Doepfer

Is there a difference in the span of the tuning knob between the 110 and
111?  I can tune my 111s up or down about an augmented 4th, but the
range on the 110s seems less, so that I can't necessarily bring it to a
specific pitch without a CV.  Is that weird performance that differs
from other people's 110s?  (Personally I prefer the sound of the 111s
for its slightly more sharp and robotic quality.  But both pack a
punch.)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: code_pig [mailto:code_pig@yahoo.com] 
> Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 3:50 PM
> To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Doepfer_a100] Re: A-100 questions
> 
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> ---------------------~--> Sell a Home for Top $ 
http://us.click.yahoo.com/RrPZMC/jTmEAA/jd3IAA/QnLolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
doepfer_a100-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

hi list,
as far as i know the a111's have a wider tuniong range
than the a110's.also, i prefer the a111's for the
linear FM input!!!!with this i can make many new
sounds that can't be done with the a110's.
about the a112:it has a grungy sound(8 bit after
all...)but i like it!you can create wavetables in
random by modulating the wavenumber whilte you are
recording.but for more accurate wavetables you can use
a common wav. editor(just cut and paste various
samples together) .you can then play them in the a112
in linear order,as a normal wav. or in wavetable mode
where you can play the 256 waves in various orders
depending on the wavetable cv applied to the
input.many,many experiments can be done with this
module.for example in rec mode you can monitor sounds
thru it and use it as a bit decimator(it tottaly
destroys your a100 sounds...but in a good way:-))
one very important feature of the a155 that can't be
done with thye maq:clock it with a pulse audio vco and
you have a vc graphic vco.(for doing this you have to
make a very simple mod in the new a155's,just ask
roland mayer).in the older a155's this mod isn't
needed...but you have to clock them with perfect
pulses.the newer a155's work ok even with saw or
triangle waves as a clock source,i think.i've got to
check this out.the older a155's go nuts if you clock
them with saw or tri waves(they play in random
steps!!!that's good,too...)
that's all.
bakis.



--- unknown freak <cgraef@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
> Is there a difference in the span of the tuning knob
> between the 110 and
> 111?  I can tune my 111s up or down about an
> augmented 4th, but the
> range on the 110s seems less, so that I can't
> necessarily bring it to a
> specific pitch without a CV.  Is that weird
> performance that differs
> from other people's 110s?  (Personally I prefer the
> sound of the 111s
> for its slightly more sharp and robotic quality. 
> But both pack a
> punch.)
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: code_pig [mailto:code_pig@yahoo.com] 
> > Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 3:50 PM
> > To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Doepfer_a100] Re: A-100 questions
> > 
> > 
> > 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
> > 
> > 
> > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> > ---------------------~--> Sell a Home for Top $ 
>
http://us.click.yahoo.com/RrPZMC/jTmEAA/jd3IAA/QnLolB/TM
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
> 
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> doepfer_a100-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> 
>  
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 
> 
> 


=====
synthfreak(parallel worlds)
athens-greece
[Doepfer_a100] group owner-moderator

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/

> Is there a difference in the span of the tuning knob between the 
110 and
> 111?  I can tune my 111s up or down about an augmented 4th, but the
> range on the 110s seems less, so that I can't necessarily bring it 
to a
> specific pitch without a CV.  Is that weird performance that differs
> from other people's 110s?  (Personally I prefer the sound of the 

The A-110 manual entry is a little inaccurate:- working back from the 
schematic the tune knob covers a third of a volt in total, or about 
+/- 2 semitones from the central position. The A-111 coarse knob 
covers a volt, i.e. +/- 1/2 an octave, as the manual says; the fine 
knob is one-tenth of this, so covers a little more than +/- a half 
semitone. V. quick measurements on my 110 and 111 seem to agree with 
these rough calcs, so no, you've not got weird performance!

Tim