Wiardgroup

I'm have put the 300 series back in full production.

The 1200 series is still available until I use up the existing parts. I plan to port the 1200 
series design into 300 series packaging eventually. The Joystick and JAG will stay just as 
they are. It would make no sense to have those in 300 series cases.

The 300 series was never completely out of production, but I had switched my main 
efforts to the Frac-Rac format. I now think that was a mistake. I didn't want to go head to 
head with Don over the 200e, but now the Buchla product is mature enough that I feel OK 
placing my emphasis on the 300 series again. I wanted Don to succeed with the 200e. 
Musical instruments is a field where if one company "defeats" another company, the whole 
culture loses out.

John Simonton intended the Frac-Rac format to be economical. John Blacet has done a 
absolutely brilliant job of executing designs in that format. But the Frac-Rac doesn't have 
the inherent infrastructure for the highest grade professional instruments. That is not to 
take away from the great modules already designed, or question the quality of theose 
instruments. A Blacet instrument is a superb economical instrument.

In my opinion the Frac-Rac aluminum is too light weight and the lack of fully shielded 
enclosures keeps them from achieving extremely low electrical noise. Because of that, I 
don't feel Frac-Rac modules should cost over $300 tops. That price point places a limit on 
the complexity of designs. To summerize, I like the Frac-Rac format a lot, and I admire the 
instruments already in that format. But it has become a limitation for new Wiard designs.

I am hoping for some customer feedback. The goal of the 300 series is to have 12 unique 
module designs, there are currently 8. These 8 modules already do almost every kind of 
synthesis known to mankind, so designing 4 new modules is no easy task. The Envelooper 
is one new design for certain.

What additional features would you like to see in the 300 series? Feel free to speculate, 
there are no stupid ideas. (Well, adding a Moog style transistor ladder filter is a stupid 
idea, the Boogie filter already blows that thin sounding design away).

In response to your call for ideas for what we would like to see 
available in a Wiard system:

Time domain processing: Either BBD or Digital delay/sampler preferably 
16bit, though 8bit does have its uses.

Frequency Shifter

Advanced control structure: VC Switch(es), Shift Register, Counters, 
Logic.

Touch Controller of *somekind*

I'm glad you are bringing the 300 back into production!

Matt






--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter" <grichter@...> wrote:

>
> the 300 series back in full production.
>

Great news Grant :-)

Ross

>
>

I would be keen on a Borg2/Boggie in one module :-)

Very excited :-)

Hooray!  Love the 300 series.  To me the 300 series is what wiard is 
all about.  Looking forward to seeing it rise again.

How about a 300 series PSIM?   Not sure how feasible that is but it 
would awesome if you could take what was going on with the computer 
voltage sources newsgroup and bring a product along those lines out. 8 
in 8 out, 8 pots (maybe programmable for data entry?)  an lcd screen 
some sort of flash memory for storing voltages/sequences.  

I think that would fit well with the 300 series and could cover a lot 
of the ground that the 300 series doesn't handle currently.

Another module idea, something along the lines of a buchla 296 
prepatched as a vocoder module?

mritenburg wrote:
> Advanced control structure: VC Switch(es), Shift Register, Counters, 
> Logic.

I'll second this comment.  While these things are available in the 300
series with clever patching, they consume modules best used elsewhere.

Actually, I'll add a request to demonstrate: I'd really like to see a
comprenensive clock/gate/trigger mangler. You can use the Envelator as a
pulse divider, or as a gate delay, or as a burst generator, but you lose
an env in the process.  You can use a Woggle out -> VCO pulsewidth ->
Envelator in AR mode to generate random variable gate/sustain length
envelopes, but now you've used *three* modules to get there (I'm sure
there is an easier way, but that's what came to mind).

So pulling some or all of these features into one dedicated module in the
classic multi-function 300 series design would be tremendous.  Here's one
idle notion:

* A master clock knob and output
* Two pulse multiplication ("solving the triplets problem") knobs and
jacks, with selector knob ranging from *2 integer-wise out to maybe *15? 
Me, I'd set these knobs to *3 and *6 and be done with it.  Maybe it's me,
but triplets are *hard*.
* Four pulse division knobs and output jacks, selector knob range from /2,
/3, /4 etc. integer-wise out to maybe /32.  That's 7 knobs and 7 jacks so
far.
* A Logic circuit to combine the basic pulses; a knob that selects
AND/OR/NOR, 2 inputs, 1 output (so that's 3 more jacks, we're up to 10
jacks and 8 knobs now).
* A scanner or seq switch, to mix some of those clocks into one stream and
select via clock/sequantizer/S+H.  Say 3 source and one clock/position
inputs, then one output.  That's 13 jacks total, and let's add a knob for
either manual select (scanner) or a threshold knob for the s.switch clock
in so you could feed it noise and adjust how randomly it advances.  I
think a scanner is the best choice here but I've been wrong before.
* An output that just feeds variable length gates to the Envelator via
some magic :) Let's use the last knob here to adjust the maximum gate
time.  14 jacks total now.
* A multiple, normalized to the master clock.  18 jacks. 
* Hm, if you use the two "could be a switch, could be an output" locations
for the master out and the variable gate out, you've got 4 more jacks. 
I'd say either a unity mixer or another multiple :)

I'm sure there is a better way to do this, or a better collection of
functions, and I'm also sure Grant can find it.  For comparison, you can
get most of these functions in Frac format now (Thanks Michael!), but they
will consume a row or more.  It would take a design of *surpassing
elegance and perspicacity* to fit them all into one 300 series module ;-)

peace,
Paul

On 10 Mar 2007 at 20:34, Grant Richter wrote:

> I'm have put the 300 series back in full production.
> 
> The 1200 series is still available until I use up the existing parts. I plan to port the 1200 
> series design into 300 series packaging eventually. The Joystick and JAG will stay just as 
> they are. It would make no sense to have those in 300 series cases.


This is really exciting news.  As someone who doesn't presently own any Wiard modules, but 
was planning on starting to invest in the 1200 series within the next few months, this 
announcement is very timely.  Grant, do you have a timeline for availability in mind, and any 
preliminary sense of pricing?  Also, at the risk of voicing a "stupid idea",  would it be feasible 
to build a variation of the Dual Joystick Controller that incorporated the JAG into a 300 series 
design?


-George

I totally agree with Matts suggestions!

I like all the Modcan effects modules like the frequency shifter, 
delay, flanger etc, gives you exponentially more new sounds than 
everything else.

A PSIM alike module would also be fine.

Frank

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "mritenburg" <mritenburg@...> 
wrote:
>
> In response to your call for ideas for what we would like to see 
> available in a Wiard system:
> 
> Time domain processing: Either BBD or Digital delay/sampler 
preferably 
> 16bit, though 8bit does have its uses.
> 
> Frequency Shifter
> 
> Advanced control structure: VC Switch(es), Shift Register, 
Counters, 
> Logic.
> 
> Touch Controller of *somekind*
> 
> I'm glad you are bringing the 300 back into production!
> 
> Matt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter" <grichter@> 
wrote:

> >
> > the 300 series back in full production.
> >
>

Fantastic news for all Wiardians!

Will the "Full Production" announcement have any effects on
- delivery times?
- prices?

Frank

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter" <grichter@...> 
wrote:
>
> I'm have put the 300 series back in full production.
> 
> The 1200 series is still available until I use up the existing 
parts. I plan to port the 1200 
> series design into 300 series packaging eventually. The Joystick 
and JAG will stay just as 
> they are. It would make no sense to have those in 300 series cases.
> 
> The 300 series was never completely out of production, but I had 
switched my main 
> efforts to the Frac-Rac format. I now think that was a mistake. I 
didn't want to go head to 
> head with Don over the 200e, but now the Buchla product is mature 
enough that I feel OK 
> placing my emphasis on the 300 series again. I wanted Don to 
succeed with the 200e. 
> Musical instruments is a field where if one company "defeats" 
another company, the whole 
> culture loses out.
> 
> John Simonton intended the Frac-Rac format to be economical. John 
Blacet has done a 
> absolutely brilliant job of executing designs in that format. But 
the Frac-Rac doesn't have 
> the inherent infrastructure for the highest grade professional 
instruments. That is not to 
> take away from the great modules already designed, or question the 
quality of theose 
> instruments. A Blacet instrument is a superb economical instrument.
> 
> In my opinion the Frac-Rac aluminum is too light weight and the 
lack of fully shielded 
> enclosures keeps them from achieving extremely low electrical 
noise. Because of that, I 
> don't feel Frac-Rac modules should cost over $300 tops. That price 
point places a limit on 
> the complexity of designs. To summerize, I like the Frac-Rac 
format a lot, and I admire the 
> instruments already in that format. But it has become a limitation 
for new Wiard designs.
> 
> I am hoping for some customer feedback. The goal of the 300 series 
is to have 12 unique 
> module designs, there are currently 8. These 8 modules already do 
almost every kind of 
> synthesis known to mankind, so designing 4 new modules is no easy 
task. The Envelooper 
> is one new design for certain.
> 
> What additional features would you like to see in the 300 series? 
Feel free to speculate, 
> there are no stupid ideas. (Well, adding a Moog style transistor 
ladder filter is a stupid 
> idea, the Boogie filter already blows that thin sounding design 
away).
>

> Could you expand the Controller concept with the addition of some
> capacitance pads or similar???

Great news Grant.  I'll second the controller idea.  the lack of 
choice in this area is for me a big drawback of using modulars.  

cheers

Richard

1. Frequency shifter
2. Anti Oscillator      and/or
2. On the Classic Oscillator... change the VCA to a VCA/LPG combo.  Not that 
huge of a change but would make a huge diference in the module.  All you 
would need to add to the faceplate would be a 3 way switch.  Obviously a bit 
of cicuitry changes (including a good old vactrol).  This would then give 
the 300 a true 'voice module'.  Very neat.
3. Envelooper (probably should be #1).
4. Delay module (cv or audio) maybe this could even be a dual module.  I 
have no doubt Grant could make an interesting digital or analog module for 
delay.  From microseconds to Seconds (maybe with different tapped outputs 
for reverby sounds).  Physical modeling to nice delays and reverbs here and 
grants good old cv of everything.  Yippie!



>From: "Grant Richter" <grichter@asapnet.net>
>Reply-To: wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com
>To: wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [wiardgroup] 300 series back in full production
>Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 20:34:24 -0000
>
>I'm have put the 300 series back in full production.
>
>The 1200 series is still available until I use up the existing parts. I 
>plan to port the 1200
>series design into 300 series packaging eventually. The Joystick and JAG 
>will stay just as
>they are. It would make no sense to have those in 300 series cases.
>
>The 300 series was never completely out of production, but I had switched 
>my main
>efforts to the Frac-Rac format. I now think that was a mistake. I didn't 
>want to go head to
>head with Don over the 200e, but now the Buchla product is mature enough 
>that I feel OK
>placing my emphasis on the 300 series again. I wanted Don to succeed with 
>the 200e.
>Musical instruments is a field where if one company "defeats" another 
>company, the whole
>culture loses out.
>
>John Simonton intended the Frac-Rac format to be economical. John Blacet 
>has done a
>absolutely brilliant job of executing designs in that format. But the 
>Frac-Rac doesn't have
>the inherent infrastructure for the highest grade professional instruments. 
>That is not to
>take away from the great modules already designed, or question the quality 
>of theose
>instruments. A Blacet instrument is a superb economical instrument.
>
>In my opinion the Frac-Rac aluminum is too light weight and the lack of 
>fully shielded
>enclosures keeps them from achieving extremely low electrical noise. 
>Because of that, I
>don't feel Frac-Rac modules should cost over $300 tops. That price point 
>places a limit on
>the complexity of designs. To summerize, I like the Frac-Rac format a lot, 
>and I admire the
>instruments already in that format. But it has become a limitation for new 
>Wiard designs.
>
>I am hoping for some customer feedback. The goal of the 300 series is to 
>have 12 unique
>module designs, there are currently 8. These 8 modules already do almost 
>every kind of
>synthesis known to mankind, so designing 4 new modules is no easy task. The 
>Envelooper
>is one new design for certain.
>
>What additional features would you like to see in the 300 series? Feel free 
>to speculate,
>there are no stupid ideas. (Well, adding a Moog style transistor ladder 
>filter is a stupid
>idea, the Boogie filter already blows that thin sounding design away).
>

_________________________________________________________________
With tax season right around the corner, make sure to follow these few 
simple tips. 
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Taxes/PreparationTips/PreparationTips.aspx?icid=HMFebtagline

Very interesting.  I actually much prefer the shallow form-factor of
the 1200-series - in fact, I now try to make all of my frac-modules as
shallow as possible, so that they can live together happily in a
portable case.

What kinds of prices can we expect for 300-series modules?

Cheers,
Kevin

Wow! Very good news! I always thought that the Wiard 300 form-factor
is the best and most ergonomic. I have both 1200 and 300 and some
others, but on the Wiard 300 System I am much faster than an all others. 

My suggestion for a new Module: something like serge multipliers with
some Wiard magic.....




Olivier














--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter" <grichter@...> wrote:
>
> I'm have put the 300 series back in full production.
> 
> The 1200 series is still available until I use up the existing
parts. I plan to port the 1200 
> series design into 300 series packaging eventually. The Joystick and
JAG will stay just as 
> they are. It would make no sense to have those in 300 series cases.
> 
> The 300 series was never completely out of production, but I had
switched my main 
> efforts to the Frac-Rac format. I now think that was a mistake. I
didn't want to go head to 
> head with Don over the 200e, but now the Buchla product is mature
enough that I feel OK 
> placing my emphasis on the 300 series again. I wanted Don to succeed
with the 200e. 
> Musical instruments is a field where if one company "defeats"
another company, the whole 
> culture loses out.
> 
> John Simonton intended the Frac-Rac format to be economical. John
Blacet has done a 
> absolutely brilliant job of executing designs in that format. But
the Frac-Rac doesn't have 
> the inherent infrastructure for the highest grade professional
instruments. That is not to 
> take away from the great modules already designed, or question the
quality of theose 
> instruments. A Blacet instrument is a superb economical instrument.
> 
> In my opinion the Frac-Rac aluminum is too light weight and the lack
of fully shielded 
> enclosures keeps them from achieving extremely low electrical noise.
Because of that, I 
> don't feel Frac-Rac modules should cost over $300 tops. That price
point places a limit on 
> the complexity of designs. To summerize, I like the Frac-Rac format
a lot, and I admire the 
> instruments already in that format. But it has become a limitation
for new Wiard designs.
> 
> I am hoping for some customer feedback. The goal of the 300 series
is to have 12 unique 
> module designs, there are currently 8. These 8 modules already do
almost every kind of 
> synthesis known to mankind, so designing 4 new modules is no easy
task. The Envelooper 
> is one new design for certain.
> 
> What additional features would you like to see in the 300 series?
Feel free to speculate, 
> there are no stupid ideas. (Well, adding a Moog style transistor
ladder filter is a stupid 
> idea, the Boogie filter already blows that thin sounding design away).
>

(The justification seems a bit odd...but the 300 series format, their separated patchbay 
and unclustered space seem more practical indeed (btw : I know mini-jacks have some 
advantages but banana connectors have too, don't they ?))

I would most likely get even poorer for :
An oscillator with a wide dynamic timbre but sweet highs.
Multiple enveloppe generators that would allow anything from subtle to dramatic 
expression with very little/unified control, and in-the-box programmability.
A stereo bank of non-fixed bandpass filters for formant/spectral processing.
A stereo phaser (1v/oct scaled ?) (scott stite's multiphase being the reference...I really like 
anything he puts up anyway...)
Some utility modules (a bank of vca's since the jag needs those, an output interface...?)
A crossplatform/bidirectionnal high-speed/definition computer voltage source/processor 
?

On 3/11/07, Tim J <bob_aloha@hotmail.com> wrote:
>

>  2. On the Classic Oscillator... change the VCA to a VCA/LPG combo.  Not that
>  huge of a change but would make a huge diference in the module.  All you
>  would need to add to the faceplate would be a 3 way switch.  Obviously a bit
>  of cicuitry changes (including a good old vactrol).  This would then give
>  the 300 a true 'voice module'.  Very neat.

This is a great idea!  If in the process of making circuit changes,
you were to replace the current AR envelope with one switchable
between AD and AR, that would be even better.

I'm glad there're others who aren't speechless. So many good ideas.
How will you know where to start? Are you sure you can handle all the
orders you're going to get? I've been wanting a system since 1999...
I definitely think the modular culture is ready for this. I hope this
encourages other players to test the waters, too.

My votes are for:

A stereo bank of non-fixed bandpass filters for formant/spectral
processing --

and allow for banana or 1/8" jacks when ordering.

Thanks so much!

Matt

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, Sam Ecoff <secoff@...> wrote:
> Anyhow, I have come to adopt what I consider to be a very Zen  
> attitude about working with modular synths: You are meant to use the  
> modules you have and what is currently working on the day you are  
> working with them. You are not meant to use the modules you have had  
> on order for 6 months, the modules you wish you had ordered or could  
> order, and the modules which are in need of repair. Spending time  
> regretting your purchasing decisions means you aren't spending time  
> with your modular! Wouldn't you rather be patching than worrying  
> about what you would have purchased if you could see into the future?
> 
> :-)
> 
> Sam E.

Sam, that's perfect! 

And you're absolutely right about re-selling modules. I've sold
numerous frac and euro modules via AH and some of the forums and
they've sold quickly for not much less than what I paid for them.

I was thinking that the form factor of the 300 series modules is 
somwhat limiting in regard to the functions that can be packed into a 
module. I then realzied that I would have no trouble accepting a double 
width 300 series module if the feature set demanded it.

$.02

Matt

WOW ! ! This is SUCH good news Grant !

