (specifically driving the A-100)?
> 
> The A-155 offers ties rather than just 16th notes. 
> The A-155 has a toggle switch for each step, whearas the MAQ 16/3 
uses 
> the knobs for both pitch and step on/off functions, nowhere near as 
> musical or useful. 
> The A-155 is easy to sync with Midi, but the MAQ 16/3 is reputed to 
> have problems if it's not the master clock.
> The A-155 can sequence external audio or CV signals, the MAQ can't.
> 
> Having both might be ideal. I use both an A-155 and a Regelwerk for 
> step sequencing.
> 
> > Is there an FAQ for these types of questions
?

> 
> The group archives contain a wealth of information on all these 
> topics. Use the Search function.
>  
> > Last question:  What's the most under-rated module Doepfer offers?
> 
> Many people dislike the A-132 dual VCA. I love the thing.
> 
> Joe