Doepfer

First of all let me say that I am very glad to be amongst you 
people, and share my love and passion for analog/modular synths.

I have a small 12U system that is mainly made up of Doepfer modules 
and has some Analogue Systems modules on it as well.

I only have two A-110 VCOs, and when I am laying down basslines for 
tunes (www.streetwiserecordings.com/recordings.htm if you want to 
check out my A-100 in action, *every* single monophonic synth sound 
is my A-100), I find that my single VCO Roland Sh-101 puts my A-100 
to shame when it comes to comparing the bottom end... 
Is that because of the Sh-101's CEM3340 based VCO? 
Will I get the same phat, tight bottom end if I simply get an A-111? 
Or is it because of that ultrafunky IR3109 VCF that the Sh-101 
sports?

It would be great if we could have Sh-101's filter on a Doepfer 
module...


Peace out.

It really depends on what you consider "proper".  Can you get fat 
bass sounds out of A-111s?  Yes.  Can you get every sort of bass 
you've ever fallen in love with out of an A-100 system?  Probably 
not.  Everything has its own character.  

I recently bought an MAM TB33II bass synth, and with its one VCO it 
has a character of juicy fatness I've never coaxed from my Doepfer.  
I also recently picked up a Macbeth M3X Minimoog clone, and it too 
can produce a certain bass character I doubt I'd ever come close to 
with my Doepfer.  If you want certain sounds, sometimes the best and 
easiest thing is to have the certain synths that can make them as 
easily as falling off a log.  Then again, there's a lot to be said 
for inventing your own sound completely.


--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "nectarios01" <nectariosm@h...> 
wrote:
> First of all let me say that I am very glad to be amongst you 
> people, and share my love and passion for analog/modular synths.
> 
> I have a small 12U system that is mainly made up of Doepfer modules 
> and has some Analogue Systems modules on it as well.
> 
> I only have two A-110 VCOs, and when I am laying down basslines for 
> tunes (www.streetwiserecordings.com/recordings.htm if you want to 
> check out my A-100 in action, *every* single monophonic synth sound 
> is my A-100), I find that my single VCO Roland Sh-101 puts my A-100 
> to shame when it comes to comparing the bottom end... 
> Is that because of the Sh-101's CEM3340 based VCO? 
> Will I get the same phat, tight bottom end if I simply get an A-
111? 

> Or is it because of that ultrafunky IR3109 VCF that the Sh-101 
> sports?
> 
> It would be great if we could have Sh-101's filter on a Doepfer 
> module...
> 
> 
> Peace out.

hehehe i would say that it is the ultrafunky ir3109 vcf,
but it also is the whole circuitry of the sh101.
all parts play an important role for the unique sound of
an instrument, the combination of vca and eg, also the mixer
and the vco. but it is probably the creamy filter, which
colors the sound the most.

best wishes

ingo




--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "nectarios01" <nectariosm@h...> 
wrote:
> First of all let me say that I am very glad to be amongst you 
> people, and share my love and passion for analog/modular synths.
> 
> I have a small 12U system that is mainly made up of Doepfer modules 
> and has some Analogue Systems modules on it as well.
> 
> I only have two A-110 VCOs, and when I am laying down basslines for 
> tunes (www.streetwiserecordings.com/recordings.htm if you want to 
> check out my A-100 in action, *every* single monophonic synth sound 
> is my A-100), I find that my single VCO Roland Sh-101 puts my A-100 
> to shame when it comes to comparing the bottom end... 
> Is that because of the Sh-101's CEM3340 based VCO? 
> Will I get the same phat, tight bottom end if I simply get an A-
111? 

> Or is it because of that ultrafunky IR3109 VCF that the Sh-101 
> sports?
> 
> It would be great if we could have Sh-101's filter on a Doepfer 
> module...
> 
> 
> Peace out.

It is not the lack of character I am talking about, but the lack of 
the bottom end that the A-100 has compared to the Sh-101.

Using the 24dB/8ve transistor ladder filters on my system (A-120, RS 
100), I find that I have to shelf 100Hz by +3dB on the Joemeek 
VC1Qcs EQ before I get the same bootom end (in level, not as tight) 
as the Sh-101.
Does the A-111 output substantialy more bottom end that the A-110? 
I am going to get a couple anyway since the A-111 waveforms are a 
bit different to the A-110's (and for the extra features), but I'd 
just like to know what to expect in the bottom end region.