When can I place an order ? 


Lester




-- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, watson <companyofquail@...> wrote:

>
> the other suggestion i have would be a filterbank,  a real filterbank,  just
> pick 8 frequencies and allow them to be boosted or cut up to 15 or 20 db.
> somthing similair to the SND SB14
> 
> On 3/12/07, mritenburg <mritenburg@...> wrote:
> >
> >   I was thinking that the form factor of the 300 series modules is
> > somwhat limiting in regard to the functions that can be packed into a
> > module. I then realzied that I would have no trouble accepting a double
> > width 300 series module if the feature set demanded it.
> >
> > $.02
> >
> > Matt
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> i warned you not to go out tonight...
>

Grant,

Reviving the 300 series is the right decision, but why limit yourself to
twelve 300 series modules?  Modules should continue as long as you have good
ideas.  Do those stop at twelve?  :-) If we count Envelooper, Borg/Boogie2,
Anti-Oscillator and a Noise Ring + "something," that would mean the 300
series is already mapped out.

One good thing about the 1200 series is the shallow depth, ideal for
controllers.  I have mine mounted on a 1 - 1/2 inch slabs of plywood, ideal
for table top use.  Now I just need a shallow depth power supply.

John Loffink
The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
http://www.wavemakers-synth.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of Grant Richter
> 
> I'm have put the 300 series back in full production.
> 
> The 1200 series is still available until I use up the existing parts. I
> plan to port the 1200
> series design into 300 series packaging eventually. The Joystick and JAG
> will stay just as
> they are. It would make no sense to have those in 300 series cases.
> 
> The 300 series was never completely out of production, but I had switched
> my main
> efforts to the Frac-Rac format. I now think that was a mistake. I didn't
> want to go head to
> head with Don over the 200e, but now the Buchla product is mature enough
> that I feel OK
> placing my emphasis on the 300 series again. I wanted Don to succeed with
> the 200e.
> Musical instruments is a field where if one company "defeats" another
> company, the whole
> culture loses out.
> 
> John Simonton intended the Frac-Rac format to be economical. John Blacet
> has done a
> absolutely brilliant job of executing designs in that format. But the
> Frac-Rac doesn't have
> the inherent infrastructure for the highest grade professional
> instruments. That is not to
> take away from the great modules already designed, or question the quality
> of theose
> instruments. A Blacet instrument is a superb economical instrument.
> 
> In my opinion the Frac-Rac aluminum is too light weight and the lack of
> fully shielded
> enclosures keeps them from achieving extremely low electrical noise.
> Because of that, I
> don't feel Frac-Rac modules should cost over $300 tops. That price point
> places a limit on
> the complexity of designs. To summerize, I like the Frac-Rac format a lot,
> and I admire the
> instruments already in that format. But it has become a limitation for new
> Wiard designs.
> 
> I am hoping for some customer feedback. The goal of the 300 series is to
> have 12 unique
> module designs, there are currently 8. These 8 modules already do almost
> every kind of
> synthesis known to mankind, so designing 4 new modules is no easy task.
> The Envelooper
> is one new design for certain.
>

(Long shot)--Given demand, is there any chance for new
designs (in part or full) to emerge in frac format,
despite the push back to the 300 series, or is frac
being completely abandoned?

Hans




--- Grant Richter <grichter@asapnet.net> wrote:

> I'm have put the 300 series back in full production.
> 
> The 1200 series is still available until I use up
> the existing parts. I plan to port the 1200 
> series design into 300 series packaging eventually.
> The Joystick and JAG will stay just as 
> they are. It would make no sense to have those in
> 300 series cases.
> 
> The 300 series was never completely out of
> production, but I had switched my main 
> efforts to the Frac-Rac format. I now think that was
> a mistake. I didn't want to go head to 
> head with Don over the 200e, but now the Buchla
> product is mature enough that I feel OK 
> placing my emphasis on the 300 series again. I
> wanted Don to succeed with the 200e. 
> Musical instruments is a field where if one company
> "defeats" another company, the whole 
> culture loses out.
> 
> John Simonton intended the Frac-Rac format to be
> economical. John Blacet has done a 
> absolutely brilliant job of executing designs in
> that format. But the Frac-Rac doesn't have 
> the inherent infrastructure for the highest grade
> professional instruments. That is not to 
> take away from the great modules already designed,
> or question the quality of theose 
> instruments. A Blacet instrument is a superb
> economical instrument.
> 
> In my opinion the Frac-Rac aluminum is too light
> weight and the lack of fully shielded 
> enclosures keeps them from achieving extremely low
> electrical noise. Because of that, I 
> don't feel Frac-Rac modules should cost over $300
> tops. That price point places a limit on 
> the complexity of designs. To summerize, I like the
> Frac-Rac format a lot, and I admire the 
> instruments already in that format. But it has
> become a limitation for new Wiard designs.
> 
> I am hoping for some customer feedback. The goal of
> the 300 series is to have 12 unique 
> module designs, there are currently 8. These 8
> modules already do almost every kind of 
> synthesis known to mankind, so designing 4 new
> modules is no easy task. The Envelooper 
> is one new design for certain.
> 
> What additional features would you like to see in
> the 300 series? Feel free to speculate, 
> there are no stupid ideas. (Well, adding a Moog
> style transistor ladder filter is a stupid 
> idea, the Boogie filter already blows that thin
> sounding design away).
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> --------------------~--> 
> Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups
> email.
>
http://us.click.yahoo.com/4It09A/fOaOAA/yQLSAA/QnLolB/TM
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time 
with the Yahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#news

If the public could change their perception of how a synthesizer module must be 
constructed, we could have a renaisance unlike anything in the past.

The single most expensive component in a synthesizer is the aluminum faceplate.

There is only one source for turnkey faceplaces in the US and they are obscenely 
expensive. I pay $70 each for 1200 series faceplates.

Your only other option involves using 4 different vendors. One to get the metal blanks, 
one to put the holes in them, another to anodize them and another yet to silkscreen them. 
Each step is a chance for errors to creep in. Also, there are 5 shipping charges to move 
everything from place to place or lose the whole batch. Or drop the box...

The people who make printed circuit boards are used to doing most of these operations to 
a higher degree of precision and more quickly and cheaply than machine shops. If the 
buying public was willing to accept faceplates made from fiberglass instead of metal, it 
would open the floodgates to new module designs.

You can hardly see the difference either, the fiberglass is painted and silkscreened just like 
the metal. Plus fiberglass is lighter and stiffer.

I have heard this idea repeatedly from many people, but no one believes people will buy 
modules with fiberglass faceplates. It is not historical.

There are also design advantages to PC material faceplates. The faceplate can become part 
of the circuit. Touch switches for triggers or mode selects are essentially free. Things that 
are expensive in metal, like slots for linear pots or perforated grills for speakers, now cost 
a few pennies instead of a few dollars.

It is a practical idea, but the world is not yet ready for it.

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "> angelzero <" <loopcycle@...> wrote:

>
> (Long shot)--Given demand, is there any chance for new
> designs (in part or full) to emerge in frac format,
> despite the push back to the 300 series, or is frac
> being completely abandoned?
>

At 09:17 PM 3/14/2007, you wrote:

>If the public could change their perception of how a synthesizer 
>module must be
>constructed, we could have a renaisance unlike anything in the past.
>
>The single most expensive component in a synthesizer is the aluminum 
>faceplate.
>
>There is only one source for turnkey faceplaces in the US and they 
>are obscenely
>expensive. I pay $70 each for 1200 series faceplates.
>
>Your only other option involves using 4 different vendors. One to 
>get the metal blanks,
>one to put the holes in them, another to anodize them and another 
>yet to silkscreen them.
>Each step is a chance for errors to creep in. Also, there are 5 
>shipping charges to move
>everything from place to place or lose the whole batch. Or drop the box...
>
>The people who make printed circuit boards are used to doing most of 
>these operations to
>a higher degree of precision and more quickly and cheaply than 
>machine shops. If the
>buying public was willing to accept faceplates made from fiberglass 
>instead of metal, it
>would open the floodgates to new module designs.
>
>You can hardly see the difference either, the fiberglass is painted 
>and silkscreened just like
>the metal. Plus fiberglass is lighter and stiffer.
>
>I have heard this idea repeatedly from many people, but no one 
>believes people will buy
>modules with fiberglass faceplates. It is not historical.
>
>There are also design advantages to PC material faceplates. The 
>faceplate can become part
>of the circuit. Touch switches for triggers or mode selects are 
>essentially free. Things that
>are expensive in metal, like slots for linear pots or perforated 
>grills for speakers, now cost
>a few pennies instead of a few dollars.
>
>It is a practical idea, but the world is not yet ready for it.
>

Grant,

I really like the circuit board panel idea. The board shop I use even 
does black epoxy solder mask which would be fine for finish.
Although they can be a bit blotchy at times and getting a consistent 
result could be a problem.
Silk screening the text and graphics would be a snap. Board material 
also comes in thicknesses above 0.062"
for added rigidity. Having built in tracks for pots and jacks would 
be cool but they would have to be SMT so as not to poke through.
I am experimenting with a new panel making shop Metal Photo of Cincinatti.
They will anodize, machine and punch all holes using CNC equipment.
Price of my A series panels is about $12 each in sets of 10 panels.

Compared to the way I used to do it which was to have panels anodized 
and then machine and drill them myself this is a real boon.
I haven't received my first order yet but it sounds promising.

For my B series panels , they are laser cut aluminum with bent 
returns for rigidity which is extremely accurate and reasonable cost.
Tolerances are +/-.005" or better.
About $12 each in batches of 10.
I have them baked enamel finished by another shop ($3.00 each) but 
the laser sheet metal shop can arrange to have them anodized for 
about $200 for a lot of 100
I then silk screen them myself as I have not found a local screen 
shop that can provide consistent results. For some reason they have trouble
with registration of graphics with holes. Even the guys who claim to 
specialize in instrument panels....weird, don't know how they stay in business.

Perhaps the circuit board idea could be offered as a down and dirty 
cheaper option but then again the cost of panels isn't that
high compared to the overall cost of a module and a pcb version is 
only going to save about $10 compared to the methods I use.
The PCB panel is still going to cost $15-20 each in small runs.

Bruce

> It is a practical idea, but the world is not yet ready for it.

I wouldn't mind.

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter" <grichter@...> wrote:

> I have heard this idea repeatedly from many people, but no one
believes people will buy 
> modules with fiberglass faceplates. It is not historical.
> 
> There are also design advantages to PC material faceplates. The 
> 
> It is a practical idea, but the world is not yet ready for it.
> 

Damn, Grant! Lighter, stiffer, cheaper faceplates with circuitry
built-in and new forms of tactile control? I'M READY FOR IT!

Well, the Cracklebox... Anyway, I would think most
customers would appreciate the savings, sounds like a
very good idea.

--- Grant Richter <grichter@asapnet.net> wrote:

> If the public could change their perception of how a
> synthesizer module must be 
> constructed, we could have a renaisance unlike
> anything in the past.
> 
> If the 
> buying public was willing to accept faceplates made
> from fiberglass instead of metal, it 
> would open the floodgates to new module designs.
> 
> You can hardly see the difference either, the
> fiberglass is painted and silkscreened just like 
> the metal. Plus fiberglass is lighter and stiffer.
> 
> I have heard this idea repeatedly from many people,
> but no one believes people will buy 
> modules with fiberglass faceplates. It is not
> historical.
> 
> There are also design advantages to PC material
> faceplates. The faceplate can become part 
> of the circuit. Touch switches for triggers or mode
> selects are essentially free. Things that 
> are expensive in metal, like slots for linear pots
> or perforated grills for speakers, now cost 
> a few pennies instead of a few dollars.
> 
> It is a practical idea, but the world is not yet
> ready for it.
> 



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Don't pick lemons.
See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html

>If the 
> buying public was willing to accept faceplates made from fiberglass instead of metal, it 
> would open the floodgates to new module designs.
> 
> You can hardly see the difference either, the fiberglass is painted and silkscreened just 
like 
> the metal. Plus fiberglass is lighter and stiffer.
> 
> I have heard this idea repeatedly from many people, but no one believes people will buy 
> modules with fiberglass faceplates. It is not historical.

> It is a practical idea, but the world is not yet ready for it.

Well if one stuck to "historical" then we'd just have Moog copies... ahemm... ;-)

It's a surprising justification though if the reaction came from your actual customers or 
dealers rather than self styled pundits. If someone actually buying said no then I would 
believe it would hold water. I mean there is no historical proof that people *won't* buy the 
modules based on someone actually offering them. 

From one standpoint you are already offering a choice of 2 metal faceplates on the 1200 
modules so while I'm sure there would be a cost involved in the prep setup for the new 
material, it's not like you don't have the inferstructure in place already to offer alternative 
priced faceplates. 

Now the idea of offering a new feature set to go with the new material does admittedly 
offer what could be a substantial "sugar coating" which does open up a more complex 
comparison. It might also bring up a long term durability situation if components are 
integrated in a way beyond just replacing the faceplate material. In other words simply a 
different material I don't think myself would be a no-sale. But some kind of mounted 
interface makes me at least worry if it will remain working years later

Here are a few of my thoughts. 

The comparison of price versus delivery time (i.e. shipping from stock vs. backordering vs. 
pre-ordering) might be worth considering. I'm always debating ordering in advance and 
then half the time cursing doing so for one reason or another at some point, though I've 
never been burnt. It's not really possible to have a choice but I think it does weigh in a lot 
on weither to get a module you have to wait for or something else or postpone the 
decision. I mean people desire modular gear a lot more than they really "need" them. So to 
me it might not be a cut and dry decision of what you get for how much money but a 
factor of will I get it in a day or two or sometime a few weeks, a season or two or 4 in the 
future.

I can see why Frac as a form factor is probably limiting in certain departments, but don't 
all form factors have pluses and minuses? Then again I bought 2 racks because there were 
a fair amount of choices out there. One thing going for it is the getting started price for 
the rack and PSU is low.

My hesitation on the original series had a bit of connection to the form factor. I was 
thinking that if I was going to get one I'd likely want to get a rack worth. I do get annoyed 
by empty rack spaces looking at me even though part of me thinks that's silly. Then they 
got more or less discontinued. I have to say it's much easier to get the motivation to get a 
module when one does have some empty spaces then when one has to work out the power 
supply and mounting. And it's also easier to talk oneself out of not getting some modules 
you want if they are a different format, require a wait, cost a good chunk of money, etc.

I've always fantasized that Grant could get something in the way of less costly fabrication 
going - I guess SMT for instance - because it's seemed like the his impass was getting the 
stuff built and then running what he has going in terms direct sales. I kept wishing he'd 
get more of his great designs out there rather than seeing the same old stuff over again so 
often from other companies (not to say that there aren't some basic modules that you 
need for a good system)

At 10:17 PM 3/14/2007, Grant Richter wrote:

>If the public could change their perception of how a synthesizer 
>module must be
>constructed, we could have a renaisance unlike anything in the past.
>
>[snip]
>It is a practical idea, but the world is not yet ready for it.


True, and nobody will buy synth modules with faceplates that are not 
silver or black, nor with silly names like "Wogglebug", and nobody 
will buy a fiberglass-bodied car, either. ;-)

Yes, I'm being flippant, because I respectfully disagree. Perhaps you 
could offer a module with a fiberglass faceplate *or* an optional (at 
extra cost) metal faceplate. That would be an interesting marketing 
experiment and I'd like to think that the market would reward your vision.

My only question is with regard to rigidity, as fiberglass surely 
needs some type of reinforcement, but that's manageable. The 
potential is great, as you say. PCB material comes in a variety of colors, too.

Interesting concept, Grant. I hope that you'll stick to your guns and 
give this idea a shot.
--
john


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.11/723 - Release Date: 3/15/2007 11:27 AM

I am intrigued by this fiberglass faceplate idea.  I would like to see 
a proof-of-concept to get a firm grasp of the final product.



--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter" <grichter@...> wrote:
>
> If the public could change their perception of how a synthesizer 
module must be 
> constructed, we could have a renaisance unlike anything in the past.
> 
> The single most expensive component in a synthesizer is the aluminum 
faceplate.

> If the buying public was willing to accept faceplates made from fiberglass
> instead of metal, it would open the floodgates to new module designs.

I've got *zero* problems with this. I would also mean slightly less $$ 
for a module too, as I'm now not paying $70.00 just for the freaking 
faceplace!

Go for it. Somebody has to be first!!

Grant writes:
> 
> If the buying public was willing to accept faceplates made from
> fiberglass instead of metal, it would open the floodgates to new module
> designs.

Count me as a vote for "Yes!  Go do that!  I'll buy them!"

Paul

Need Mail bonding?
Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.

I'm in the minority here, but I have to say that I do not like the idea 
of fiberglass. I will admit though that this is purely for aesthetic 
reasons, and has nothing to do with functionality. Grant built me a 
beautiful Series 300 system with gold faceplates. Even powered down, it 
blows me away. It's a beautiful work of art. I just don't think a 
fiberglass system would have the same vibe, for lack of a better word. 
And to me, an instrument's vibe and personality are very important. 
Having said all that, if Grant comes out with something really cool in 
fiberglass, I'll buy it. : )

Just my two byte's worth.

