MOTM

http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1519305923

Hey, I remember when these were new! I saw one in person.   I bet they are
rare as nobody I knew at the time even thought about buying them.  We were
quite pleased with our 122/145/147s.  But we were interested in the other
900 series stackable solid state high power monsters.  But, they have lost
their luster today as well.
Larry H.

----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Schreiber <synth1@...>
To: MOTM listserv <motm@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 10:38 AM
Subject: [motm] The perfect MOTM accessory


http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1519305923





Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Yeah,

The one I liked was the 925. JBL drivers in leslie technology. Lots of
power. A friend of mine had two of these hooked up to his B3. It really
rocked. I only had a 122 and 145. :(

Scott

"J. Larry Hendry" wrote:

> 
> Hey, I remember when these were new! I saw one in person.   I bet they are
> rare as nobody I knew at the time even thought about buying them.  We were
> quite pleased with our 122/145/147s.  But we were interested in the other
> 900 series stackable solid state high power monsters.  But, they have lost
> their luster today as well.
> Larry H.
>

From my memory Paul is not planning to produce any FFB either now nor 
in the future, while R. Arrick is planning to produce one, my very 
simple question is if the Stooges are planning to make a MOTM style 
panel for the .com FFB.
Cheers  Enrico  Italy

Well, you *could* be wrong ....hee..hee...

Paul S.

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "edibennardo" <endiendi@...>
To: <motm@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 6:20 PM
Subject: [motm] Re: Fixed Filter Bank


> >From my memory Paul is not planning to produce any FFB either now nor 
> in the future, while R. Arrick is planning to produce one, my very 
> simple question is if the Stooges are planning to make a MOTM style 
> panel for the .com FFB.
> Cheers  Enrico  Italy
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
>

----- Original Message ----- 

From: edibennardo <endiendi@...>
my very simple question is if the Stooges
are planning to make a MOTM style 
panel for the .com FFB.
Cheers  Enrico  Italy

Simple Stooge Answer = no
Larry (the simple stooge) 
<grin>

Speaking of hypothetical new modules, what's the story on the new VCA
module(s)?  I've been putting off getting another '110 waiting for it...

                                ...Craig

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
To: <motm@yahoogroups.com>; "edibennardo" <endiendi@...>
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 4:49 PM
Subject: Re: [motm] Re: Fixed Filter Bank


> Well, you *could* be wrong ....hee..hee...
>
> Paul S.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "edibennardo" <endiendi@...>
> To: <motm@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 6:20 PM
> Subject: [motm] Re: Fixed Filter Bank
>
>
> > >From my memory Paul is not planning to produce any FFB either now nor
> > in the future, while R. Arrick is planning to produce one, my very
> > simple question is if the Stooges are planning to make a MOTM style
> > panel for the .com FFB.
> > Cheers  Enrico  Italy
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

--- In motm@y..., "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@a...> wrote:
> Well, you *could* be wrong ....hee..hee...
> 
> Paul S.
> 
I was relating to something I remember you wrote in a message long 
time back, anyway.. in some occasions *I love to be wrong*...
and... since at least one stooge is not planning to do any panel.. 
well let's see what happens.
Enrico

Here's my ideas for a FFB.  18 or 20 bands, 1 octave apart for the 
highest and lowest bands, 1/3 octave or less apart in the middle.
Individual outputs for each band and an envelope follower for each 
band as well with the follower response tuned to that particular 
frequency range.  A follower output for each band as well.
This thing could be used as a front end for a vocoder.  A second one 
with the addition of a bunch of VCAs could be the back end of a 
vocoder.  You could split a sound into a bunch of bands and 
manipulate each band differently.
I'd love to hear others ideas on this thing as well.

I like the vocoder integration possibilities. I am just wondering if
having the filter frequencies based an octave apart (notwithstanding the
1/3 octave additions) that certain notes, with harmonics, would not be
more emphasized than others. How about a filter based upon non-octave
intervals. Comments?

