>>I just arranged to buy a doepfer maq 16/3. I have a P3 and I am wondering about the differences? Do you like the doepfer? How does it compare to the P3?<< like having a push-bike & a range-rover-sports, if I can go all jeremy clarkson on you for a moment. :-) want to go to the top of the hill & admire the view? use the bike. want to go to the top of the hill with several friends, take a picnic & make a short film up there? take the range rover. put the bike in the back of the range rover aswell. I hope this helps... :-) immediacy/hands-on interaction vs complexity/fleibility/depth. they are complemetary in my live-rig, not mutually exclusive. I have posted elsewhere as to why & how... the maq, running on more than one channel, & potentially at different step-ratios, allows one to quickly realise counterpointed, syncopated & polyrhythmic patterns which can then be copied across into the p3; I find (& YMMV) this to be quicker than using the p3 alone, whilst the p3 allows better access to multiple versions of the results, & greater flexibility in arranging them, especially so that they can interact. the p3 can be used to force-to-scale the maq's output, a feature otherwise only achievable by the use of custom patches in y'r synth engine (we used special patches in emu samplers & later the audity & proteus modules to achieve non-bum-note stage performances.) use of the maq is greatly enhanced, btw, if you set up a midi controller upstream of it to adjust things like the start/loop-point, the range of adjustment of each row of knobs (number of octaves & so forth) & this kind of thing. with a merge/through arrangement, the same controller can conveniently be programmed to do things to a downstream device (synth module, w.h.y.), with the controls arranged by row or midi channel. we currently use doepfer pocket controls & evolution keyboards to do this, with merge/thru devices concealed in the backs of the maqs. I guess it helps to be an engineer.... :-) again, this arrangement prompted some of the code changes in the p3, not least the behaviour of the midi-through filtering with controller messages while the p3 is recording it's midi-input. I hope some of this is useful. duncan.
Message
Re: Doepfer MAQ 16/3 worths having it, having a P3?
2008-09-17 by duncan
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.