Gus

here are 2 photos of fibreglass test modules
http://www.flickr.com/photos/45395793@N00/?saved=1

if the fibreglass end result gave me the beautiful blue celtic design 
for a cheaper price that would mean that on roughly the 9th module it 
was free :-)


timothy cooper wrote:

>
> And yet another supporter of the fiberglass revolution that seems to 
> be taking place!  Fantastic concept and great possibilites! Just Do 
> it!!! 
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Need Mail bonding?
> Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A 
> <http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/index;_ylc=X3oDMTFvbGNhMGE3BF9TAzM5NjU0NTEwOARfcwMzOTY1NDUxMDMEc2VjA21haWxfdGFnbGluZQRzbGsDbWFpbF90YWcx?link=ask&sid=396546091> 
> for great tips from Yahoo! Answers 
> <http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/index;_ylc=X3oDMTFvbGNhMGE3BF9TAzM5NjU0NTEwOARfcwMzOTY1NDUxMDMEc2VjA21haWxfdGFnbGluZQRzbGsDbWFpbF90YWcx?link=ask&sid=396546091> 
> users.
>

The only issue I have with the Wiard blue series is I have seen some 
peoples systems where they have obviously bought modules over time and 
the blue face plates dont really look to be exactly the same blue. :-) I 
am being really anal but i do like a uniform looking system.

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, amnesia <amni56@...> wrote:
>
> here are 2 photos of fibreglass test modules
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/45395793@N00/?saved=1

It looks soft, warm, almost translucent...nice !

You might take a look back at message #25 in this
list, where Grant explains the uncontrollable
differences in the faceplate color.


--- amnesia <amni56@tpg.com.au> wrote:

> The only issue I have with the Wiard blue series is
> I have seen some 
> peoples systems where they have obviously bought
> modules over time and 
> the blue face plates dont really look to be exactly
> the same blue. :-) I 
> am being really anal but i do like a uniform looking
> system.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> --------------------~--> 
> Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups
> email.
>
http://us.click.yahoo.com/4It09A/fOaOAA/yQLSAA/QnLolB/TM
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
It's here! Your new message!  
Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.11/723 - Release Date: 3/15/2007 11:27 AM

about half of my modular (http://www.fluxmonkey.com/fluxGear.htm) 
has fiberglass front panels... my local surpus shop had a boxload of 
double-thick, doublesided blank PCBs almost perfectly sized as 2wice 
a standard frac module.  biggest advantage for me is workability--i 
don't have a metal shop or shear available, and the fiberglass is 
much easier to cut and shape in the basement.  obviously, i'm not 
taking advantage of the etching/silkscreening possibilites...  i 
basically glue on paper and cover it w/ laminating plastic... tho i 
suppose even my utilitarian version has it's aesthetic... but i can 
vouch for the electrical and mechanical soundness of the idea.

we'll will be be at AHMW next weekend... any other wiardo's goin?

bbob


--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter" <grichter@...> 
wrote:
>...If the 
> buying public was willing to accept faceplates made from 
fiberglass instead of metal, it 
> would open the floodgates to new module designs.
> 
> You can hardly see the difference either, the fiberglass is 
painted and silkscreened just like 
> the metal. Plus fiberglass is lighter and stiffer.
> 
> I have heard this idea repeatedly from many people, but no one 
believes people will buy 
> modules with fiberglass faceplates. It is not historical.
> 
> There are also design advantages to PC material faceplates. The 
faceplate can become part 
> of the circuit. Touch switches for triggers or mode selects are 
essentially free. Things that 
> are expensive in metal, like slots for linear pots or perforated 
grills for speakers, now cost 

> a few pennies instead of a few dollars.
> 
> It is a practical idea, but the world is not yet ready for it.
>

I like the way those green fibre glass face plates look.  I also like 
the plain black and gold aluminum face plates done for the non-
production custom wiard systems.  I think offering both aluminum and 
fibre glass for the classic 300 series modules instead of one or the 
other would be the optimal approach.  I see no compelling reason why a 
person should not be able to request aluminum face plates if they are 
willing to incur the cost.  I would like to be able to order a green 
aluminum face plate system sans the celtic graphics.




--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, amnesia <amni56@...> wrote:

>
> here are 2 photos of fibreglass test modules
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/45395793@N00/?saved=1

Matthew,

Take a close look at an old Buchla Kinesthic Input Port controller, or
the Buchla Music Easel keyboard - it has a construction similar what
Grant is describing.

IMHO, give me a "classic" Wiard front panel on my modules.  Ten years
later, they still look great, and are easy to clean....  (Sorry, Grant).

When I was making my Serge in the 70's, I was actually thinking about
laminating wood onto the faceplates, which, when put into wooden case,
would have resulted in an all-wooden, but no faceplate graphics
synth....  I still like that idea - a piece of wood with patchcords
sticking out of it....

gary



"mritenburg" <mritenburg@...> wrote:

>
> I am intrigued by this fiberglass faceplate idea.  I would like to see 
> a proof-of-concept to get a firm grasp of the final product.
> 
> 
> 
> --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter" <grichter@> wrote:
> >
> > If the public could change their perception of how a synthesizer 
> module must be 
> > constructed, we could have a renaisance unlike anything in the past.
> > 
> > The single most expensive component in a synthesizer is the aluminum 
> faceplate.
>

Hi Bob,

I'm going to be at AHMW (probably with my 12 module 300 series Wiard system
amongst other gizmos). I'd like to see those fiberglass front paneled modules.



--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "data2action" <rdrake@...> wrote:

>
> about half of my modular (http://www.fluxmonkey.com/fluxGear.htm) 
> has fiberglass front panels... my local surpus shop had a boxload of 
> double-thick, doublesided blank PCBs almost perfectly sized as 2wice 
> a standard frac module.  biggest advantage for me is workability--i 
> don't have a metal shop or shear available, and the fiberglass is 
> much easier to cut and shape in the basement.  obviously, i'm not 
> taking advantage of the etching/silkscreening possibilites...  i 
> basically glue on paper and cover it w/ laminating plastic... tho i 
> suppose even my utilitarian version has it's aesthetic... but i can 
> vouch for the electrical and mechanical soundness of the idea.
> 
> we'll will be be at AHMW next weekend... any other wiardo's goin?
> 
> bbob
> 
> 
> --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter" <grichter@> 
> wrote:
> >...If the 
> > buying public was willing to accept faceplates made from 
> fiberglass instead of metal, it 
> > would open the floodgates to new module designs.
> > 
> > You can hardly see the difference either, the fiberglass is 
> painted and silkscreened just like 
> > the metal. Plus fiberglass is lighter and stiffer.
> > 
> > I have heard this idea repeatedly from many people, but no one 
> believes people will buy 
> > modules with fiberglass faceplates. It is not historical.
> > 
> > There are also design advantages to PC material faceplates. The 
> faceplate can become part 
> > of the circuit. Touch switches for triggers or mode selects are 
> essentially free. Things that 
> > are expensive in metal, like slots for linear pots or perforated 
> grills for speakers, now cost 
> > a few pennies instead of a few dollars.
> > 
> > It is a practical idea, but the world is not yet ready for it.
> >
>

Hi Matt,

I highly respect your comments on all the yahoo groups regarding modular synths! I remember that you sold your Wiard system (for a very attractive price to a swiss guy...) and bought a Buchla 200e.

What do you think about both modulars? (I read a post from you some time ago asking for Buchla support (which does not seem to be the best).

Thanks a lot in advance

Frank

Btw: Did you ever own a Serge and can compare it with a Buchla and/or Wiard?

-- 
Frank Hettlich Schulung und Consulting
Wartburgstr. 18
D-49124 Georgsmarienhuette
Tel. +49-5401-59443
Mob. +49-173-2702264

There is a sexiness to a wood faceplate, and FR4 material certainly an interesting 
alternative in the same aesthetic sense,. My question is how does one assure that the 
faceplate is uniformly and adequately protected (grounded) when made of materials with 
such a high degree of electrical isolation?  

The idea of integrating surface mount circuitry to the back of the faceplate is intriguing to 
say the least, something that was done in the 70's in a slightly different manner with a 
firm in New Hamphire which was producing  MUTLILAYER plastic injection-molded chassis' 
for Apple computer and others which had interconnect circuitry embedded in them (albeit 
additive process,  which does have it's reliability issues, although faceplate could easily be 
done with subtractive process) and running along all sides, even taking the corners as 
well. 

- P

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Chang" <gchang@...> wrote:

>
> Matthew,
> 
> Take a close look at an old Buchla Kinesthic Input Port controller, or
> the Buchla Music Easel keyboard - it has a construction similar what
> Grant is describing.
> 
> IMHO, give me a "classic" Wiard front panel on my modules.  Ten years
> later, they still look great, and are easy to clean....  (Sorry, Grant).
> 
> When I was making my Serge in the 70's, I was actually thinking about
> laminating wood onto the faceplates, which, when put into wooden case,
> would have resulted in an all-wooden, but no faceplate graphics
> synth....  I still like that idea - a piece of wood with patchcords
> sticking out of it....
> 
> gary
> 
> 
> 
> "mritenburg" <mritenburg@> wrote:
> >
> > I am intrigued by this fiberglass faceplate idea.  I would like to see 
> > a proof-of-concept to get a firm grasp of the final product.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter" <grichter@> wrote:
> > >
> > > If the public could change their perception of how a synthesizer 
> > module must be 
> > > constructed, we could have a renaisance unlike anything in the past.
> > > 
> > > The single most expensive component in a synthesizer is the aluminum 
> > faceplate.
> >
>

Hi Matthew
--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "mritenburg" <mritenburg@...> wrote:>  
> I see no compelling reason why a person should not be able to 
> request aluminum face plates if they are willing to incur the cost.  

i can envision a compelling reason. 
Though at this early stage i concede that it is all speculation. 
But if i understand Grant's original hypothesis, one scenario under
consideration combines the circuit board and the panel. The components
would occupy one side and the controls and jacks would protrude
through the other side. This would obviously impart a lot of material
and assembly savings. But some very innovative and unconventional
engineering would be required to make it work (this time***)
If that method was implemented there would be no discrete faceplate
that could be customized. 
Even if there were a partial implementation of such a scheme, i.e.
some components on a fiberglass 'faceplate' and some on a separate
PCB, Metal faceplates would be precluded.
i'm curious to find out of if  this is indeed what Prof. Richter was
considering. 

-doc

***
anybody remember the Alesis 1622 debacle? ruin a fader...discard the
mixer!

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter" <grichter@...> wrote:
>
> If the public could change their perception of how a synthesizer
module must be 
> constructed, we could have a renaisance unlike anything in the past.
> 




i'm GO for fibreglass


do it!


but, would this work for 300?  isn't one of the points of the 300 to
be fully shielded?

I worry a bit about a fiberglass face plate that incorporates certain components
(other than knobs, sliders, and jacks). Particularly surface mount components.
If I'm constantly plugging and unplugging patch cords to a module, I'm flexing
(maybe ever so slightly, but depending on the material, perhaps quite a bit
actually) the front of the module. Won't this stress the solder points of anything
mounted on the rear? This concept might work well for some types of
modules but for others, I'm not so sure. I have nothing against the use of
fiberglass (or plastic, or wood for that matter) for face plates, but I do
question over loading the functionality of it by putting the actual circuit 
layout on the rear of the plate.

My 2 cents.


--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "drmabuce" <drmabuce@...> wrote:

>
> Hi Matthew
> --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "mritenburg" <mritenburg@> wrote:>  
> > I see no compelling reason why a person should not be able to 
> > request aluminum face plates if they are willing to incur the cost.  
> 
> i can envision a compelling reason. 
> Though at this early stage i concede that it is all speculation. 
> But if i understand Grant's original hypothesis, one scenario under
> consideration combines the circuit board and the panel. The components
> would occupy one side and the controls and jacks would protrude
> through the other side. This would obviously impart a lot of material
> and assembly savings. But some very innovative and unconventional
> engineering would be required to make it work (this time***)
> If that method was implemented there would be no discrete faceplate
> that could be customized. 
> Even if there were a partial implementation of such a scheme, i.e.
> some components on a fiberglass 'faceplate' and some on a separate
> PCB, Metal faceplates would be precluded.
> i'm curious to find out of if  this is indeed what Prof. Richter was
> considering. 
> 
> -doc
> 
> ***
> anybody remember the Alesis 1622 debacle? ruin a fader...discard the
> mixer!
>

I know what you mean but I really think the photos exaggerate this. It
all depends how the light hits it. True, they do vary SLIGHTLY but not
enough to make a difference. Especially when you consider how bad ass a
Wiard is!!!

    Regards,
    John

On 3/15/07 5:40 PM, "amnesia" <amni56@tpg.com.au> wrote:

>  
>  
>  
> 
> The only issue I have with the Wiard blue series is I have seen some
> peoples systems where they have obviously bought modules over time and
> the blue face plates dont really look to be exactly the same blue. :-) I
> am being really anal but i do like a uniform looking system.
> 
>  
>

Hi Mike

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael A. Firman" <maf@...> wrote:
>
> 
> I worry a bit about a fiberglass face plate that incorporates
certain components
> (other than knobs, sliders, and jacks).
> If I'm constantly plugging and unplugging patch cords to a module,
I'm flexing
> (maybe ever so slightly, but depending on the material, perhaps
quite a bit
> actually) the front of the module. Won't this stress the solder
points of anything
> mounted on the rear? 

absolutely right!
this is the 'innovative and unconventional' part i was refering to.
Some form of mechanical isolation of the stressed locations would be
required to rival the reliability of a separate faceplate. Grant has
shown a willingness to break with tradition in other areas of
engineering , i'm just suggesting that he might have a trick up his
sleeve for this one too. 


> Particularly surface mount components.

especially true!!!!!
the deleterius effects of flexing are magnified when working with
components that are the size of boogers!!!
;'>

it'd be no mean feat... if the Professor could pull it off!

after that,  maybe he could patent the 'pet CMOS 4066' with droll
packaging, start a fad, and sell them for $11.95 each to finance the
next PCB buy too!

Happy Blarney day!
=)
-doc

> but, would this work for 300?  isn't one of the points of the 300 to
> be fully shielded?

The 300 series will stay exactly as it is. I was refering to fiberglass panels only for 
inexpensive systems like Frac-Rac or Euro-Rack.

I don't know if anyone remembers the "crop circles" keyboard that Don Buchla made.

From the one picture I have seen of it, it looks like it was designed for quradraphonic 
panning. It was arranged in a circle with 4 quadrants of "woven" traces. It looked like each 
quadrant produced a voltage, and the 4 voltages were routed to 4 VCAs. So you could pan by 
running you finger in a circle around the quadrants.

There is an example of where the faceplate would have to be made of PC material, to support 
the capacitive sensing traces.

The Freescale parts have a 2.5 millisecond settling time per contact, that is too slow for a 
black and white type keyboard, but probably fine for a "crop circle" type controller.

It would be sorta cool to have something like that in a Frac-Rac module.

I don't have plans to do that any time soon, just daydreaming.

amnesia <amni56@...> wrote:
>
> The only issue I have with the Wiard blue series is I have seen some 
> peoples systems where they have obviously bought modules over time and 
> the blue face plates dont really look to be exactly the same blue.
:-) I 
> am being really anal but i do like a uniform looking system.
>


This is where being anal will cost you a bit of money - you will get
matching faceplate colors if you order all of your system at the same
time.

Or, if you really want a perfect system, you can replace each
faceplate with a .fpd-style faceplate, where the color will be
consistent (and about $70 a piece - but perfectly matched).

Having the largest system that exists (at least for the time being), I
personally find that the difference in the graphics is what
'hand-made' is all about....8*)

Gary
How big is big, any photos?

Gary Chang wrote:

>
> amnesia <amni56@...> wrote:
> >
> > The only issue I have with the Wiard blue series is I have seen some
> > peoples systems where they have obviously bought modules over time and
> > the blue face plates dont really look to be exactly the same blue.
> :-) I
> > am being really anal but i do like a uniform looking system.
> >
>
> This is where being anal will cost you a bit of money - you will get
> matching faceplate colors if you order all of your system at the same
> time.
>
> Or, if you really want a perfect system, you can replace each
> faceplate with a .fpd-style faceplate, where the color will be
> consistent (and about $70 a piece - but perfectly matched).
>
> Having the largest system that exists (at least for the time being), I
> personally find that the difference in the graphics is what
> 'hand-made' is all about....8*)
>
>

Just wanting to know how similar of different the Wogglebug is compared 
to the Heisenberg Generator, which I love.
>
>

in the photos section, under "interesting packaging"
http://launch.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/wiardgroup/photos/view/5df7?
b=17

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, amnesia <amni56@...> wrote:
>
> Gary
> How big is big, any photos?
> 
> Gary Chang wrote:
> >
> > amnesia <amni56@> wrote:
> > >
> > > The only issue I have with the Wiard blue series is I have 
seen some
> > > peoples systems where they have obviously bought modules over 
time and
> > > the blue face plates dont really look to be exactly the same 
blue.
> > :-) I
> > > am being really anal but i do like a uniform looking system.
> > >
> >
> > This is where being anal will cost you a bit of money - you will 
get
> > matching faceplate colors if you order all of your system at the 
same
> > time.
> >
> > Or, if you really want a perfect system, you can replace each
> > faceplate with a .fpd-style faceplate, where the color will be
> > consistent (and about $70 a piece - but perfectly matched).
> >
> > Having the largest system that exists (at least for the time 
being), I

> > personally find that the difference in the graphics is what
> > 'hand-made' is all about....8*)
> >
> >
>

Hi cray

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, amnesia <amni56@...> wrote:
>
> Just wanting to know how similar of different the Wogglebug is compared 
> to the Heisenberg Generator,


briefly...VERY different
they are different categories of circuit entirely. 