Scott

paulhaneberg wrote:

> 
> Here's my ideas for a FFB.  18 or 20 bands, 1 octave apart for the
> highest and lowest bands, 1/3 octave or less apart in the middle.
> Individual outputs for each band and an envelope follower for each
> band as well with the follower response tuned to that particular
> frequency range.  A follower output for each band as well.
> This thing could be used as a front end for a vocoder.  A second one
> with the addition of a bunch of VCAs could be the back end of a
> vocoder.  You could split a sound into a bunch of bands and
> manipulate each band differently.
> I'd love to hear others ideas on this thing as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Paul (or anyone else who might know)-

What is the number going to be for the '480 Companion
Module?  When can we expect to see it?  What will some
of the functions be?

thanx
jeph

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Greetings - Send FREE e-cards for every occasion!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

I agree with the idea of using a non-harmonically related spacing, 
although unless you individually tuned the filters to be exactly on 
frequency the chances are that the tolerances of the parts would 
take care of it.  I also was thinking about costs.  The key 
component in the modular vocoder idea is the VCA.  These certainly 
wouldn't have to be up to the MOTM standard, but they should still 
be of reasonably good quality.  I think the envelope follwers could 
be done inexpensively since the frequency range they cover would be 
narrow.  
I also like the modular vocoder idea, but I'm trying to put 
additional functions into this module.  I'm really interested in 
trying to break sounds apart and then reconstitute them.  I was 
thinking of looking at the area of vocal formants for the strongest 
concentration of filters, but also looking at the resonances in 
stringed and wind instruments to try to determine the most optimal 
filter frequencies. Making the Q variable somewhere along the line 
for stronger resonances is also a possibility.
Of course the larger the number of filters the greater the 
possibility of noise.  I have some really good Ashley EQs in my 
studio.  Maybe I'll take one of those apart and look at the 
filters.  They are really outstanding. 
What would be really cool is if I could somehow do a Fourier 
transform in analog circuitry, extract the spectrum of a sound in 
real-time, then reconstitute it with the spectrum modified or 
applied to another signal.  Maybe a pitch follower and a series of 
VCBPFs would work.  Hmmm. :/

> What is the number going to be for the '480 Companion
> Module?

MOTM-481, naturally :)

>When can we expect to see it?

1-2 months after release of the MOTM-480.


>What will some of the functions be?

Extra filter stage outputs, mainly. Sice the filter is a dual state-variable, there are at least
8 seperate potential outputs!

Paul S.



>

How do people on this list annotate their patches? Paper and pencil? 
Using some manner of program running on a PC/Mac? Using some manner 
of program running on a handheld device?

Is there any interest in an MOTM patch editor that runs on a handheld 
device? If so, what kind of handheld device do people on this list 
use (Palm, Jornada, etc.)?

If this seems OT, please reply off list. Thanks.

paulhaneberg wrote: 
> > Here's my ideas for a FFB.  18 or 20 bands....

> > This thing could be used as a front end for a vocoder....

> > I'd love to hear others ideas on this thing as well.


The first time I talked to Paul when I placed my order for my kits he 
happened to mention plans for a vocoder modeled after the famous and 
rare sennheiser 20 band vocoder. What ever happened to this great (yet 
expensive) idea?

Peter

>
> The first time I talked to Paul when I placed my order for my kits he
> happened to mention plans for a vocoder modeled after the famous and
> rare sennheiser 20 band vocoder. What ever happened to this great (yet
> expensive) idea?
>

It's a great and expensive idea. Estimated $3000 assembled. But is does have 53 front panel knobs
(3U high, 19" rack)

Paul S.

esresource@... writes:

>>I like the vocoder integration possibilities. I am just wondering if
 having the filter frequencies based an octave apart (notwithstanding the
 1/3 octave additions) that certain notes, with harmonics, would not be
 more emphasized than others. How about a filter based upon non-octave
 intervals. Comments?<<

The bands in a fixed filter bank are not so thin that you need to worry about 
certain notes or harmonics.