Peace out.

i wouldn't say that the a111 has more bass than the a110.
the sh101 low end boost comes from the filter i guess.
whenever i want a fat bass, i use the ssm2044-based a105 module.
but it doesn't sound like a roland filter, it just gives you
plenty of bass.

best wishes

ingo

--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "nectarios01" <nectariosm@h...> 
wrote:
> It is not the lack of character I am talking about, but the lack of 
> the bottom end that the A-100 has compared to the Sh-101.
> 
> Using the 24dB/8ve transistor ladder filters on my system (A-120, 
RS 

> 100), I find that I have to shelf 100Hz by +3dB on the Joemeek 
> VC1Qcs EQ before I get the same bootom end (in level, not as tight) 
> as the Sh-101.
> Does the A-111 output substantialy more bottom end that the A-110? 
> I am going to get a couple anyway since the A-111 waveforms are a 
> bit different to the A-110's (and for the extra features), but I'd 
> just like to know what to expect in the bottom end region.
> 
> 
> Peace out.

Whatever goes into making the mysterious quality refered to as bottom-
end, I don't think the A-111s are particularly more notable for it 
than the A-110s are.  I consider the A-111s more reedy and precise 
than my Analogue Systems RS-90s, which I find to have a much rounder 
and Moogier quality and I'd choose if I were looking for a rounder 
type of bass.  Of course with the A-120 and RS-100 filters, you're 
dealing with Moog ladders whose character is going to be different 
from an SH101 filter regardless.  I much prefer the RS-100 to the A-
120, actually.


--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "nectarios01" <nectariosm@h...> 
wrote:
> It is not the lack of character I am talking about, but the lack of 
> the bottom end that the A-100 has compared to the Sh-101.
> 
> Using the 24dB/8ve transistor ladder filters on my system (A-120, 
RS 

> 100), I find that I have to shelf 100Hz by +3dB on the Joemeek 
> VC1Qcs EQ before I get the same bootom end (in level, not as tight) 
> as the Sh-101.
> Does the A-111 output substantialy more bottom end that the A-110? 
> I am going to get a couple anyway since the A-111 waveforms are a 
> bit different to the A-110's (and for the extra features), but I'd 
> just like to know what to expect in the bottom end region.
> 
> 
> Peace out.

hello nectarie,
its funny that you say your sh101 has a better bass
than the a100.i have the sh101 and,although i love
it's sound and bass,i don't hear a better bass sound
coming from it.it's all a matter of personal opinion.
bakis.



--- modularcharles <cgraef@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
> It really depends on what you consider "proper". 
> Can you get fat 
> bass sounds out of A-111s?  Yes.  Can you get every
> sort of bass 
> you've ever fallen in love with out of an A-100
> system?  Probably 
> not.  Everything has its own character.  
> 
> I recently bought an MAM TB33II bass synth, and with
> its one VCO it 
> has a character of juicy fatness I've never coaxed
> from my Doepfer.  
> I also recently picked up a Macbeth M3X Minimoog
> clone, and it too 
> can produce a certain bass character I doubt I'd
> ever come close to 
> with my Doepfer.  If you want certain sounds,
> sometimes the best and 
> easiest thing is to have the certain synths that can
> make them as 
> easily as falling off a log.  Then again, there's a
> lot to be said 
> for inventing your own sound completely.
> 
> 
> --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "nectarios01"
> <nectariosm@h...> 
> wrote:
> > First of all let me say that I am very glad to be
> amongst you 
> > people, and share my love and passion for
> analog/modular synths.
> > 
> > I have a small 12U system that is mainly made up
> of Doepfer modules 
> > and has some Analogue Systems modules on it as
> well.
> > 
> > I only have two A-110 VCOs, and when I am laying
> down basslines for 
> > tunes (www.streetwiserecordings.com/recordings.htm
> if you want to 
> > check out my A-100 in action, *every* single
> monophonic synth sound 
> > is my A-100), I find that my single VCO Roland
> Sh-101 puts my A-100 
> > to shame when it comes to comparing the bottom
> end... 
> > Is that because of the Sh-101's CEM3340 based VCO?
> 
> > Will I get the same phat, tight bottom end if I
> simply get an A-
> 111? 
> > Or is it because of that ultrafunky IR3109 VCF
> that the Sh-101 
> > sports?
> > 
> > It would be great if we could have Sh-101's filter
> on a Doepfer 
> > module...
> > 
> > 
> > Peace out.
> 
> 


=====
Bakis Sirros
Parallel Worlds / Polariton
Athens-Greece
[Doepfer_a100] group owner
http://www.rubber.gr
http://www.ward12.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/

And let's not forget the sub-oscilllator.