-doc

Oh Garry's Wiard is the one that makes me drool. :-)


data2action wrote:

>
> in the photos section, under "interesting packaging"
> http://launch.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/wiardgroup/photos/view/5df7? 
> <http://launch.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/wiardgroup/photos/view/5df7?>
> b=17
>
> --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com>, amnesia <amni56@...> wrote:
> >
> > Gary
> > How big is big, any photos?
> >
> > Gary Chang wrote:
> > >
> > > amnesia <amni56@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The only issue I have with the Wiard blue series is I have
> seen some
> > > > peoples systems where they have obviously bought modules over
> time and
> > > > the blue face plates dont really look to be exactly the same
> blue.
> > > :-) I
> > > > am being really anal but i do like a uniform looking system.
> > > >
> > >
> > > This is where being anal will cost you a bit of money - you will
> get
> > > matching faceplate colors if you order all of your system at the
> same
> > > time.
> > >
> > > Or, if you really want a perfect system, you can replace each
> > > faceplate with a .fpd-style faceplate, where the color will be
> > > consistent (and about $70 a piece - but perfectly matched).
> > >
> > > Having the largest system that exists (at least for the time
> being), I
> > > personally find that the difference in the graphics is what
> > > 'hand-made' is all about....8*)
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>

http://launch.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/wiardgroup/photos/view/5df7?b=20

In this picture, two modules were missing....

(This foto is in the Interesting Packaging folder of the photos
section of this yahoo group...).

gary


amnesia <amni56@...> wrote:
>
> Gary
> How big is big, any photos?
> 
> Gary Chang wrote:
> >
> > amnesia <amni56@> wrote:
> > >
> > > The only issue I have with the Wiard blue series is I have seen some
> > > peoples systems where they have obviously bought modules over
time and

> > > the blue face plates dont really look to be exactly the same blue.
> > :-) I
> > > am being really anal but i do like a uniform looking system.
> > >
> >
> > This is where being anal will cost you a bit of money - you will get
> > matching faceplate colors if you order all of your system at the same
> > time.
> >
> > Or, if you really want a perfect system, you can replace each
> > faceplate with a .fpd-style faceplate, where the color will be
> > consistent (and about $70 a piece - but perfectly matched).
> >
> > Having the largest system that exists (at least for the time being), I
> > personally find that the difference in the graphics is what
> > 'hand-made' is all about....8*)
> >
> >
>

Actually, I think that our past discussion comparing the WB to the
Blacet module....

Let me first say that this comparison is VERY general.

To be fair, the Heisenberg, WB and the Serge Smooth and Stepped
Generator have one thing in common - they are the result of a designer
who has spent a lot of time with a Buchla 265 Sources of Uncertainty.

The 256's idea - sampling a lfo that is being modulated by a noise
source - is the basis of each of these modules, so that is where there
is similarity - and why the Blacet module is not similar.

I think that each and everyone of the designers of these devices can
tell you that getting interesting stepped information out of these
guys is pretty interesting and easy - what is the bitch is to get
really musical smooth movement.  In this regard, the Woggle Bug is my
choice.

Grant has added mods, such as a true analog noise source to the WB,
making the smooth generator respond very similarly to the 256 in the
smooth mode.

The resourceful designer that he is, Grant's module has actual audio
outputs, which makes learning how to train your new WB to do stuff
much simpler.

So, each is a three bedroom condo, based on a Frank Loyd Wright
Design.  Other that that, the are completely unique!


gary




John <inform3r@...> wrote:
>
>     Hey, didn¹t I answer this question once before? ;)
> It¹s kind of like apples and oranges. They both do similar things in
the CV
> realm but the Woggle has a whole other side to it which is the
ability to
> generate all types of crazy sounds/noises. The fun starts when you
use one
> Woggle channel to modulate the other. That¹s why I don¹t compare
these two
> modules. They both do a great job with modulation CV¹s but that¹s
where the
> similarities end. Hell, even the way they modulate feels different in a
> hands on situation. Both excellent modules.
> 
>     Regards,
>     John
> 
> 
> On 3/18/07 12:03 PM, "amnesia" <amni56@...> wrote:
> 
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > 
> > Just wanting to know how similar of different the Wogglebug is
compared

> > to the Heisenberg Generator, which I love.
> >> >
> >> >  
> >  
> >
>

Hey Doc,

I always appreciate your detailed comments.  Would you mind giving a 
detailed explanation of how and why they are different?

Thank you!

Matt

> briefly...VERY different
> they are different categories of circuit entirely. 
> 
> -doc
>

I wonder if a little touchplate controller would be a good tryout for
a fiberglass faceplate 1200-series module?  I presume that the
touchplates themselves could just be etched onto the surface of the
board?  Maybe something 2 x the width of the boogie filter and borg
filter modules with say 8 or 10 plates, each with one or 2 voltage
level pots above it, an out for each pot, and a gate out. Switchable
between triggered by touching one of the plates, or steppable with a
trigger pulse input, so you can use it as a sequencer, maybe? A couple
of attenuators or a couple of basic linear VCAs at the top would be
cool, maybe a variable voltage out with a pot as a performance
control,  Maybe even a slightly bigger version with a built-in
joystick if yer feeling really fancy.

I was playing with the sequantiser the other night - I routed the
unquantised out to one of the scale tables of a waveform city, via the
attenuator of a Blacet mult/att module (this is such a handly little
module, it actually makes a good performance control, depending on
what you route through it - I have one next to the joystick for this)
- I had a lot of fun altering the level of the sequencer signal going
to the quantiser,  I got sequences that worked pretty well with
different chords, but homing in on them with the attenuator pot could
be tricky - something like the touchplate described above would have
made it easier & even more enjoyable.  I'd buy such a piece
immediately, and use it loads if you were to make one, Grant.

On 3/18/07, Grant Richter <grichter@asapnet.net> wrote:
>
>
> I don't know if anyone remembers the "crop circles" keyboard that Don Buchla made.
>
>  From the one picture I have seen of it, it looks like it was designed for quradraphonic
>  panning. It was arranged in a circle with 4 quadrants of "woven" traces. It looked like each

See my message a few back. I think I gave an accurate description as a
user that owns both.

    Regards,
    John

On 3/19/07 10:00 AM, "mritenburg" <mritenburg@yahoo.com> wrote:

>  
>  
>  
> 
> Hey Doc,
> 
> I always appreciate your detailed comments.  Would you mind giving a
> detailed explanation of how and why they are different?
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> Matt
> 
>> > briefly...VERY different
>> > they are different categories of circuit entirely.
>> > 
>> > -doc
>> >
> 
>  
>

John, 

for whatever reason, I cannot find the message that you are referring
to regarding your experiences with these two modules....

gc

John <inform3r@...> wrote:
>
> 
>     See my message a few back. I think I gave an accurate
description as a

> user that owns both.
> 
>     Regards,
>     John
> 
> On 3/19/07 10:00 AM, "mritenburg" <mritenburg@...> wrote:
> 
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > 
> > Hey Doc,
> > 
> > I always appreciate your detailed comments.  Would you mind giving a
> > detailed explanation of how and why they are different?
> > 
> > Thank you!
> > 
> > Matt
> > 
> >> > briefly...VERY different
> >> > they are different categories of circuit entirely.
> >> > 
> >> > -doc
> >> >
> > 
> >  
> >
>

i would like to see continued development in the 1200 series.  
i was really looking forward to a new oscillator!  
i would be very excited to see new developments, whatever form they
take, fiberglass or otherwise.  
i know i am not speaking only for myself here.

hans


--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter" <grichter@...> wrote:
>
> > but, would this work for 300?  isn't one of the points of the 300 to
> > be fully shielded?
> 
> The 300 series will stay exactly as it is. I was refering to
fiberglass panels only for 
> inexpensive systems like Frac-Rac or Euro-Rack.
>

I never really thought about this because I thought 300 modules were totally unattainable, but what was the price range for Wiard modules back when they were in regular production?

Bryan

Bryan E Cornell wrote:
>  I never really thought about this because I thought 300 modules were
>  totally unattainable, but what was the price range for Wiard modules
>  back when they were in regular production?

Here's Robert Rich's review of the 300 series from 2002:
http://emusician.com/elecinstruments/emusic_wiard_series_modular/

It shows prices of $439-$599 per module, less for the dual joystick.

cheers,
Paul

The faceplates are being silkscreened now.

Just got Woggle Bug PCBs, rest of PCBs still on order.

Waiting for Perkins-Elmer Vactrols.

Everythings moving along, but this is thru-hole technology. Harder to get than surface 
mount parts. Longer lead times and more expensive than ever before. Most component 
prices have doubled since 2002.

in 2002 aluminum was $1.00 a pound, today it is $2.50 a pound.

The size of the American deficit makes the dollar weaker in a global marketplace.

That is a statement of economic fact, no political content intended.


--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, John <inform3r@...> wrote:

>
>     It¹s been a while since the announcement. When are we going to hear
> what¹s happening with the 300 series? Did I miss something?
> 
>     Regards,
>     John
> 
> 
> On 3/21/07 1:39 PM, "loopcycle" <loopcycle@...> wrote:
> 
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > 
> > i would like to see continued development in the 1200 series.
> > i was really looking forward to a new oscillator!
> > i would be very excited to see new developments, whatever form they
> > take, fiberglass or otherwise.
> > i know i am not speaking only for myself here.
> > 
> > hans
> > 
> > --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> > "Grant Richter" <grichter@> wrote:
> >> >
> >>> > > but, would this work for 300?  isn't one of the points of the 300 to
> >>> > > be fully shielded?
> >> > 
> >> > The 300 series will stay exactly as it is. I was refering to
> > fiberglass panels only for
> >> > inexpensive systems like Frac-Rac or Euro-Rack.
> >> >
> > 
> >  
> >
>

don't forget to note that the review and prices date february, 2002....

gary

plord@... wrote:

>
> Bryan E Cornell wrote:
> >  I never really thought about this because I thought 300 modules were
> >  totally unattainable, but what was the price range for Wiard modules
> >  back when they were in regular production?
> 
> Here's Robert Rich's review of the 300 series from 2002:
> http://emusician.com/elecinstruments/emusic_wiard_series_modular/
> 
> It shows prices of $439-$599 per module, less for the dual joystick.
> 
> cheers,
> Paul
>

Hi all
based on the indications that i can read,
 'long lead times', 
  'kings ransom', 
  aluminum doubles in price, 
  PDIP packaging drifting inexorably toward unobtanium pricing,
  even the Davies knobs are getting scarce. 
i'll hazard a guess that Grant has worn several pencils down to the
nub trying to figure out where the line of profitability is. This will
not be easy because, with commodity prices in freefall right now, that
line is very much a moving target. Anyone doing DIY knows that,
nowadays, prices can change from one screen refresh to the next! 
Bottom line: a 300 was always a top shelf item. It cost a lot to build
it in 2001 and it will cost significantly more to do so in 2007.

-doc

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Chang" <gchang@...> wrote:
>
> don't forget to note that the review and prices date february, 2002....
> 
> gary
> 
> plord@ wrote:
> >
> > Bryan E Cornell wrote:
> > >  I never really thought about this because I thought 300 modules
were
> > >  totally unattainable, but what was the price range for Wiard
modules

> > >  back when they were in regular production?
> > 
> > Here's Robert Rich's review of the 300 series from 2002:
> > http://emusician.com/elecinstruments/emusic_wiard_series_modular/
> > 
> > It shows prices of $439-$599 per module, less for the dual joystick.
> > 
> > cheers,
> > Paul
> >
>

Gary Chang wrote:
> don't forget to note that the review and prices date february, 2002....

Sorry, thought that was obvious; Bryan did ask for data from "back when
they were in regular production".  Current prics will be higher, if for no
other reason than, as Grant has lamented, in 2002 he often saw his modules
immediately turned around for a profit, a sure sign that they were priced
below the market value.  

So yeah, current pricing, higher than that.

Paul

> 
> gary
> 
> plord@... wrote:
> >
> > Bryan E Cornell wrote:
> > >  I never really thought about this because I thought 300 modules were
> > >  totally unattainable, but what was the price range for Wiard modules
> > >  back when they were in regular production?
> > 
> > Here's Robert Rich's review of the 300 series from 2002:
> > http://emusician.com/elecinstruments/emusic_wiard_series_modular/
> > 
> > It shows prices of $439-$599 per module, less for the dual joystick.
> > 
> > cheers,
> > Paul
> >
> 
>

> aluminum doubles in price

FIBERGLASS!!!!!!

300 price ... would say 2.5-3x of the 1200 prices. But the only person who knows for sure 
is grant ;)

I had a similar decision for my system some time ago:

1. complete system 300 .... were talking about $ 5.000 starting price

2. extend my cwejman s1 with cwejman modules .... also not really cheap

3. build a mixed system where i end up with more modules for the money. maybe less 
quality then 1. or 2. but more modules to play with and also a lower entry bill

I went for route 3. Motm, blacet, cwejman, wiard and also some doepfer module in a 
mixed system. Lots of stuff, lots of possibilities. If i would have to make the choice 
between keeping the system or selling it and buying a 300 instead (a small one) i would 
keep it.

P.s. sometime there will be a 300 system in my house ... maybe. Hopefully ;)

So after all in my opinion the best would be if grant is continueing and expanding both 
series.

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, Les Mizzell <lesmizz@...> wrote:
>
> 
> > aluminum doubles in price
> 
> FIBERGLASS!!!!!!
>


If i would have the choice i would like to pay a little bit more for aluminium. Imho its not that 
big problem to offer both. Ok the design advantage of fiberglass integration into circuit 
design will go away.

Hi Paul

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, plord@... wrote:
> Current prics will be higher, if for no
> other reason than, as Grant has lamented, in 2002 he often saw his
modules
> immediately turned around for a profit, a sure sign that they were
priced
> below the market value.  
> 

a very cogent point indeed, i'd sort of forgotten about that...
so if folks want to get a preview of the price range , they might find
a few hints in ebay bid histories.
While i'm sure that this viewpoint is controversial i want to say that
i agree completely that those rapid ebay turns were as you say, 'a
sure sign that they  were priced below the market value'. 
Grant made a lot of early sacrifices to keep the price low and when it
became apparent that there was a speculative aftermarket in 300's he
was understandably dismayed

-doc

I hope grant will find the right price for the 300's, right for him as well. I understand the 
frac-rack format has physical limitations (I wouldn't have minded odd widths still...), and 
SMT probably isn't the best option for a musical instrument you'd rather be able to service 
some(oh, no, please)day...
What's so appealing to me about grant's project, is that it has nothing to do with 
accumulation and doesn't lack character. Luxury and beauty are completely different 
notions...given his (kind of) nostalgia about the evenfall minimodular, there's still hope for 
good sounding, non-conventional and affordable designs (?)

> >   FIBERGLASS!!!!!!
 >     Aaaaaaargghhhhhh!

My next door neighbour has a beautiful blue boat sitting in their front 
yard. The sucker is made of fiberglass. If you can put a finish like 
that on a fiberglass panel it will look better than most metal panels 
I've seen.

What's the big deal?

Unfortunately if you want to service an instrument somedays you will sooner or later having 
problems to get something else then smd parts....

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "stefanbonnet" <stefanbonnet@...> wrote:

>
> I hope grant will find the right price for the 300's, right for him as well. I understand the 
> frac-rack format has physical limitations (I wouldn't have minded odd widths still...), and 
> SMT probably isn't the best option for a musical instrument you'd rather be able to service 
> some(oh, no, please)day...
> What's so appealing to me about grant's project, is that it has nothing to do with 
> accumulation and doesn't lack character. Luxury and beauty are completely different 
> notions...given his (kind of) nostalgia about the evenfall minimodular, there's still hope for 
> good sounding, non-conventional and affordable designs (?)
>

Hi all

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "tom_tav" <tom_tav@...> wrote:
>
> Unfortunately if you want to service an instrument somedays you will
sooner or later having 
> problems to get something else then smd parts....
> 

this is true, but the decision for a technological cottage industry is
anything but clear right now...

a few questions about surface-mount technology are stacking up in my
mailbox so here's my take:

background:
SMD,SMT,SOIC are all jargon for pretty-much the same thing:
itty bitty parts that you can move with a sneeze and don't have any
nice bendy wires stickin' out of 'em.
the wiki on this subject is pretty good  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-mount_technology
These things are made for the convenience of robots and not for human
fingers.

More germane to this forum is the issue of reparability. It's true
that the older DIP devices will suffer from a scarcity of replacement
parts. But this evolutionary precipice in hardware is a bit unique in
that the components are virtually identical electrically but they are
physically much smaller.  In this way this is not like the migration
from tubes to discrete transistors. The scale of physical
miniaturization was comparable but  power environments moved from high
voltage unipolar to lower voltage bipolar and the active components
had VERY different electrical properties. 
SMD is optimized for mass production by automated processes. Component
level repairs are not part of the plan. The intention is to reduce the
cost of the circuitboard to the point that replacement is cheaper than
repair. This works pretty well for cell phones produced in production
runs of 50,000 units but those scales do not favor small run esoteric
devices. Small run SMD boards don't run cheap enough to garner the
advantage of being disposable and replaceable.
Component-level repairs to SMD are possible but significantly more
difficult and time consuming .  i'd contend that the profile of
increased risk and difficulty of SMD repair is different but
equivalent to the tradeoffs inherent in through-hole (DIP) (ie. easier
repairs but scarcer parts). In a pinch I think it is easier to adapt a
smaller SMD chip to a through-hole application than the reverse.

The wiard designs (what's on the schematic) are very durable but  the
technology available to realize these 'songs in solder' is in a real
state of flux right now.*** The consequences of the choices that face
Prof. Richter (and his colleagues) at this juncture are VERY serious,
and there is no path that offers a CLEAR advantage right now.

aleatoric music is way more fun than aleatoric livelihoods.

-doc

PS
apologies to the group for all the button-thrashing empty posts this
morning

***
even  -i- don't KNOW if that pun was intended or not

I would like to add to Doc's eloquent incites that many devices, such
as the Sequentix P3 sequencer, (which has been a rather large success
in the thru-hole era), could not be converted to the newer technology
in a way that was econimically realistic for its market place - and,
because of the EU's ban on such leaded devices being manufactured, has
now ended production.