I didn't necessarilly want to mention this now, just incase it doesn't 
happen, but there is a slight chance that I may be able to offer something in 
this area in the future.  I already bought about half the parts.  I want a 
filter bank on the MOTM too.  But I'd like the flexibility of something like 
a parametric EQ, but with the radical tone shaping of a filter bank.  Since I 
know of and own such a divice, I'm going to be duplicating a couple for 
myself to pop into my MOTM.  Depending on the hassle of PCB layout and panels 
and whether I can or want to add voltage control to it, it has potential for 
a product.

-Elhardt

scott@... writes:

>>How do people on this list annotate their patches? Paper and pencil? Using 
some manner of program running on a PC/Mac? Using some manner of program 
running on a handheld device?<<

I drew up all (it needs updating now) of the MOTM modules in Corel Draw and 
posted those online (http://members.aol.com/elhardt3/motm.zip) a while back.  
I piece the modules together in Corel Draw, print them out, and then draw in 
patchcords and knob settings.

-Elhardt

----- Original Message -----

From: Scott Juskiw <scott@...>
> How do people on this list annotate their patches? Paper and pencil?
> Using some manner of program running on a PC/Mac? Using some manner
> of program running on a handheld device?

i generally note down the patch in the form of a block diagram on a sheet of
scrap paper, then later on, i'll tidy up the layout, and re-draw it in one
of those little artists note books you can get - this is my little black
patch book
if someone posts a patch, or an idea - i'll generally print off the email,
draw a basic block diagram on it, then leave it ontop of my modular for
testing at a later date - the resulting patch is then re-drawn into the book

i found that this was a more intuitive approach than traditional patch
sheets, as it exposes the workings of a patch, rather than just being a
piece of paper full of coloured lines

and yes, i was working on a PDF document of patches, but i've had to put
that on hold for the time-being - sorry chaps

cheers
paul b
sheffield
uk
etc

I personally storing them in my brain.  Not trying to
be funny.  I have found that the better you understand
your modular, the more intuitive it becomes.

OTOH, I love to see what other people have created and
learn from them by checking out their patches.

Palm OS (running on a Visor).  What language do you
write in?

g'day
jeph

--- Scott Juskiw <scott@...> wrote:
> How do people on this list annotate their patches?
> Paper and pencil? 
> Using some manner of program running on a PC/Mac?
> Using some manner 
> of program running on a handheld device?
> 
> Is there any interest in an MOTM patch editor that
> runs on a handheld 
> device? If so, what kind of handheld device do
> people on this list 
> use (Palm, Jornada, etc.)?
> 
> If this seems OT, please reply off list. Thanks.
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> 
>  
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - sign up for Fantasy Baseball
http://sports.yahoo.com

> The first time I talked to Paul when I placed my order for my kits he
> happened to mention plans for a vocoder modeled after the famous and
> rare sennheiser 20 band vocoder. What ever happened to this great (yet
> expensive) idea?

Couple days ago I was wondering which vocoder Les Rockets used to get their
warm but highly intelligible vocoder sounds.... Yeah, Senheiser as it turns
out. 

DO IT, PAUL! ...If only because I'm using a Nord Modular for a vocoder at
the moment, so I know you really want to give me a Synthtech alternative!!!

> I drew up all (it needs updating now) of the MOTM modules in Corel Draw and
> posted those online (http://members.aol.com/elhardt3/motm.zip) a while back.

So now there are templates out there for Visio and CorelDraw... Doesn't
anyone use jpg's or gif's on this list???   :-/

I grabbed each individual module image from Paul's website, laid them out in
Photoshop to match my cabinet, traced the contour (a Photoshop filter which
takes some tweaking to get it just right, but saves ink while printing) and
then printed a bunch of copies which I mark up by hand. I'm sure the Visio
and CorelDraw ones are MUCH prettier to look at (mine looks very tough) but
I don't know anyone around here who uses either of these applications so I
had to diy... I'll email a copy to anyone who wants to try it out.

You know, I tried this approach for a while.  The problem turned out 
that my rig keeps changing.  THe block diagram approach works better 
for me because I can diagram the patch independently of what modules 
I have in the system.  And I can include (sorry Paul :) modules from 
other vendors.