--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "selfoscillate" 
<synaptic_music@y...> wrote:
> 
> hehehe i would say that it is the ultrafunky ir3109 vcf,
> but it also is the whole circuitry of the sh101.
> all parts play an important role for the unique sound of
> an instrument, the combination of vca and eg, also the mixer
> and the vco. but it is probably the creamy filter, which
> colors the sound the most.
> 
> best wishes
> 
> ingo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "nectarios01" 
<nectariosm@h...> 
> wrote:
> > First of all let me say that I am very glad to be amongst you 
> > people, and share my love and passion for analog/modular synths.
> > 
> > I have a small 12U system that is mainly made up of Doepfer 
modules 
> > and has some Analogue Systems modules on it as well.
> > 
> > I only have two A-110 VCOs, and when I am laying down basslines 
for 
> > tunes (www.streetwiserecordings.com/recordings.htm if you want to 
> > check out my A-100 in action, *every* single monophonic synth 
sound 
> > is my A-100), I find that my single VCO Roland Sh-101 puts my A-
100 

> > to shame when it comes to comparing the bottom end... 
> > Is that because of the Sh-101's CEM3340 based VCO? 
> > Will I get the same phat, tight bottom end if I simply get an A-
> 111? 
> > Or is it because of that ultrafunky IR3109 VCF that the Sh-101 
> > sports?
> > 
> > It would be great if we could have Sh-101's filter on a Doepfer 
> > module...
> > 
> > 
> > Peace out.

A guy on AH asked the list where he could get an affordable variable-width
bandpass filter and I replied as follows.  Seemed maybe worth cross-posting:

Re: [AH] variable bandwidth bandpass filters...

... I whipped up a quickee example mp3:

http://66.155.197.104/vogelscheiss/misc/doepfer_varbandpass.mp3

The setup is this:

AUDIO:  a 4-note chord of VCOs feeds into the audio input of a Doepfer A-121
Multimode.  Lowpass output of that filter runs into the audio input of a
second A-121.  The highpass output of this second filter runs out to the
mixer.

CONTROL:  LFO square wave gates an ADSR.  Postive ADSR output feeds CV1 on
the highpass, inverted ADSR output feeds CV1 on the lowpass, so every time
the highpass Fc goes up the lowpass Fc goes down, widening the passband.
The sine output of the same LFO feeds CV2 on both filters, so that you're
getting some additional unison movement.  The Fc knobs on the filters are
set to taste, but at a certain point in the ADSR cycle they crisscross and
cut off all sound.  Resonance on both filters is set to 7.

I added a little MoFX echo to make myself happy.

Voila, variable-width bandpass.  Don't modulars rock?

I am not simply saying that the Sh-101 has "better bass", just that 
the Sh-101 has a noticeably bigger bottom end than the A-100. That 
is very obvious when you A and B the two synths. Anyway.. I also 
wanted to ask if it is down to the CEM3340 chip, but apparently it 
is not that.

I'll order that SSM2044 on monday and see if that helps.
Also, is the A-103 filter simply an A-120 with a softer slope (being 
a transistor ladder filter as well)? Is the sonic difference way 
different than the A-120's?

Sorry for my basic questions, but I just found this group, and you 
guys seem to know what you are talking about.

Peace out.

--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "nectarios01" <nectariosm@h...> 
wrote:
> I am not simply saying that the Sh-101 has "better bass", just that 
> the Sh-101 has a noticeably bigger bottom end than the A-100. That 
> is very obvious when you A and B the two synths. Anyway.. I also 
> wanted to ask if it is down to the CEM3340 chip, but apparently it 
> is not that.
> 
> I'll order that SSM2044 on monday and see if that helps.
> Also, is the A-103 filter simply an A-120 with a softer slope 
(being 
> a transistor ladder filter as well)? Is the sonic difference way 
> different than the A-120's?

yes, the a103 sounds different, especially with high resonance.
i don't know how to describe it, maybe someone else can find better
words. it is mainly the same design as in the a120, but modified
so that it reacts like a tb303 filter.
another difference is, that the a103 input can be overdriven,
this is not possible with a standard a120. btw all the newer
filters (also the a105) can be overdriven, which is good
for the special portion of fat in the output signal :-)

> Sorry for my basic questions, but I just found this group, and you 
> guys seem to know what you are talking about.

you're welcome :-)

best wishes

ingo