At the very least, conversion of the 300 series to SMD would be very
costly - period.  Grant has already employed this technology on his
more recent devices (1200 series) - I suspect that he will continue to
do this in the future.

As for the "archival" 300 Series Modules that exist, I think that it
would be safe to assume that even at twice the price for components, a
300 Series module is still more affordable to build today in its
existing design than turning it into a "TBD" module, pending the
costly and uncertain conversion to SMD, which would turn this cash cow
into a cash drain....

that''s just my opinion - I could be wrong.


gary





"drmabuce" <drmabuce@...> wrote:

>
> Hi all
> 
> --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "tom_tav" <tom_tav@> wrote:
> >
> > Unfortunately if you want to service an instrument somedays you will
> sooner or later having 
> > problems to get something else then smd parts....
> > 
> 
> this is true, but the decision for a technological cottage industry is
> anything but clear right now...
> 
> a few questions about surface-mount technology are stacking up in my
> mailbox so here's my take:
> 
> background:
> SMD,SMT,SOIC are all jargon for pretty-much the same thing:
> itty bitty parts that you can move with a sneeze and don't have any
> nice bendy wires stickin' out of 'em.
> the wiki on this subject is pretty good  
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-mount_technology
> These things are made for the convenience of robots and not for human
> fingers.
> 
> More germane to this forum is the issue of reparability. It's true
> that the older DIP devices will suffer from a scarcity of replacement
> parts. But this evolutionary precipice in hardware is a bit unique in
> that the components are virtually identical electrically but they are
> physically much smaller.  In this way this is not like the migration
> from tubes to discrete transistors. The scale of physical
> miniaturization was comparable but  power environments moved from high
> voltage unipolar to lower voltage bipolar and the active components
> had VERY different electrical properties. 
> SMD is optimized for mass production by automated processes. Component
> level repairs are not part of the plan. The intention is to reduce the
> cost of the circuitboard to the point that replacement is cheaper than
> repair. This works pretty well for cell phones produced in production
> runs of 50,000 units but those scales do not favor small run esoteric
> devices. Small run SMD boards don't run cheap enough to garner the
> advantage of being disposable and replaceable.
> Component-level repairs to SMD are possible but significantly more
> difficult and time consuming .  i'd contend that the profile of
> increased risk and difficulty of SMD repair is different but
> equivalent to the tradeoffs inherent in through-hole (DIP) (ie. easier
> repairs but scarcer parts). In a pinch I think it is easier to adapt a
> smaller SMD chip to a through-hole application than the reverse.
> 
> The wiard designs (what's on the schematic) are very durable but  the
> technology available to realize these 'songs in solder' is in a real
> state of flux right now.*** The consequences of the choices that face
> Prof. Richter (and his colleagues) at this juncture are VERY serious,
> and there is no path that offers a CLEAR advantage right now.
> 
> aleatoric music is way more fun than aleatoric livelihoods.
> 
> -doc
> 
> PS
> apologies to the group for all the button-thrashing empty posts this
> morning
> 
> ***
> even  -i- don't KNOW if that pun was intended or not
>

What is truely shocking is that SO (small outline) SMD devices are going EOL (end of life) in 
as short as two years. SMD seem like it will have the same problem as early eight bit 
digital. The rate of change is very highly accelerated. 2708 EPROMs are still available, but 
you need an old programmer to recognize them.

It is beginning to look like the safest design strategy is to us a mix of thru hole and SMD. 
It appears DIP packs are sticking around longer than some SO chips which are already 
obsoleted.

Lead bearing technology is a know factor, while lead reduced technology is still a big 
question mark. And once again, car and motorcycles batteries and stained glasses 
windows in churches represent thousands of time more evironmental lead contribution 
that Wiard could possibly make in it's entire existance.


--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Chang" <gchang@...> wrote:

>
> I would like to add to Doc's eloquent incites that many devices, such
> as the Sequentix P3 sequencer, (which has been a rather large success
> in the thru-hole era), could not be converted to the newer technology
> in a way that was econimically realistic for its market place - and,
> because of the EU's ban on such leaded devices being manufactured, has
> now ended production.
> 
> At the very least, conversion of the 300 series to SMD would be very
> costly - period.  Grant has already employed this technology on his
> more recent devices (1200 series) - I suspect that he will continue to
> do this in the future.
> 
> As for the "archival" 300 Series Modules that exist, I think that it
> would be safe to assume that even at twice the price for components, a
> 300 Series module is still more affordable to build today in its
> existing design than turning it into a "TBD" module, pending the
> costly and uncertain conversion to SMD, which would turn this cash cow
> into a cash drain....
> 
> that''s just my opinion - I could be wrong.
> 
> 
> gary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "drmabuce" <drmabuce@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all
> > 
> > --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "tom_tav" <tom_tav@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Unfortunately if you want to service an instrument somedays you will
> > sooner or later having 
> > > problems to get something else then smd parts....
> > > 
> > 
> > this is true, but the decision for a technological cottage industry is
> > anything but clear right now...
> > 
> > a few questions about surface-mount technology are stacking up in my
> > mailbox so here's my take:
> > 
> > background:
> > SMD,SMT,SOIC are all jargon for pretty-much the same thing:
> > itty bitty parts that you can move with a sneeze and don't have any
> > nice bendy wires stickin' out of 'em.
> > the wiki on this subject is pretty good  
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-mount_technology
> > These things are made for the convenience of robots and not for human
> > fingers.
> > 
> > More germane to this forum is the issue of reparability. It's true
> > that the older DIP devices will suffer from a scarcity of replacement
> > parts. But this evolutionary precipice in hardware is a bit unique in
> > that the components are virtually identical electrically but they are
> > physically much smaller.  In this way this is not like the migration
> > from tubes to discrete transistors. The scale of physical
> > miniaturization was comparable but  power environments moved from high
> > voltage unipolar to lower voltage bipolar and the active components
> > had VERY different electrical properties. 
> > SMD is optimized for mass production by automated processes. Component
> > level repairs are not part of the plan. The intention is to reduce the
> > cost of the circuitboard to the point that replacement is cheaper than
> > repair. This works pretty well for cell phones produced in production
> > runs of 50,000 units but those scales do not favor small run esoteric
> > devices. Small run SMD boards don't run cheap enough to garner the
> > advantage of being disposable and replaceable.
> > Component-level repairs to SMD are possible but significantly more
> > difficult and time consuming .  i'd contend that the profile of
> > increased risk and difficulty of SMD repair is different but
> > equivalent to the tradeoffs inherent in through-hole (DIP) (ie. easier
> > repairs but scarcer parts). In a pinch I think it is easier to adapt a
> > smaller SMD chip to a through-hole application than the reverse.
> > 
> > The wiard designs (what's on the schematic) are very durable but  the
> > technology available to realize these 'songs in solder' is in a real
> > state of flux right now.*** The consequences of the choices that face
> > Prof. Richter (and his colleagues) at this juncture are VERY serious,
> > and there is no path that offers a CLEAR advantage right now.
> > 
> > aleatoric music is way more fun than aleatoric livelihoods.
> > 
> > -doc
> > 
> > PS
> > apologies to the group for all the button-thrashing empty posts this
> > morning
> > 
> > ***
> > even  -i- don't KNOW if that pun was intended or not
> >
>

I had a conversation with one of the design minds behind Apogee
Analog/Digital Convertors a few months ago that reflects much of the
same thought - Apogee has even considered buying on Ebay used AD8000
convertors in an effort to reclaim parts that are no longer in
production since the AD8000 was in production a few years ago, in an
effort to have parts in stock to repair units that are brought in for
repair.  'Oh, curse that unit that has lasted longer than a few years!"

He admitted that the state of the art was "disposible electronics: -
on the shelf this year, but gone forever in a few.

So it seems that Grant is right - there is no real guarantee that if
Wiard 300 goes SO that the SMD components needed will be available in
a few years.


gary



"Grant Richter" <grichter@...> wrote:
>
> What is truely shocking is that SO (small outline) SMD devices are
going EOL (end of life) in 
> as short as two years. SMD seem like it will have the same problem
as early eight bit 
> digital. The rate of change is very highly accelerated. 2708 EPROMs
are still available, but 
> you need an old programmer to recognize them.
> 
> It is beginning to look like the safest design strategy is to us a
mix of thru hole and SMD. 
> It appears DIP packs are sticking around longer than some SO chips
which are already 
> obsoleted.
> 
> Lead bearing technology is a know factor, while lead reduced
technology is still a big 
> question mark. And once again, car and motorcycles batteries and
stained glasses 
> windows in churches represent thousands of time more evironmental
lead contribution 
> that Wiard could possibly make in it's entire existance.
> 
> 
> --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Chang" <gchang@> wrote:
> >
> > I would like to add to Doc's eloquent incites that many devices, such
> > as the Sequentix P3 sequencer, (which has been a rather large success
> > in the thru-hole era), could not be converted to the newer technology
> > in a way that was econimically realistic for its market place - and,
> > because of the EU's ban on such leaded devices being manufactured, has
> > now ended production.
> > 
> > At the very least, conversion of the 300 series to SMD would be very
> > costly - period.  Grant has already employed this technology on his
> > more recent devices (1200 series) - I suspect that he will continue to
> > do this in the future.
> > 
> > As for the "archival" 300 Series Modules that exist, I think that it
> > would be safe to assume that even at twice the price for components, a
> > 300 Series module is still more affordable to build today in its
> > existing design than turning it into a "TBD" module, pending the
> > costly and uncertain conversion to SMD, which would turn this cash cow
> > into a cash drain....
> > 
> > that''s just my opinion - I could be wrong.
> > 
> > 
> > gary
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > "drmabuce" <drmabuce@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all
> > > 
> > > --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "tom_tav" <tom_tav@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately if you want to service an instrument somedays
you will
> > > sooner or later having 
> > > > problems to get something else then smd parts....
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > this is true, but the decision for a technological cottage
industry is
> > > anything but clear right now...
> > > 
> > > a few questions about surface-mount technology are stacking up in my
> > > mailbox so here's my take:
> > > 
> > > background:
> > > SMD,SMT,SOIC are all jargon for pretty-much the same thing:
> > > itty bitty parts that you can move with a sneeze and don't have any
> > > nice bendy wires stickin' out of 'em.
> > > the wiki on this subject is pretty good  
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-mount_technology
> > > These things are made for the convenience of robots and not for
human
> > > fingers.
> > > 
> > > More germane to this forum is the issue of reparability. It's true
> > > that the older DIP devices will suffer from a scarcity of
replacement
> > > parts. But this evolutionary precipice in hardware is a bit
unique in
> > > that the components are virtually identical electrically but
they are
> > > physically much smaller.  In this way this is not like the migration
> > > from tubes to discrete transistors. The scale of physical
> > > miniaturization was comparable but  power environments moved
from high
> > > voltage unipolar to lower voltage bipolar and the active components
> > > had VERY different electrical properties. 
> > > SMD is optimized for mass production by automated processes.
Component
> > > level repairs are not part of the plan. The intention is to
reduce the
> > > cost of the circuitboard to the point that replacement is
cheaper than
> > > repair. This works pretty well for cell phones produced in
production
> > > runs of 50,000 units but those scales do not favor small run
esoteric
> > > devices. Small run SMD boards don't run cheap enough to garner the
> > > advantage of being disposable and replaceable.
> > > Component-level repairs to SMD are possible but significantly more
> > > difficult and time consuming .  i'd contend that the profile of
> > > increased risk and difficulty of SMD repair is different but
> > > equivalent to the tradeoffs inherent in through-hole (DIP) (ie.
easier
> > > repairs but scarcer parts). In a pinch I think it is easier to
adapt a
> > > smaller SMD chip to a through-hole application than the reverse.
> > > 
> > > The wiard designs (what's on the schematic) are very durable but
 the
> > > technology available to realize these 'songs in solder' is in a real
> > > state of flux right now.*** The consequences of the choices that
face
> > > Prof. Richter (and his colleagues) at this juncture are VERY
serious,

> > > and there is no path that offers a CLEAR advantage right now.
> > > 
> > > aleatoric music is way more fun than aleatoric livelihoods.
> > > 
> > > -doc
> > > 
> > > PS
> > > apologies to the group for all the button-thrashing empty posts this
> > > morning
> > > 
> > > ***
> > > even  -i- don't KNOW if that pun was intended or not
> > >
> >
>

> as short as two years. SMD seem like it will have the same problem as early eight bit 
> digital. The rate of change is very highly accelerated. 2708 EPROMs are still available, 
but 
> you need an old programmer to recognize them.
> 

Somebody asked what a 2708 is. The 2708 Eprom was a 1K x 8 bit device used to store 
the operating system of some very early digital musical instruments.

Someone once told me the Buchla 400 has 16 of them in it. Don't know if that is actually 
true. But it is a real problem for keeping those instruments alive. You need to pull all of 
them, read the binary files and store the files. Then have backups of the chips to program 
in case some go bad.

Musical instruments are about the only case where the concept of "archival" applies to 
electronics. There are 300 year old harpsichords still in use. Some very old pipe organs. It 
is not unreasonable to hope some of the instruments from this century can be kept alive 
and playing for a long time also. Wiard modules are painstakingly designed to last as long 
as possible.

Electrolytic capacitors have around a 20 to 25 year lifespan. The only module that has 
them in the signal path is the Borg filters. There was no way around it. Everything else is 
DC coupled and there is no component in the signal path with a known limited lifespan. I 
expect them to function for a century at least. I know that is not important to most users, 
but it is all part of designing for everyday reliability.

Waveform City #3 just came back for service and all it needed was new pots and one new 
jack (switch contact failed). It was still in calibration after 8 years in the field. Gotta love 
that solid state technology (and those quality trim pots).

I have rackmount frames again. They cost enough to make a grown man cry and took 12 
weeks to get. But they are essential to some customers. I only sell them with new module 
sales. They are too expensive and hard to get to support people buying second hand 
modules.

I am sorry about that. I don't penalize customers who purchase second hand modules, but 
in this specific instance, there is nothing I can do.


--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Verschoor" <modular@...> wrote:
>
> Oow i got another great requuest.
> Get the rackmount back to!
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Dennis
> 
> On 3/12/07, waveform100 <googol@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Wow! Very good news! I always thought that the Wiard 300 form-factor
> > is the best and most ergonomic. I have both 1200 and 300 and some
> > others, but on the Wiard 300 System I am much faster than an all others.
> >
> > My suggestion for a new Module: something like serge multipliers with
> > some Wiard magic.....
> >
> > Olivier
> >
> > --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com <wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com>, "Grant
> > Richter" <grichter@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm have put the 300 series back in full production.
> > >
> > > The 1200 series is still available until I use up the existing
> > parts. I plan to port the 1200
> > > series design into 300 series packaging eventually. The Joystick and
> > JAG will stay just as
> > > they are. It would make no sense to have those in 300 series cases.
> > >
> > > The 300 series was never completely out of production, but I had
> > switched my main
> > > efforts to the Frac-Rac format. I now think that was a mistake. I
> > didn't want to go head to
> > > head with Don over the 200e, but now the Buchla product is mature
> > enough that I feel OK
> > > placing my emphasis on the 300 series again. I wanted Don to succeed
> > with the 200e.
> > > Musical instruments is a field where if one company "defeats"
> > another company, the whole
> > > culture loses out.
> > >
> > > John Simonton intended the Frac-Rac format to be economical. John
> > Blacet has done a
> > > absolutely brilliant job of executing designs in that format. But
> > the Frac-Rac doesn't have
> > > the inherent infrastructure for the highest grade professional
> > instruments. That is not to
> > > take away from the great modules already designed, or question the
> > quality of theose
> > > instruments. A Blacet instrument is a superb economical instrument.
> > >
> > > In my opinion the Frac-Rac aluminum is too light weight and the lack
> > of fully shielded
> > > enclosures keeps them from achieving extremely low electrical noise.
> > Because of that, I
> > > don't feel Frac-Rac modules should cost over $300 tops. That price
> > point places a limit on
> > > the complexity of designs. To summerize, I like the Frac-Rac format
> > a lot, and I admire the
> > > instruments already in that format. But it has become a limitation
> > for new Wiard designs.
> > >
> > > I am hoping for some customer feedback. The goal of the 300 series
> > is to have 12 unique
> > > module designs, there are currently 8. These 8 modules already do
> > almost every kind of
> > > synthesis known to mankind, so designing 4 new modules is no easy
> > task. The Envelooper
> > > is one new design for certain.
> > >
> > > What additional features would you like to see in the 300 series?
> > Feel free to speculate,
> > > there are no stupid ideas. (Well, adding a Moog style transistor
> > ladder filter is a stupid
> > > idea, the Boogie filter already blows that thin sounding design away).
> > >
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
> - Soon gear pictures at: http://atari.1040.st
> -
>           -
> - Music at:
> http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?
fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=103352029
> -
> -
> 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
>

There have been problems in the past with speculators buying these instruments for resale 
at a later date. Since my goal is to get them in to the hands of working musicians and not 
instrument speculators, I now handle all 300 series sales by telephone only.

Yoou can call me at 414-769-0791 and I will be happy ot discuss it.