Someone somewhere asked if it would be a good idea to create a patch 
diagram program for a handheld.  I'd say yes (I have an iPaq) but I 
would also say do it for a desktop.

In fact, I would take on such a project but I don't really know the 
formal definitions for the blocks in the diagrams.  Does anybody know 
of a doc where such a standard is described?

Mike

PS - I've recently acquired a Nord Micro Modular and I have been 
experimenting with "diagramming" patches in that editor.  So far, 
mixed results...

mm


--- In motm@y..., Scott Gibbons <scott.gibbons@m...> wrote:
> > I drew up all (it needs updating now) of the MOTM modules in 
Corel Draw and
> > posted those online (http://members.aol.com/elhardt3/motm.zip) a 
while back.
> 
> So now there are templates out there for Visio and CorelDraw... 
Doesn't
> anyone use jpg's or gif's on this list???   :-/
> 
> I grabbed each individual module image from Paul's website, laid 
them out in
> Photoshop to match my cabinet, traced the contour (a Photoshop 
filter which
> takes some tweaking to get it just right, but saves ink while 
printing) and
> then printed a bunch of copies which I mark up by hand. I'm sure 
the Visio
> and CorelDraw ones are MUCH prettier to look at (mine looks very 
tough) but
> I don't know anyone around here who uses either of these 
applications so I
> had to diy... I'll email a copy to anyone who wants to try it out.

>  > The first time I talked to Paul when I placed my order for my kits he
>>  happened to mention plans for a vocoder modeled after the famous and
>>  rare sennheiser 20 band vocoder. What ever happened to this great (yet
>>  expensive) idea?

>Couple days ago I was wondering which vocoder Les Rockets used to get their
>warm but highly intelligible vocoder sounds.... Yeah, Senheiser as it turns
>out.
>
>DO IT, PAUL! ...If only because I'm using a Nord Modular for a vocoder at
>the moment, so I know you really want to give me a Synthtech alternative!!!


Yes, please give us a 'real-man's' alternative to fake(dsp) and small 
keyboard based analog vocoders.

I want lots of knobs, and control, with a great sound.

The Sennheiser is just way too expensive, and there doesn't seem to 
be much else in that league, please give us an affordable (compared 
to the Sennheiser) alternative.


Simon
Canberra
AUSTRALIA

Well, the Sennheiser goes for ~$15K. Mine would be about $6K. Is that "affordable"??!?

<Paul S>

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Simon" <simon@...>
To: <motm@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 1:58 PM
Subject: [motm] Re: Fixed Filter Bank


> >  > The first time I talked to Paul when I placed my order for my kits he
> >>  happened to mention plans for a vocoder modeled after the famous and
> >>  rare sennheiser 20 band vocoder. What ever happened to this great (yet
> >>  expensive) idea?
> 
> >Couple days ago I was wondering which vocoder Les Rockets used to get their
> >warm but highly intelligible vocoder sounds.... Yeah, Senheiser as it turns
> >out.
> >
> >DO IT, PAUL! ...If only because I'm using a Nord Modular for a vocoder at
> >the moment, so I know you really want to give me a Synthtech alternative!!!
> 
> 
> Yes, please give us a 'real-man's' alternative to fake(dsp) and small 
> keyboard based analog vocoders.
> 
> I want lots of knobs, and control, with a great sound.
> 
> The Sennheiser is just way too expensive, and there doesn't seem to 
> be much else in that league, please give us an affordable (compared 
> to the Sennheiser) alternative.
> 
> 
> Simon
> Canberra
> AUSTRALIA
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
>

http://moogarchives.com/m907.htm

Can someone explain the graph? It seems to be contradictory to 
a couple of posts about the ability to completely cut a band. It's 
been about 15 years since I had my hands on a 907.

Also, wasn't there a variant with the center frequencies at vocal 
formants? I also seem to remember one for electric violin to 
simulate acoustic violin body resonances.

Lastly, having outputs for each band (like the EMS?) would be 
nice on the MOTM FFB. I've used PA crossovers to similar effect - 
lots of fun!

