Eml synthesizers

--- In emlsynth@yahoogroups.com, "widoworx" <
rihilleman@a...> wrote:
> For me, the role that the EMS500 played in the Devo Sound 
was enough 
> for me.  

To clarify, Devo did use an EML (EML500 at least) and as far as I 
know not  EMS synths


> 
> EMS synths are a whole different experience. They are 
wonderfully 
> made and you can see where the money is.

Well to Europeans they were quite reasonably priced. There is 
that story of Tangerine Dream driving and taking the ferry to 
England to get one after realizing they could actually afford a 
proper synth.  

  But, there is a reason why 
> you don't hear many lead lines on PF albums until the late 
> seventies.  Keeping a EMS in tune AND intonated is the 
hardest of 
> any analog synth I have ever used.  Moogs, Arps and OB FVS 
are all 
> much easier to use.

I guess EML kept much  better in tune when it came to drifting 
but the 'feature' of the 101 (and I presume the 100) for doing 
other than 12 notes to the octave tuning doesn't make standard 
innotation easy - It would have been better if they had a switch to 
either use that notes per octave knob or not. With EML's gear I 
guess pre-500 or 400, playing standard equal tempered 
material was possible but not exactly the quickest or easiest 
thing to do either IMHO - Which brings up the 400 - was it easy to 
play standard tuning on that combo and conversely, was it also 
easy not to?

> 
> They are great for sound effects and as a filter processor, but 
they 
> are a real challenge as a lead instrument.  My hats off to Eno, 
> Rundgren and others, but only with a Kenton Midi to CV 
controller 
> have I been able to use my VCS3 MKI melodically.

Yes, I think that's the concensus, though the MkII  is much 
improved

As for Woodstock, clearly EMS had a srtong foothold there 
because the late Everett Hafner of EMSA (the US EMS 
dealership) was based in the region -