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, John <inform3r@...> wrote:
>
>     This is great news about the faceplates and Woggle PCB¹s but what I¹m
> getting at (and what I think the other 99% of the list wants to know) is
> when will the availability and price be posted?
>     A previous post said ³Back in Full Production² so I assume the above
> info is somewhere?
> 
>     Regards,
>     John
> 
> 
> On 3/21/07 10:44 PM, "Grant Richter" <grichter@...> wrote:
> 
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > 
> > The faceplates are being silkscreened now.
> > 
> > Just got Woggle Bug PCBs, rest of PCBs still on order.
> > 
> > Waiting for Perkins-Elmer Vactrols.
> > 
> > Everythings moving along, but this is thru-hole technology. Harder to get than
> > surface 
> > mount parts. Longer lead times and more expensive than ever before. Most
> > component 
> > prices have doubled since 2002.
> > 
> > in 2002 aluminum was $1.00 a pound, today it is $2.50 a pound.
> > 
> > The size of the American deficit makes the dollar weaker in a global
> > marketplace.
> > 
> > That is a statement of economic fact, no political content intended.
> > 
> > --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com> , 
John
> > <inform3r@> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >     It¹s been a while since the announcement. When are we going to hear
> >> > what¹s happening with the 300 series? Did I miss something?
> >> > 
> >> >     Regards,
> >> >     John
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > On 3/21/07 1:39 PM, "loopcycle" <loopcycle@> wrote:
> >> > 
> >>> > >  
> >>> > >  
> >>> > >  
> >>> > > 
> >>> > > i would like to see continued development in the 1200 series.
> >>> > > i was really looking forward to a new oscillator!
> >>> > > i would be very excited to see new developments, whatever form they
> >>> > > take, fiberglass or otherwise.
> >>> > > i know i am not speaking only for myself here.
> >>> > > 
> >>> > > hans
> >>> > > 
> >>> > > --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com <mailto:wiardgroup%
40yahoogroups.com>

> >>> <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> >>> > > "Grant Richter" <grichter@> wrote:
> >>>>> > >> >
> >>>>>>> > >>> > > but, would this work for 300?  isn't one of the points of the
> 300 to
> >>>>>>> > >>> > > be fully shielded?
> >>>>> > >> > 
> >>>>> > >> > The 300 series will stay exactly as it is. I was refering to
> >>> > > fiberglass panels only for
> >>>>> > >> > inexpensive systems like Frac-Rac or Euro-Rack.
> >>>>> > >> >
> >>> > > 
> >>> > >  
> >>> > >
> >> >
> > 
> >  
> >
>

With all due respect to Grant's concerns about instrument speculators,  
I sold my 300 with great pain (along with an Arp 2600, .Com, and a wall 
of Doepfer) to cover the cost of a my Buchla 200e.  I would really not 
like to be characterized as having exploited Wiard or Grant.

> As I remember, mr. Ritenburg's set was the first "standard", i.e., 
> not the Black one, system produced. That instrument had use value and 
> great intrinsic value ($11K).

Wiard in located in the central time zone of the US (on the 88th meridian). Same time zone 
as Chicago.

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, Mark Griffiths <mark@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Grant, for non US people can you tell us what time zone you are in (maybe the 
principal city of that time zone) so I can call you during the day? regards, Mark
> 
> Grant Richter <grichter@...> wrote:          There have been problems in the past with 
speculators buying these instruments for resale 
> at a later date. Since my goal is to get them in to the hands of working musicians and 
not 

> instrument speculators, I now handle all 300 series sales by telephone only.
> 
> Yoou can call me at 414-769-0791 and I will be happy ot discuss it.
> 
> --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, John <inform3r@> wrote:
> >
> > This is great news about the faceplates and Woggle PCB¹s but what I¹m
> > getting at (and what I think the other 99% of the list wants to know) is
> > when will the availability and price be posted?
> > A previous post said ³Back in Full Production² so I assume the above
> > info is somewhere?
> > 
> > Regards,
> > John
> > 
> > 
> > On 3/21/07 10:44 PM, "Grant Richter" <grichter@> wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > The faceplates are being silkscreened now.
> > > 
> > > Just got Woggle Bug PCBs, rest of PCBs still on order.
> > > 
> > > Waiting for Perkins-Elmer Vactrols.
> > > 
> > > Everythings moving along, but this is thru-hole technology. Harder to get than
> > > surface 
> > > mount parts. Longer lead times and more expensive than ever before. Most
> > > component 
> > > prices have doubled since 2002.
> > > 
> > > in 2002 aluminum was $1.00 a pound, today it is $2.50 a pound.
> > > 
> > > The size of the American deficit makes the dollar weaker in a global
> > > marketplace.
> > > 
> > > That is a statement of economic fact, no political content intended.
> > > 
> > > --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com> , 
> John
> > > <inform3r@> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > It¹s been a while since the announcement. When are we going to hear
> > >> > what¹s happening with the 300 series? Did I miss something?
> > >> > 
> > >> > Regards,
> > >> > John
> > >> > 
> > >> > 
> > >> > On 3/21/07 1:39 PM, "loopcycle" <loopcycle@> wrote:
> > >> > 
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > > i would like to see continued development in the 1200 series.
> > >>> > > i was really looking forward to a new oscillator!
> > >>> > > i would be very excited to see new developments, whatever form they
> > >>> > > take, fiberglass or otherwise.
> > >>> > > i know i am not speaking only for myself here.
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > > hans
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > > --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com <mailto:wiardgroup%
> 40yahoogroups.com>
> > >>> <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> > >>> > > "Grant Richter" <grichter@> wrote:
> > >>>>> > >> >
> > >>>>>>> > >>> > > but, would this work for 300? isn't one of the points of the
> > 300 to
> > >>>>>>> > >>> > > be fully shielded?
> > >>>>> > >> > 
> > >>>>> > >> > The 300 series will stay exactly as it is. I was refering to
> > >>> > > fiberglass panels only for
> > >>>>> > >> > inexpensive systems like Frac-Rac or Euro-Rack.
> > >>>>> > >> >
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > >
> > >> >
> > > 
> > > 
> > >
> >
>

>        Did this exploitation of your product occur during the 300 series production or 
after the modules were discontinued? I understand wait times and all but how could there 
have been a premium while the units were still available retail?

There were two people buying modules at $479 and immediately reselling them on eBay 
for $750. Currently modules trade on eBay for $1100 each.

>        Anytime a product is made that is unique and exists in very small quantities, 
discontinuation will lead to price spikes. As I remember, Mr. Rittenburg's set was the first 
"standard", i.e., not the Black one, system produced. That instrument had use value and 
great intrinsic value ($11K).

Wiard has never discontinued ANY product, unless a part became impossible to get like 
the original Joystick controller (the Bakelite meters stopped being made). There is only 
main production and special order status. I have continued to produce 300 series modules 
for the last 5 years.

>        The previous sale I can remember was Ryan from AH @ $4600 - and that was not 
that long before the other, after the line was discontinued. Just pointing out the numbers I 
know.

Once again, the line was never discontinued. That was disinformation spread by guess 
who? I was not taking system orders when I only had parts left for 4 of the module types, 
but they were never discontinued entirely.

>        I am interested in comments re: the said exploitation. Inflation is a killer and prices 
go up, but I would hope Grant, that an overfocus on this would be a pointless distraction. 
If you intend to keep the units in production the preceeding issue becomes mute.

This is the last historical opportunity to purchase the parts to make 300 series modules. 
So I decided to take a chance and buy parts for 200 more modules. I hope I do not regret 
it.

> I still do not see anyone providing info that proves the escalation happened before 
production ceased. Anyone? Remember the Fenix?

Production never ceased. "Call" means "Call on the telephone". I think people are confused by 
the fact that I don't shill Wiard like everybody else shills their whatever. It is simple, only 
intelligent people buy modulars. If you are intelligent enough to buy a modular, you are 
intelligent enough to make a purchase decision without my influence.

Synthesizers are musical instruments, each brand is as unique as a violin or trumpet. Would 
you trust someone who tries to talk you into buying a trumpet when you go shopping for a 
violin?

If you did not hear Wiard news from me personally, do not believe it. Specially from AH. Other 
manufacturers and their fanatics spread rumors and disinformation in the hopes of 
influencing your purchase decision. Don't be fooled, thay are trying to sell you a trumpet, 
when you wanted a violin.

Grant Richter wrote:
> The faceplates are being silkscreened now.
> Just got Woggle Bug PCBs, rest of PCBs still on order.
> Waiting for Perkins-Elmer Vactrols.

Hi Grant,

Following up on our conversation of a few weeks ago, and this note from
you on the 22nd, should I expect a shipping notice for the Sequantizers
this week?

Can you tell me the full depth of the rack mount chassis for the 300
series?  I am mocking up plans for a wood a cabinet to house things and
have room for growth, but I'm not sure how much depth I need to hold a row
of 300 series plus PS500 power supply...I am guessing it's about a foot
front to back?  Does the PS500 hang off the back of the rack chassis in
some way, or do I need to make other accomodations for PS mounting? 
Thanks for any info.

Finally, have you made any decisions regarding the new modules?  As we
discussed, I'm in for an envelooper regardless of the format, 300 series
or 19" rack.  Hell, I'm probably good for one of whatever you design.

regards,
Paul

On Apr 3, 2007, at 5:19 PM, Les Mizzell wrote:

>> Don't be fooled, they are trying to
>> sell you a trumpet, when you wanted a violin.
>
> Is this why I have trouble getting rosin off my lips?


that, or you're in love with a pine tree...

> Don't be fooled, they are trying to 
> sell you a trumpet, when you wanted a violin.

Is this why I have trouble getting rosin off my lips?

Possibly a typo, those are bowing marks, not "blowing" marks...

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, Bryan Carrigan <bryancarrigan@...> wrote:

>
> 
> On Apr 3, 2007, at 5:19 PM, Les Mizzell wrote:
> 
> >> Don't be fooled, they are trying to
> >> sell you a trumpet, when you wanted a violin.
> >
> > Is this why I have trouble getting rosin off my lips?
> 
> 
> that, or you're in love with a pine tree...
>

Hello Grant and Wiard Folks:

Did this exploitation of your product occur during the 300 series production or after the modules were discontinued? I understand wait times and all but how could there have been a premium while the units were still available retail?
Anytime a product is made that is unique and exists in very small quantities, discontinuation will lead to price spikes. As I remember, Mr. Rittenburg's set was the first "standard", i.e., not the Black one, system produced. That instrument had use value and great intrinsic value ($11K).
The previous sale I can remember was Ryan from AH @ $4600 - and that was not that long before the other, after the line was discontinued. Just pointing out the numbers I know.
I am interested in comments re: the said exploitation. Inflation is a killer and prices go up, but I would hope Grant, that an overfocus on this would be a pointless distraction. If you intend to keep the units in production the preceeding issue becomes mute.

Good Luck and Best Wishes -

Bill (If I only owned a 300)

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

Hi Paul,

> Following up on our conversation of a few weeks ago, and this note from
> you on the 22nd, should I expect a shipping notice for the Sequantizers
> this week?

Ouch! Yes, you got me. I really try to be good to my word, but sometimes I slip up. The 
Sequentizers have been done since late November of 2006, I was delaying shipment 
because I was hoping to ship with finished faceplates and not have to swap them out in 
the future. I NEVER expected this faceplate business to drag on as long as it has. It is quite 
embarrassing. I spoke to the silkscreener today and he says he expects I can pick them up 
next week. It is my fault actually, I told he quality was more important than speed.

I will get everything I have finished out tomorrow.

I haven't inspected all 200 faceplates, but the ones I did inspect have very close color 
matching and also match the frames well. I worked with the vendor and I hope we have 
improved the color variance.

> Can you tell me the full depth of the rack mount chassis for the 300
> series?  I am mocking up plans for a wood a cabinet to house things and
> have room for growth, but I'm not sure how much depth I need to hold a row
> of 300 series plus PS500 power supply...I am guessing it's about a foot
> front to back?  Does the PS500 hang off the back of the rack chassis in
> some way, or do I need to make other accomodations for PS mounting? 
> Thanks for any info.

The modules are 9.5 inches deep (excluding knobs). The power connectors need another 2 
inches, case depth should be 12 inches. Unless you experience a hum problem, the power 
supply can mount in the open area behind the patch bays, underneath the PCB enclosures. 
John Blacet used a toroidal transformer for the PS500 supplies, this should minimize any 
radiated magnetic fields.

> Finally, have you made any decisions regarding the new modules?  As we
> discussed, I'm in for an envelooper regardless of the format, 300 series
> or 19" rack.  Hell, I'm probably good for one of whatever you design.

I didn't get any feedback on the Envelooper idea, so I just dropped it. All I can do is try out 
ideas and see if anyone is interested. If no one is, there is no sense pursuing it. That is 
why I have 30 different prototype designs down my basement, but only 13 in production.

Would y'all mind not pissing off the manufacturer until AFTER I get my
system?  Thanks!                                     

The primary difference between now and 4 or 6 months ago is that 4 months
ago Grant *had none of the parts in stock* for many of the modules.  No
Envelator boards or components, for example, very few faceplates of any
kind, no racks, no partner/process for silkscreening...if you ordered a
Wogglebug 4 months ago, it would have been a one-off order and you would
have paid and waited for the individual manufacture of each part.  As
Grant's recent messages have indicated, he has now established all of the
partner relationships necessary for production, and more importantly, he's
*already invested* in stock for 200 more modules.  

Grant's entitled to his own business practices.  If you want a one-man
modular company to be run according to your tastes, then start one.

regards,
Paul


John wrote:

>     Bill I think you?re right. From what Grant just posted I don?t see a
> difference in the availability of the 300 series 6 months ago as compared to
> it being ?back in full production? today. I guess I?m kind of disappointed.
> I don?t know why Grant would fly a flag saying that the 300 is back in full
> swing but then hide all the price + availability info. Isn?t that how the
> 300 has been for the last few years? I was told 4 months ago that if I
> wanted a Wogglebug I should call. That was when the 300 was ?discontinued?.
> He says the same thing now. IMO the 300 is not back in production. No
> disrespect to Grant or Wiard. I support both. Just call it what it is.
> BTW, by announcing ?full production? and then having to call to receive a
> price(which is probably a high one at that) only FUELS speculators and
> definitely keeps the modules out of the hands of people that could really
> enjoy/use them.
> 
>     Regards,
>     John
> 
> 
> On 4/3/07 10:07 AM, "Eyesaw" <eyesaw@ptd.net> wrote:
> 
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > 
> > Hello Grant and Wiard Folks:
> >  
> >        Did this exploitation of your product occur during the 300 series
> > production or after the modules were discontinued? I understand wait times and
> > all but how could there have been a premium while the units were still
> > available retail?
> >        Anytime a product is made that is unique and exists in very small
> > quantities, discontinuation will lead to price spikes. As I remember, Mr.
> > Rittenburg's set was the first "standard", i.e., not the Black one, system
> > produced. That instrument had use value and great intrinsic value ($11K).
> >        The previous sale I can remember was Ryan from AH @ $4600 - and that
> > was not that long before the other, after the line was discontinued. Just
> > pointing out the numbers I know.
> >        I am interested in comments re: the said exploitation. Inflation is a
> > killer and prices go up, but I would hope Grant, that an overfocus on this
> > would be a pointless distraction. If you intend to keep the units in
> > production the preceeding issue becomes mute.
> >  
> > Good Luck and Best Wishes -
> >  
> > Bill  (If I only owned a 300)
> >  
> >>  
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >>  
> >> From:  Grant  Richter <mailto:grichter@asapnet.net>
> >>  
> >> To: wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com
> >>  
> >> Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 11:33  PM
> >>  
> >> Subject: [wiardgroup] Re: 300 series...  What's Going On?
> >>  
> >> 
> >>  
> >>  
> >> 
> >> There have been problems in the past with speculators buying these
> >> instruments for resale
> >> at a later date. Since my goal is to get them in to  the hands of working
> >> musicians and not
> >> instrument speculators, I now  handle all 300 series sales by telephone only.
> >> 
> >> Yoou can call me at  414-769-0791 and I will be happy ot discuss it.
> >> 
> >> --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> >> John <inform3r@...> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > This is great news about  the faceplates and Woggle PCB?s but what I?m
> >>> > getting at (and what I  think the other 99% of the list wants to know) is
> >>> > when will the  availability and price be posted?
> >>> > A previous post said ?Back in Full  Production? so I assume the above
> >>> > info is somewhere?
> >>> > 
> >>> >  Regards,
> >>> > John
> >>> > 
> >>> > 
> >>> > On 3/21/07 10:44 PM, "Grant  Richter" <grichter@...> wrote:
> >>> > 
> >>>> > > 
> >>>> > >  
> >>>> > > 
> >>>> > > 
> >>>> > > The faceplates are being  silkscreened now.
> >>>> > > 
> >>>> > > Just got Woggle Bug PCBs, rest of  PCBs still on order.
> >>>> > > 
> >>>> > > Waiting for Perkins-Elmer  Vactrols.
> >>>> > > 
> >>>> > > Everythings moving along, but this is  thru-hole technology. Harder to
> >>>> get than
> >>>> > > surface 
> >>>> > >  mount parts. Longer lead times and more expensive than ever before.
> >>>> Most
> >>>> > > component 
> >>>> > > prices have doubled since  2002.
> >>>> > > 
> >>>> > > in 2002 aluminum was $1.00 a pound, today it  is $2.50 a pound.
> >>>> > > 
> >>>> > > The size of the American deficit  makes the dollar weaker in a global
> >>>> > > marketplace.
> >>>> > >  
> >>>> > > That is a statement of economic fact, no political content  intended.
> >>>> > > 
> >>>> > > --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com>
> >>>> <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> >> John
> >>>> > >  <inform3r@> wrote:
> >>>>>> > >> >
> >>>>>> > >> > It?s been  a while since the announcement. When are we going to
> hear
> >>>>>> > >>  > what?s happening with the 300 series? Did I miss something?
> >>>>>> >  >> > 
> >>>>>> > >> > Regards,
> >>>>>> > >> >  John
> >>>>>> > >> > 
> >>>>>> > >> > 
> >>>>>> > >> > On  3/21/07 1:39 PM, "loopcycle" <loopcycle@> wrote:
> >>>>>> > >> >  
> >>>>>>>> > >>> > > 
> >>>>>>>> > >>> > > 
> >>>>>>>> >  >>> > >
> >>>>>>>> > >>> > > 
> >>>>>>>> > >>>  > > i would like to see continued development in the 1200
> series.
> >>>>>>>> > >>> > > i was really looking forward to a new  oscillator!
> >>>>>>>> > >>> > > i would be very excited to see new  developments, whatever
> form they
> >>>>>>>> > >>> > > take,  fiberglass or otherwise.
> >>>>>>>> > >>> > > i know i am not  speaking only for myself here.
> >>>>>>>> > >>> > > 
> >>>>>>>> >  >>> > > hans
> >>>>>>>> > >>> > > 
> >>>>>>>> >  >>> > > --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com
> >>>>>>>> <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com>   <mailto:wiardgroup%
> >> 40yahoogroups.com>
> >>>>>> > >>>  <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> >>>>>>>> > >>>  > > "Grant Richter" <grichter@> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> >  >>>>> > >> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>  > >>> > > but, would this work for 300? isn't one of
> the  points of the
> >>> > 300 to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >  >>> > > be fully shielded?
> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> >  >> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > The 300 series  will stay exactly as it is. I was
> refering to
> >>>>>>>> > >>> > >  fiberglass panels only for
> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> >  inexpensive systems like Frac-Rac or Euro-Rack.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>  > >> >
> >>>>>>>> > >>> > > 
> >>>>>>>> > >>> >  >
> >>>>>>>> > >>> > >
> >>>>>> > >> >
> >>>> > >  
> >>>> > > 
> >>>> > >
> >>> >
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >>   
> >> 
> >>  avast!  Antivirus <http://www.avast.com> : Inbound message clean.  Virus
> >> Database (VPS): 000730-1,  04/02/2007
> >> Tested on: 4/3/2007 7:06:04 AM
> >> avast! -  copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > avast! Antivirus <http://www.avast.com> : Outbound message clean. Virus
> > Database (VPS): 000730-1, 04/02/2007
> > Tested on: 4/3/2007 9:07:15 AM
> > avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.
> >  
> >     
> 
>

Hi Paul,

Thank you for coming to my defense.