Barry

> http://moogarchives.com/m907.htm
>
> Can someone explain the graph? It seems to be contradictory to
> a couple of posts about the ability to completely cut a band. It's
> been about 15 years since I had my hands on a 907.

The graph: That's the 907's frequency response with all pots up. (!)
Originally a "design fault" (intentional or not, I do not know,
and it's a sensitive topic, so don't quote me on that ...), there is
a lot of cancellation going on between the bands.

BUT this produces a wonderful coloration of the signal, and I
like it so much that I actually cloned it twice. (The first shot
wasn't good enough in SNR, but the second one is fine.)

You will really want this - just wait a few more days until I'm
sending Paul the demo samples. (Came back from an 14 hour
business trip, headache and tired.)


> Lastly, having outputs for each band (like the EMS?) would be
> nice on the MOTM FFB.

Separate outputs are contrary to the Moog Filter Bank's topology.
(I know that Wendy Carlos had hers modified with individual
outputs, but this cannot be done without compromise on other
aspects of the design.)

The EMS filter bank is nice, but very different. Designed without
that "fault", it has a very flat response when all pots are up.
A "better design" than the Moog, but less character.
I have made a clone of the EMS FB many years ago for my
personal use, but I would not contribute to a commercial
version (MOTM) of this one, or any other direct copy of EMS
products.

But apart from this "ethical" aspect, the Moog FB is the *really*
interesting one anyway, because of its special character and
coloration.

JH.

--- In motm@y..., "jhaible" <jhaible@d...> wrote:
> The graph: That's the 907's frequency response with all pots 
up. (!)

Wow, I take it you mean all the way up, or at the center?

> Originally a "design fault" (intentional or not, I do not know,
> and it's a sensitive topic, so don't quote me on that ...), there is
> a lot of cancellation going on between the bands.

I guess I just did (quote you, that is) <g>.
 
> BUT this produces a wonderful coloration of the signal, and I
> like it so much that I actually cloned it twice. (The first shot
> wasn't good enough in SNR, but the second one is fine.)

I'm sure the phase plot is equally bizarre. I remeber it sounding 
nice. As with most Moog modules, I usually attributed the 
"niceness" (and the noise) to the discrete circuitry. Though it 
seems a lot of vintage synth character in general has more to do 
with design quirks - in the studio I call them "happy accidents."
 
> Separate outputs are contrary to the Moog Filter Bank's 
topology.
> (I know that Wendy Carlos had hers modified with individual
> outputs, but this cannot be done without compromise on other
> aspects of the design.)

Okay, no individual outputs. How about an inverted output? That 
would be nice to blend with the source for cancellation effects.
 
> The EMS filter bank is nice, but very different. Designed without
> that "fault", it has a very flat response when all pots are up.
> A "better design" than the Moog, but less character.
> I have made a clone of the EMS FB many years ago for my
> personal use, but I would not contribute to a commercial
> version (MOTM) of this one, or any other direct copy of EMS
> products.

Why? Are there patents still in effect, or because EMS is still (sort 
of) in business? They don't make the filter bank anymore, do 
they? I notice the "D" brand is probably pulling their yet to ship 
diode filter, because of a licensing hassle. Modcan have an 
"EMS type" filter, I wonder if it's licensed. Drifting even further off 
topic, how different is the Roland diode ladder from the EMS?
 
> But apart from this "ethical" aspect, the Moog FB is the *really*
> interesting one anyway, because of its special character and
> coloration.

Cool, bring it on!

Barry

-----Original Message-----

A few days ago I started a discussion about FFB and I'm afraid the 
talk went too far beyond what I had expected, lots of interesting 
considerations led us to talk about huge and highly expensive 
vocoders, I was simply talking about FFB a la Moog and my simple 
question in the end was: Is Paul planning a MOTM FFB? If yes I'll 
wait patiently... if he is not I'll probably buy a .com when it comes 
out. From a more technical point of view I think J. H.'s contributes 
were absolutely appropriate and clarifying, I learnt a lot from his 
couple of messages on this argument (thank you Jurgens!) Of course 
I'm pointing out what I was expecting from this discussion just 
because I was convinced that my couriousity was shared by other 
people and my question posted to the list and to Paul might be 
somehow useful to others as well. I do agree with the urgency of 
releasing the dual VCA mostly because it was announced long ago and 
also because many people are eagerly waiting for it, but it will get 
dramatically urgent when the 110 won't be available any more and it 
seems it should become unavail. from day to day but it never does.
All the best Enrico (Sicily) 

