MOTM

At 09:10 AM 10/3/2006, Jay wrote:

>DotCom is boring just because so few third-party suppliers have taken up
>the task of producing visually compatible modules for it. MOTM would be
>quite boring as a synthesizer by itself without Oakley, ModCan, etc. I'm
>switching to MOTM format because it's so easy to order a panel from FPE
>and make whatever I want.

The dotcom line is the most vanilla of all, with the possible 
exception of the Q96X series. I find your implication that the MOTM 
and dotcom lines are similar in scope to be off base. For starters, 
Synthesizers.com offers only 1 oscillator and 2 filters; compare that 
to MOTM, with a multitude of interesting filters and oscillators. 
Compare what seem to be similar modules and you'll usually (if not 
always) find more features on the MOTM stuff. Like, the dotcom ADSR 
doesn't have a trigger input, so you have to kludge a way to 
retrigger it. Compare the VC switches and note that only MOTM has the 
clickless audio switching mode. If you compare the Lag modules you 
find, well, no comparison. And so on.

Now, the dotcom line is also the best value in large scale modulars, 
IMHO. That's why my small-but-slowly-growing modular is made up 
mostly of dotcom modules, which form the "core" of the synth. As 
modules are added, however, they tend to be MOTM, Blacet, Encore, 
DIY, etc. As you say, it's nice (for us, if not for Paul!) to have a 
variety of companies offering MOTM-compatible products. I'll likely 
add more dotcom stuff, too, but I've got almost all of the vanilla that I need.
--
john