People mean well, but they have no idea how things actually get done.

It is easy to assume that making anything is like making anything else.

But this is a wrong idea.

The size of the marketplace determines everything because vendors
have minimum orders.

The modular marketplace remains as tiny as it has ever been,
and my options are extremely limited.

I will continue to do the best I can, and hope that people mature enough to realize
that being adversarial is in no ones best interest.

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, plord@... wrote:
>
>                                                    
> Would y'all mind not pissing off the manufacturer until AFTER I get my
> system?  Thanks!                                     
> 
> The primary difference between now and 4 or 6 months ago is that 4 months
> ago Grant *had none of the parts in stock* for many of the modules.  No
> Envelator boards or components, for example, very few faceplates of any
> kind, no racks, no partner/process for silkscreening...if you ordered a
> Wogglebug 4 months ago, it would have been a one-off order and you would
> have paid and waited for the individual manufacture of each part.  As
> Grant's recent messages have indicated, he has now established all of the
> partner relationships necessary for production, and more importantly, he's
> *already invested* in stock for 200 more modules.  
> 
> Grant's entitled to his own business practices.  If you want a one-man
> modular company to be run according to your tastes, then start one.
> 
> regards,
> Paul
> 
> 
> John wrote:
> >     Bill I think you?re right. From what Grant just posted I don?t see a
> > difference in the availability of the 300 series 6 months ago as compared to
> > it being ?back in full production? today. I guess I?m kind of disappointed.
> > I don?t know why Grant would fly a flag saying that the 300 is back in full
> > swing but then hide all the price + availability info. Isn?t that how the
> > 300 has been for the last few years? I was told 4 months ago that if I
> > wanted a Wogglebug I should call. That was when the 300 was ?discontinued?.
> > He says the same thing now. IMO the 300 is not back in production. No
> > disrespect to Grant or Wiard. I support both. Just call it what it is.
> > BTW, by announcing ?full production? and then having to call to receive a
> > price(which is probably a high one at that) only FUELS speculators and
> > definitely keeps the modules out of the hands of people that could really
> > enjoy/use them.
> > 
> >     Regards,
> >     John
> > 
> > 
> > On 4/3/07 10:07 AM, "Eyesaw" <eyesaw@...> wrote:
> > 
> > >  
> > >  
> > >  
> > > 
> > > Hello Grant and Wiard Folks:
> > >  
> > >        Did this exploitation of your product occur during the 300 series
> > > production or after the modules were discontinued? I understand wait times and
> > > all but how could there have been a premium while the units were still
> > > available retail?
> > >        Anytime a product is made that is unique and exists in very small
> > > quantities, discontinuation will lead to price spikes. As I remember, Mr.
> > > Rittenburg's set was the first "standard", i.e., not the Black one, system
> > > produced. That instrument had use value and great intrinsic value ($11K).
> > >        The previous sale I can remember was Ryan from AH @ $4600 - and that
> > > was not that long before the other, after the line was discontinued. Just
> > > pointing out the numbers I know.
> > >        I am interested in comments re: the said exploitation. Inflation is a
> > > killer and prices go up, but I would hope Grant, that an overfocus on this
> > > would be a pointless distraction. If you intend to keep the units in
> > > production the preceeding issue becomes mute.
> > >  
> > > Good Luck and Best Wishes -
> > >  
> > > Bill  (If I only owned a 300)
> > >  
> > >>  
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >>  
> > >> From:  Grant  Richter <mailto:grichter@...>
> > >>  
> > >> To: wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com
> > >>  
> > >> Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 11:33  PM
> > >>  
> > >> Subject: [wiardgroup] Re: 300 series...  What's Going On?
> > >>  
> > >> 
> > >>  
> > >>  
> > >> 
> > >> There have been problems in the past with speculators buying these
> > >> instruments for resale
> > >> at a later date. Since my goal is to get them in to  the hands of working
> > >> musicians and not
> > >> instrument speculators, I now  handle all 300 series sales by telephone only.
> > >> 
> > >> Yoou can call me at  414-769-0791 and I will be happy ot discuss it.
> > >> 
> > >> --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com> 
,
> > >> John <inform3r@> wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > This is great news about  the faceplates and Woggle PCB?s but what I?m
> > >>> > getting at (and what I  think the other 99% of the list wants to know) is
> > >>> > when will the  availability and price be posted?
> > >>> > A previous post said ?Back in Full  Production? so I assume the above
> > >>> > info is somewhere?
> > >>> > 
> > >>> >  Regards,
> > >>> > John
> > >>> > 
> > >>> > 
> > >>> > On 3/21/07 10:44 PM, "Grant  Richter" <grichter@> wrote:
> > >>> > 
> > >>>> > > 
> > >>>> > >  
> > >>>> > > 
> > >>>> > > 
> > >>>> > > The faceplates are being  silkscreened now.
> > >>>> > > 
> > >>>> > > Just got Woggle Bug PCBs, rest of  PCBs still on order.
> > >>>> > > 
> > >>>> > > Waiting for Perkins-Elmer  Vactrols.
> > >>>> > > 
> > >>>> > > Everythings moving along, but this is  thru-hole technology. Harder to
> > >>>> get than
> > >>>> > > surface 
> > >>>> > >  mount parts. Longer lead times and more expensive than ever before.
> > >>>> Most
> > >>>> > > component 
> > >>>> > > prices have doubled since  2002.
> > >>>> > > 
> > >>>> > > in 2002 aluminum was $1.00 a pound, today it  is $2.50 a pound.
> > >>>> > > 
> > >>>> > > The size of the American deficit  makes the dollar weaker in a global
> > >>>> > > marketplace.
> > >>>> > >  
> > >>>> > > That is a statement of economic fact, no political content  intended.
> > >>>> > > 
> > >>>> > > --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com <mailto:wiardgroup%
40yahoogroups.com>
> > >>>> <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> > >> John
> > >>>> > >  <inform3r@> wrote:
> > >>>>>> > >> >
> > >>>>>> > >> > It?s been  a while since the announcement. When are we going to
> > hear
> > >>>>>> > >>  > what?s happening with the 300 series? Did I miss something?
> > >>>>>> >  >> > 
> > >>>>>> > >> > Regards,
> > >>>>>> > >> >  John
> > >>>>>> > >> > 
> > >>>>>> > >> > 
> > >>>>>> > >> > On  3/21/07 1:39 PM, "loopcycle" <loopcycle@> wrote:
> > >>>>>> > >> >  
> > >>>>>>>> > >>> > > 
> > >>>>>>>> > >>> > > 
> > >>>>>>>> >  >>> > >
> > >>>>>>>> > >>> > > 
> > >>>>>>>> > >>>  > > i would like to see continued development in the 1200
> > series.
> > >>>>>>>> > >>> > > i was really looking forward to a new  oscillator!
> > >>>>>>>> > >>> > > i would be very excited to see new  developments, whatever
> > form they
> > >>>>>>>> > >>> > > take,  fiberglass or otherwise.
> > >>>>>>>> > >>> > > i know i am not  speaking only for myself here.
> > >>>>>>>> > >>> > > 
> > >>>>>>>> >  >>> > > hans
> > >>>>>>>> > >>> > > 
> > >>>>>>>> >  >>> > > --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com
> > >>>>>>>> <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com>   <mailto:wiardgroup%
> > >> 40yahoogroups.com>
> > >>>>>> > >>>  <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> > >>>>>>>> > >>>  > > "Grant Richter" <grichter@> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> >  >>>>> > >> >
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>  > >>> > > but, would this work for 300? isn't 
one of
> > the  points of the
> > >>> > 300 to
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >  >>> > > be fully shielded?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> >  >> >
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > The 300 series  will stay exactly as it is. I was
> > refering to
> > >>>>>>>> > >>> > >  fiberglass panels only for
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> >  inexpensive systems like Frac-Rac or Euro-
Rack.

> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>  > >> >
> > >>>>>>>> > >>> > > 
> > >>>>>>>> > >>> >  >
> > >>>>>>>> > >>> > >
> > >>>>>> > >> >
> > >>>> > >  
> > >>>> > > 
> > >>>> > >
> > >>> >
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >>   
> > >> 
> > >>  avast!  Antivirus <http://www.avast.com> : Inbound message clean.  Virus
> > >> Database (VPS): 000730-1,  04/02/2007
> > >> Tested on: 4/3/2007 7:06:04 AM
> > >> avast! -  copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > avast! Antivirus <http://www.avast.com> : Outbound message clean. Virus
> > > Database (VPS): 000730-1, 04/02/2007
> > > Tested on: 4/3/2007 9:07:15 AM
> > > avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.
> > >  
> > >     
> > 
> >
>

> I didn't get any feedback on the Envelooper idea, so I just dropped it. All I can do is try 
out 
> ideas and see if anyone is interested. If no one is, there is no sense pursuing it.

I wouldn't say you shouldn't pursue this design, I was a bit worried about some functionnal  
restrictions (real time sustain level adjustment being the only one I can remember right 
now...), but the overall concept makes totally sense !

The frame is it  unscrewable for flat postage?


>
>

Enough of this hangling, gentlemen!

I am not the expert on Grant's whereabouts - he lives in Wisconsin, I
live in California.  I do consider myself to be 'a good friend' of
Grant's, however - this is something that I am very proud to be.  

There is no need to be critical here - I am sure that there are simple
explanations.

Not announcing price or availability simply means that he doesn't know
the information yet.  If he doesn't have all of the parts in stock
yet, then how can he announce price and availabilty?  

As far as exploitation, I think that we can all see that it can be a
bitter pill to swallow when modules that you worked hard to create
sell for 2x the price that you sold them for new, and the new owners
are expecting you to service them (which Grant does, BTW).

Albeit subtle to our eyes, the announcement is not so subtle a change
from Grant's side of the cow.  

Previous to the 'not in production' period, Grant was not in control
of his life and business - constantly chasing delivery deadlines with
little time for design and other things in life.  He suspended 300
Series production at this time to make some important changes.

This period of 'not in production' does not mean that he wasn't
building custom systems for people who offerred him too much money to
pass up.  The 300 Series was always available as a custom made-for-you
system during this period.

What this period enabled Grant to do was to control his activities to
allow him to do more designing, which has resulted in the Noise Ring,
JAG, Boogie, Borg2, Envelooper and Anti-Oscillator, to name a few. 
But there is a need for capital to fund Grant's further design
aspirations.

So Grant has announced that he has brought the 300 Series back into
production - that means that he is spending his own money to stock
parts with the intention of building 10 or so modules per type.

IMHO, I think that his caution about 'predicting' a price or
availability is based on experience, and how mistakes taken at this
point can sour a project months down the road when the cold wind of
reality sets in.  (Sorry about the stupid metphor here).

Like many on this list, I have known Grant for many years - and he has
been both honest and fair when it comes to his business practices and
he has rarely, if ever, come out on the better side of the deal.