--- In motm@y..., "Vehorn, Benjamin" <ben@a...> wrote:
> You would probably sell one or two but the fact there there are so 
many vocoders on the market, new and old, analog and DSP, means you'd 
have a lot of competition. IMO, this market is completely played out.
> I would definitely vote against it, considering the amount of time 
Paul would have to spend on developing this. He could probably 
develop and manufacture 8 or 10 new modules, soup to nuts, in the 
timeframe it would take to get the vocoder into assembly. This is 
just a guess, though, I'm sure Paul would have a better perspective. 
While it's nice to talk about what is possible, I think Paul is 
capable of designing a kick-ass version of anything he wants and 
clamoring for more stuff just gets in the way of items already on the 
drawing board. I'm still waiting on the dual VCA/pan/fade but it 
seems to keep getting pushed back due to people making more noise 
about other modules. This was supposed to be the next module a year 
ago. And whatever happened to the preamp/envelope follower? I think 
these would be far more useful than a vocoder, or even another filter 
for that matter.
> If anyone is *really* jonesing for a super-high end vocoder, I've 
got a Sennheiser I might consider selling for considerably less than 
$15K.
> ---Ben
>  
>  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Schreiber [mailto:synth1@a...]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 6:33 PM
> To: motm@y...; Simon
> Subject: Re: [motm] Re: Fixed Filter Bank
> 
> 
> Well, the Sennheiser goes for ~$15K. Mine would be about $6K. Is 
that "affordable"??!?
> 
> <Paul S>
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Simon" <simon@a...>
> To: <motm@y...>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 1:58 PM
> Subject: [motm] Re: Fixed Filter Bank
> 
> 
> > >  > The first time I talked to Paul when I placed my order for 
my kits he
> > >>  happened to mention plans for a vocoder modeled after the 
famous and
> > >>  rare sennheiser 20 band vocoder. What ever happened to this 
great (yet
> > >>  expensive) idea?
> > 
> > >Couple days ago I was wondering which vocoder Les Rockets used 
to get their
> > >warm but highly intelligible vocoder sounds.... Yeah, Senheiser 
as it turns
> > >out.
> > >
> > >DO IT, PAUL! ...If only because I'm using a Nord Modular for a 
vocoder at
> > >the moment, so I know you really want to give me a Synthtech 
alternative!!!
> > 
> > 
> > Yes, please give us a 'real-man's' alternative to fake(dsp) and 
small 
> > keyboard based analog vocoders.
> > 
> > I want lots of knobs, and control, with a great sound.
> > 
> > The Sennheiser is just way too expensive, and there doesn't seem 
to 
> > be much else in that league, please give us an affordable 
(compared 
> > to the Sennheiser) alternative.
> > 
> > 
> > Simon
> > Canberra
> > AUSTRALIA
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor	
> 
> ADVERTISEMENT
>  
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=215002.1818248.3328688.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=17
05032277:HM/A=847665/R=0/*http://ads.x10.com/?
bHlhaG9vbW9uc3RlcjcuZGF0=1015457339%
3eM=215002.1818248.3328688.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705032277:HM/A=84766
5/R=1> 	
>   <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?
M=215002.1818248.3328688.1261774/D=egroupmail/S=1705032277:HM/A=847665
/rand=835330522> 	
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service 
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

Yes, there will be a MOTM Fixed-Filter Bank based on the Moog 907A.

When? After the '130, for sure!

Paul S.

> Well, the Sennheiser goes for ~$15K. Mine would be about $6K. Is that
> "affordable"??!?

I'm sure it would sound at least as good as a $6K unit, but I couldn't
justify that price for my purposes. So here's a "NO" vote.  :-(