MOTM

I agree with Tom's ordering, though not with all of his arguments.  My vote
is for:

1.  Dual VCA/Panner/Fader
2.  Pulse Divider
3.  NOT the microVCO, something else

As Tom says, the Dual VCA/Panner/Fader adds functionality to the MOTM system
that isn't available elsewhere.  It also makes stereo panning much easier.

Where I disagree is the Pulse Divider.  I look at this as mostly a control
voltage tool.  Since it is microcontroller based, it may not even work that
well at audio frequencies - I would expect it might have some jitter.  This
is a great complement to a sequencer for getting nonrepetitive note
durations and polyrhythmic textures.

The microVCO still confounds me.  Why a 1U module that duplicates
functionality when there are so many things missing from MOTM.  I'll give a
few examples:

Phaser
Variable Slope Filter
Waveshapers
Analog Shift Register
Envelope Follower
Preamp
Sequencer
VC Envelope Generator
Quantizer
Frequency Shifter
Boolean Logic
Comparator/Schmitt Triggers
Control Voltage Modifiers

This is the #1 reason that new customers to the modular field choose a Serge
over MOTM.  I know, I see this on the Serge list all the time.  It limits
the customer base of MOTM, thereby limiting the sales that Paul will see,
thereby limiting the expansion of MOTM.

John Loffink
microtonal@...

----- Original Message -----
From: <mbedtom@...>
To: <motm@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 5:13 AM
Subject: [motm] VOTE


> I usually sit on the sidelines, but I think I'll speak up now.  My
> vote is for the VCA.
>
> A 1U VCO is nice, but doesn't everyone already have at least one or
> two VCOs?  Another VCO will only dilute sales of the 300.  Yes, a 1U
> VCO will allow one to "stretch" their cabinet but at the expense of
> other waveform outputs.  What's next then, a 1U wave-shaper to get
> the waveforms not present in the Micro-VCO?  Oh, but then you can use
> the 1U Micro-VCO to drive a 2U Mini-Wave.  Well there went the real
> estate you were trying to save.  If another VCO were to be designed,
> I'd vote for a 2U DUAL-VCO like on the Oberheim SEM.  A 3046
> transistor array handles both expo converters and the VCOs will track
> like magic.  Sawtooth and variable duty cycle pulse from each and no
> more.  A 1U VCO at probably 70% the cost of the 300?  I'll pass.
>
> The divider: Isn't that what a sub-octave mux already does?  (Take
> two sub-octave muxes and call me in the morning.)  Maybe I missed a
> key point, but sonically isn't the 'divider' gonna sound a lot like a
> sub-octave mux?  Why would someone want both modules?
>
> For me, the dual VCA is the cat's pajamas.  (My opinion is selfishly
> based on what I already have and what I think I want.)  I've got 6,
> 300 VCOs and don't really need more.  Got a sub-octave mux; not
> certain what else a divider would do for me sonically.  But I don't
> have any exponential response VCAs.  If the VCA comes in last place,
> I'll have to dust off that copy of the David Blackmer patent on VCAs
> and do it myself.  I'll pass on the 1U VCO and the divider ad
> infinitum because I think those bases are already covered.  At
> present, a MOTM-Dual VCA does not yet exist (for sale).  I must vote
> for something "new" rather than a rehash of existing functionality.
> To me, a lin/exp VCA is a basic building block and am quite surprised
> it does not already exist.  I am even more surprised by the number of
> people that would put it last on the list of wanted modules.
>
> Lastly, I think I'd prefer to vote with more information in-hand.  I
> would like to know probable prices because that will influence, to
> some degree, the order in which I buy modules (and consequently, what
> I would vote for as 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choices).  Suggestion: Once a
> person buys say a minimum of 8 or so MOTM modules, he/she should have
> private access to a "new products" page on the SynthTech website
> (that is not available to competitors or the general Internet
> public).  There, product ideas could be previewed with full
> descriptions, probable selling prices, and perhaps development
> durations.  In other words, this would be a virtualized glossy
> brochure.  Then when we vote for a given new module, we'd do so being
> fully informed rather squealing for something that may not be fully
> described or described across many group postings over a period of
> many days.
>
> I must confess that the apparent novelty of a 1U VCO or "divider"
> escapes me.  My vote for a dual-VCA is mostly based on my lack of a
> lin/exp VCA coupled with only sketchy information on what the other
> modules will do differently than what I already have.  Does Paul
> factor in the complement of MOTM modules already owned by the
> respondents?  Will the winning module choice be purely based on this
> group's straw poll?
>
> Cheers!
> Tom Farrand
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>