gary




  Also being a long time 

John <inform3r@...> wrote:
>
>     You totally missed the premise of my post. I guess it was over your
> head? I¹ve been a Wiard 300 customer since around the year 2000. I
think I
> know what I¹m talking about when it comes to that. I don¹t know what
you¹re
> getting at when you say ³if you are aware of their existence.² If
you have
> nothing to add besides rallying on the popular side of opinion then
go piss
> up a flagpole.
> 
>     -John
> 
> 
> On 4/4/07 6:49 PM, "watson" <companyofquail@...> wrote:
>     quote from john:
> > 
> > No disrespect to Grant or Wiard. I support both. Just call it what
it is.
> > BTW, by announcing "full production" and then having to call to
receive a
> > price(which is probably a high one at that) only FUELS speculators and
> > definitely keeps the modules out of the hands of people that could
really
> > enjoy/use them.
> > 
> > this is possibly one of the most ridiculous things i have read in a
> > while....someone that is going to spend 600-1000 dollars per
module for a
> > synth in the class of a wiard probably isnt going to change his or
her mind
> > about buying one because they have to call about the price.  if
you want a
> > wiard synth you already know the ballpark it is in (if you are
aware of their
> > existence) and you eithe rhave the money to play ball or dont.
> > 
> > just my opinion
> > 
> > On 4/4/07, Grant Richter <grichter@...> wrote:
> >>  
> >>  
> >>  
> >> 
> >> Hi Paul,
> >> 
> >> Thank you for coming to my defense.
> >> 
> >> People mean well, but they have no idea how things actually get done.
> >> 
> >> It is easy to assume that making anything is like making anything
else.
> >> 
> >> But this is a wrong idea.
> >> 
> >> The size of the marketplace determines everything because vendors
> >> have minimum orders.
> >> 
> >> The modular marketplace remains as tiny as it has ever been,
> >> and my options are extremely limited.
> >> 
> >> I will continue to do the best I can, and hope that people mature
enough to
> >> realize
> >> that being adversarial is in no ones best interest.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> >> plord@ wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >              
> >>> > Would y'all mind not pissing off the manufacturer until AFTER
I get my
> >>> > system?  Thanks!
> >>> > 
> >>> > The primary difference between now and 4 or 6 months ago is
that 4 months
> >>> > ago Grant *had none of the parts in stock* for many of the
modules.  No
> >>> > Envelator boards or components, for example, very few
faceplates of any
> >>> > kind, no racks, no partner/process for silkscreening...if you
ordered a
> >>> > Wogglebug 4 months ago, it would have been a one-off order and
you would
> >>> > have paid and waited for the individual manufacture of each
part.  As
> >>> > Grant's recent messages have indicated, he has now established
all of the
> >>> > partner relationships necessary for production, and more
importantly, he's
> >>> > *already invested* in stock for 200 more modules.
> >>> > 
> >>> > Grant's entitled to his own business practices.  If you want a
one-man
> >>> > modular company to be run according to your tastes, then start
one.
> >>> > 
> >>> > regards,
> >>> > Paul
> >>> > 
> >>> > 
> >>> > John wrote:
> >>>> > >     Bill I think you?re right. From what Grant just posted
I don?t see
> a
> >>>> > > difference in the availability of the 300 series 6 months
ago as
> >>>> compared to
> >>>> > > it being ?back in full production? today. I guess I?m kind of
> >>>> disappointed.
> >>>> > > I don?t know why Grant would fly a flag saying that the 300
is back in
> >>>> full
> >>>> > > swing but then hide all the price + availability info.
Isn?t that how
> the
> >>>> > > 300 has been for the last few years? I was told 4 months
ago that if I
> >>>> > > wanted a Wogglebug I should call. That was when the 300 was
> >>>> ?discontinued?.
> >>>> > > He says the same thing now. IMO the 300 is not back in
production. No
> >>>> > > disrespect to Grant or Wiard. I support both. Just call it
what it is.
> >>>> > > BTW, by announcing ?full production? and then having to
call to receive
> a
> >>>> > > price(which is probably a high one at that) only FUELS
speculators and
> >>>> > > definitely keeps the modules out of the hands of people
that could
> >>>> really
> >>>> > > enjoy/use them.
> >>>> > > 
> >>>> > >     Regards,
> >>>> > >     John
> >>>> > > 
> >>>> > > 
> >>>> > > On 4/3/07 10:07 AM, "Eyesaw" <eyesaw@> wrote:
> >>>> > > 
> >>>>> > > >  
> >>>>> > > >  
> >>>>> > > >  
> >>>>> > > > 
> >>>>> > > > Hello Grant and Wiard Folks:
> >>>>> > > >  
> >>>>> > > >        Did this exploitation of your product occur
during the 300
> >>>>> series
> >>>>> > > > production or after the modules were discontinued? I
understand wait
> >>>>> times and
> >>>>> > > > all but how could there have been a premium while the
units were
> still
> >>>>> > > > available retail?
> >>>>> > > >        Anytime a product is made that is unique and
exists in very
> small
> >>>>> > > > quantities, discontinuation will lead to price spikes. As I
> >>>>> remember, Mr.
> >>>>> > > > Rittenburg's set was the first "standard", i.e., not the
Black one,
> >>>>> system
> >>>>> > > > produced. That instrument had use value and great
intrinsic value
> >>>>> ($11K).
> >>>>> > > >        The previous sale I can remember was Ryan from AH
@ $4600 -
> >>>>> and that
> >>>>> > > > was not that long before the other, after the line was
discontinued.
> Just
> >>>>> > > > pointing out the numbers I know.
> >>>>> > > >        I am interested in comments re: the said
exploitation.
> >>>>> Inflation is a
> >>>>> > > > killer and prices go up, but I would hope Grant, that an
overfocus
> >>>>> on this
> >>>>> > > > would be a pointless distraction. If you intend to keep
the units in
> >>>>> > > > production the preceeding issue becomes mute.
> >>>>> > > >  
> >>>>> > > > Good Luck and Best Wishes -
> >>>>> > > >  
> >>>>> > > > Bill  (If I only owned a 300)
> >>>>> > > >  
> >>>>>> > > >>  
> >>>>>> > > >> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>>>> > > >>  
> >>>>>> > > >> From:  Grant  Richter <mailto:grichter@>
> >>>>>> > > >>  
> >>>>>> > > >> To: wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com
> >>>>>> <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com>
> >>>>>> > > >>  
> >>>>>> > > >> Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 11:33  PM
> >>>>>> > > >>  
> >>>>>> > > >> Subject: [wiardgroup] Re: 300 series...  What's Going On?
> >>>>>> > > >>  
> >>>>>> > > >> 
> >>>>>> > > >>  
> >>>>>> > > >>  
> >>>>>> > > >> 
> >>>>>> > > >> There have been problems in the past with speculators
buying these
> >>>>>> > > >> instruments for resale
> >>>>>> > > >> at a later date. Since my goal is to get them in to 
the hands of
> >>>>>> working
> >>>>>> > > >> musicians and not
> >>>>>> > > >> instrument speculators, I now  handle all 300 series
sales by
> >>>>>> telephone only.
> >>>>>> > > >> 
> >>>>>> > > >> Yoou can call me at  414-769-0791 and I will be happy
ot discuss
> it.
> >>>>>> > > >> 
> >>>>>> > > >> --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com
> >>>>>> <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com>  <mailto: wiardgroup%
> >>>>>> <mailto:wiardgroup%25> <mailto: wiardgroup% >  40yahoogroups.com
> >>>>>> <http://40yahoogroups.com> >
> >> ,
> >>>>>> > > >> John <inform3r@> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> > > >>> >
> >>>>>>>> > > >>> > This is great news about  the faceplates and
Woggle PCB?s but
> what I?m
> >>>>>>>> > > >>> > getting at (and what I  think the other 99% of
the list wants
> >>>>>>>> to know) is
> >>>>>>>> > > >>> > when will the  availability and price be posted?
> >>>>>>>> > > >>> > A previous post said ?Back in Full  Production?
so I assume
> the above
> >>>>>>>> > > >>> > info is somewhere?
> >>>>>>>> > > >>> > 
> >>>>>>>> > > >>> >  Regards,
> >>>>>>>> > > >>> > John
> >>>>>>>> > > >>> > 
> >>>>>>>> > > >>> > 
> >>>>>>>> > > >>> > On 3/21/07 10:44 PM, "Grant  Richter" <grichter@>
wrote:
> >>>>>>>> > > >>> > 
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > > The faceplates are being  silkscreened now.
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > > Just got Woggle Bug PCBs, rest of  PCBs
still on order.
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > > Waiting for Perkins-Elmer  Vactrols.
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > > Everythings moving along, but this is  thru-hole
> >>>>>>>>>> technology. Harder to
> >>>>>>>> > > >>>> get than
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > > surface
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > >  mount parts. Longer lead times and more
expensive than
> ever before.
> >>>>>>>> > > >>>> Most
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > > component
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > > prices have doubled since  2002.
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > > in 2002 aluminum was $1.00 a pound, today it
 is $2.50 a
> pound.
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > > The size of the American deficit  makes the
dollar
> >>>>>>>>>> weaker in a global
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > > marketplace.
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > > That is a statement of economic fact, no
political
> >>>>>>>>>> content  intended.
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > > --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com
> >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com>  <mailto: wiardgroup%
> >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:wiardgroup%25> <mailto: wiardgroup% >
> >> 40yahoogroups.com <http://40yahoogroups.com> >
> >>>>>>>> > > >>>> <mailto:wiardgroup% <mailto:wiardgroup%25>
<mailto:wiardgroup%
> >>>>>>>> >  40yahoogroups.com <http://40yahoogroups.com> > ,
> >>>>>> > > >> John
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > >  <inform3r@> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > >> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > >> > It?s been  a while since the
announcement. When
> are we going to
> >>>> > > hear
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > >>  > what?s happening with the 300
series? Did I
> miss something?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>> >  >> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > >> > Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > >> >  John
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > >> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > >> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > >> > On  3/21/07 1:39 PM, "loopcycle"
<loopcycle@>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > >> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> >  >>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>>  > > i would like to see continued
development
> in the 1200
> >>>> > > series.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> > > i was really looking forward to
a new
> oscillator!
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> > > i would be very excited to see new
> developments, whatever
> >>>> > > form they
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> > > take,  fiberglass or otherwise.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> > > i know i am not  speaking only
for myself
> here.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> >  >>> > > hans
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> >  >>> > > --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:wiardgroup%40yahoogroups.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> <mailto:wiardgroup% <mailto:wiardgroup%25>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:wiardgroup% >  40yahoogroups.com
> >>>>>>>>>>>> <http://40yahoogroups.com> >   <mailto:wiardgroup%
> >>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:wiardgroup%25> <mailto:wiardgroup% >
> >>>>>> > > >> 40yahoogroups.com <http://40yahoogroups.com> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > >>>  <mailto:wiardgroup%
<mailto:wiardgroup%25>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:wiardgroup% >  40yahoogroups.com
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://40yahoogroups.com> > ,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>>  > > "Grant Richter" <grichter@> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >  >>>>> > >> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>  > >>> > > but, would this
work for
> 300? isn't 
> >> one of
> >>>> > > the  points of the
> >>>>>>>> > > >>> > 300 to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >  >>> > > be fully shielded?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> >  >> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > The 300 series  will
stay exactly
> as it is. I was
> >>>> > > refering to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> > >  fiberglass panels only for
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> >  inexpensive systems
like Frac-Rac
> or Euro-
> >> Rack.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>  > >> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> >  >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > >> >
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > >
> >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>> > >
> >>>>>>>> > > >>> >
> >>>>>> > > >> 
> >>>>>> > > >> 
> >>>>>> > > >> 
> >>>>>> > > >>   
> >>>>>> > > >> 
> >>>>>> > > >>  avast!  Antivirus <http://www.avast.com> : Inbound
message clean.
> Virus
> >>>>>> > > >> Database (VPS): 000730-1,  04/02/2007
> >>>>>> > > >> Tested on: 4/3/2007 7:06:04 AM
> >>>>>> > > >> avast! -  copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.
> >>>>> > > > 
> >>>>> > > > 
> >>>>> > > > 
> >>>>> > > > avast! Antivirus <http://www.avast.com> : Outbound
message clean.

> Virus
> >>>>> > > > Database (VPS): 000730-1, 04/02/2007
> >>>>> > > > Tested on: 4/3/2007 9:07:15 AM
> >>>>> > > > avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.
> >>>>> > > >  
> >>>>> > > >     
> >>>> > > 
> >>>> > >
> >>> >
> >> 
> >> 
> >>  
> >>     
> > 
> >
>

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter" <grichter@...> 
wrote:

> 
> I didn't get any feedback on the Envelooper idea, so I just dropped 
it. All I can do is try out 
> ideas and see if anyone is interested. If no one is, there is no 
sense pursuing it. That is 
> why I have 30 different prototype designs down my basement, but only 
13 in production.
>

Hmmmm... I was hoping for more onlist discussion before commenting.  I 
was quite fond of the Envelooper idea and it (along with the other 300 
series modules) was added to my list of modular gear to buy.  
Admittedly, it'll take me 2 years to acquire a complete Wiard 
system... so many modular priorities... (Wiard 300 will be my third 
format.)

Now I'm curious about the other 26 ideas...

cheers,
eric f

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Chang" <gchang@...> wrote:
>
> Enough of this hangling, gentlemen!
> 

WHAT!!!!!!????
and give up show biz????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
;'>

Hi all,

i was really interested in where this discussion would go if the old
same 'f.o.g.'s (friends of Grant) stayed out of it for a while. i hope
that , if nothing, else Grant can see that amongst the enormous
diversity of attitudes, personalities, and form-factor religions out
here in Wiardo land, there is broad and deep support for his IDEAS.
This approbation has been expressed very eloquently by quite a few of
you in April's messages. Another thing that i note is that there is a
much clearer comprehension of two phenomena: 

1) the particularly nasty roadblocks that face a cottage electronics
artisan in this tiny niche market 

2) the particularly nasty roadblocks that form between the ears of ANY
visionary designer forced to perform the roles of material procurement
manager, CFO, markerting director, webmaster, adminstrative staff,
chef, and production manager*** , all just in order to have enough
money to eat , much less find enough OTA's to keep the 300's alive.

i'm very peasantly surprised.
i underestimated y'all. i really did not realize how many of you 'get it'.
wow!

That said, i comprehend John's disappointment. His goodwill toward
Wiard is not in dispute in my mind. Though my contact with him is
vicarious, i know by indirect means that he is a generous and erudite
fellow and a careful and skilled engineer himself. He was an early
customer of Wiard long before it had acquired it's 'eBay cachet'.
From my perspective, John's complaints are not only his prerogative as
a customer in a free market but they have real merit in the context of
the current market for synth modules. 
Most of the market for these gadgets is based on a retail commodity
model (see http://www.analoguehaven.com/). -In that context-, Wiard's
policies don't stack up well.  But this is where my position diverges
from John's expressed comments. Regardless of the why's and
wherefores, Grant has chosen to steer his business away from a retail
commodity model to a cost-plus specialty model . In that context
Grants 'call for price' policy is de rigeur and 'back in full
production' is merely a modulation of component stocks and leadtime
estimates. In the climate of expectations and what's considered normal
for the general modular marketplace, these pronouncements from Grant
are indsputably prone to easy misapprehension. 
i can also grasp the disappointment because this is unequivocally a
change from previous policies.  Grant has tried to shoehorn his
business into the retail 'internet vending machine' mold a couple of
times now and the plain truth is that it doesn't work for him. i've
witnessed just how much havoc these attempts have wreaked on Grant's
livelyhood. 

But on the other end of the see-saw from Wiard's inconvenience,
eccentricity, epehemeral policies & communications is the possibility
of a sustainable model that matches the designer to a livelyhood and a
modicum of security. 

Does this mean some tradeoffs that won't sit well with customers who
liked the previous model(s) better?....Damn sure does!

Grant is making this up as he goes along, this is the opposite of the
current conventional wisdom  of a push-button marketplace. I sense
even a bit of deliberate protest in it. At the risk of presumption on
my relationship with him, Grant is fully aware that his policies are
an irritation to a portion of the potential market. But he's tried-on
a series of more conformist personae and they all fit very badly. To
my mind this is consummate (if quixotic) integrity. Grant goes his own
way. He's spurned family, financial security, and to a degree, his own
health in order to chase his singular techno-artistic dream. He did so
advisedly and with full knowledge of the potential sacrifices. Like
SuperChicken, He knew the job was dangerous when he took it! The fact
that he declines to cater to notions and policies extraneous to his
private muse kind of appeals to me, even if it means i have to pay
twice as much for the second Sequantizer as i did for my first. 
The concession he'll have to grant me is that he'll have to wait twice
as long for me to save up the money.... but, in all honesty, i bet
he's fine with that.
After an all-too-short visit to Mabuse Manor, my family coined a phrase...

(best combined with an insouciant Gallic shrug)
'c'est le Grant!'

 shalom!
-doc

*** (i'm sure Grant can tell me what i left out of this list of hats)

> your designs. A few posts back you unceremoniously dropped the
> Envelooper.
> Meanwhile a lot of us here where thinking it was going to be one of
> the next
> modules! And a lot of us (including me) were more than willing to buy
> at
> least one.

i totally agree with that. i did not understand from the
envelooper announcement that feedback about the module is desired.
in the past there was no discussion like that, the modules just
showed up as is, without public discussions about the features,
and that was it. or did i miss something? (very possible)

best wishes

ingo



http://www.dron.de
http://www.selfoscillate.de
http://www.signalform.de


		
___________________________________________________________ 
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de

> i totally agree with that. i did not understand from the
> envelooper announcement that feedback about the module is desired.
> in the past there was no discussion like that, the modules just
> showed up as is, without public discussions about the features,
> and that was it. or did i miss something? (very possible)
> 

I apologize for any confusion my remark has caused.

I have spent hundreds of man hours over the last 3 years researching
new synthesizer technology in advanced controllers and advanced
multidimensional waveshaper and wave terrain oscillators.

Like the other Wiard modules, these ideas are new and unique.
Because they are so new, the exact method of implementing
them is not entirely clear to me yet. But I have far too much invested
already to simply abandon the ideas.

When I mentioned the Envelooper, I was hoping someone would come
forward in the manner of "I think this would work for this application
that I have in mind." People (and myself) still need more time to mull
over the application for such advanced devices.

In regards to a fully integrated synthesizer; Many of the great synth
companies historically began with modulars, and then released fully
integrated instruments. ARP began with the 2500 series and later produced
the Oddysey. Moog began with the 900 series and later produced the
Mini-Moog. Emu began with a modular and later produced integrated
instruments.

Of course, the integrated instruments never have the full capability
of the parent modular. There are always design trade offs. While I would like to
produce an integrated instrument sometime in the future, it will not
be a replacement for the 300 or 1200 series, but will contain a scaled
down version of those unique technologies. First I have to finish developing
those technologies, before I can concern myself with how best to package them.

At his exact moment, my concern is with getting the existing designs so
I can produce them for the next 3 to 5 years. The Envelooper design
project has only been placed on the back burner until I can catch up
with stocking parts and building your orders.

My use of the word "dropped" was unfortunate because it gave the
impression I had abandoned the project. I have not. The Envelooper module
and Walkabout Oscillator are still being researched. I have working prototypes
of both designs, but they need to be improved for manufacture. I also need to
reseach if ideas like downloadable wavetables are fesible.

I apologize again for any confusion.

walkabout oscillator will be a huge hit here in Australia :-)

Grant Richter wrote:

>
> > i totally agree with that. i did not understand from the
> > envelooper announcement that feedback about the module is desired.
> > in the past there was no discussion like that, the modules just
> > showed up as is, without public discussions about the features,
> > and that was it. or did i miss something? (very possible)
> >
>
> I apologize for any confusion my remark has caused.
>
> I have spent hundreds of man hours over the last 3 years researching
> new synthesizer technology in advanced controllers and advanced
> multidimensional waveshaper and wave terrain oscillators.
>
> Like the other Wiard modules, these ideas are new and unique.
> Because they are so new, the exact method of implementing
> them is not entirely clear to me yet. But I have far too much invested
> already to simply abandon the ideas.
>
> When I mentioned the Envelooper, I was hoping someone would come
> forward in the manner of "I think this would work for this application
> that I have in mind." People (and myself) still need more time to mull
> over the application for such advanced devices.
>
> In regards to a fully integrated synthesizer; Many of the great synth
> companies historically began with modulars, and then released fully
> integrated instruments. ARP began with the 2500 series and later produced
> the Oddysey. Moog began with the 900 series and later produced the
> Mini-Moog. Emu began with a modular and later produced integrated
> instruments.
>
> Of course, the integrated instruments never have the full capability
> of the parent modular. There are always design trade offs. While I 
> would like to
> produce an integrated instrument sometime in the future, it will not
> be a replacement for the 300 or 1200 series, but will contain a scaled
> down version of those unique technologies. First I have to finish 
> developing
> those technologies, before I can concern myself with how best to 
> package them.
>
> At his exact moment, my concern is with getting the existing designs so
> I can produce them for the next 3 to 5 years. The Envelooper design
> project has only been placed on the back burner until I can catch up
> with stocking parts and building your orders.
>
> My use of the word "dropped" was unfortunate because it gave the
> impression I had abandoned the project. I have not. The Envelooper module
> and Walkabout Oscillator are still being researched. I have working 
> prototypes
> of both designs, but they need to be improved for manufacture. I also 
> need to
> reseach if ideas like downloadable wavetables are fesible.
>
> I apologize again for any confusion.
>
>

> > Don't be fooled, they are trying to 
> > sell you a trumpet, when you wanted a violin.
> 
> Is this why I have trouble getting rosin off my lips?
>


I hear they call those 'piccolos' in Hawaii

> Grant, I think you should take more cues from all of the people that
adore
> your designs. A few posts back you unceremoniously dropped the
Envelooper.
> Meanwhile a lot of us here where thinking it was going to be one of
the next
> modules! And a lot of us (including me) were more than willing to buy at
> least one.


yup
it was on my list 
=(

I guess I'll use this time to chime in that I hope there's still a few
1200 series we might see?   the active multiple?   i was interested in
whatever that would be.   i know a number of other people around these
parts that have oddball units i'd like my oddball unit to be able to
play with, er, *easier* i suppose you could say?   is there a final
word, or do you just want to get rolling with the 300 before tending
to further developement.  

btw plans for my 'finished' portable unit include now a bank of
300..... just add $$$...

> i totally agree with that. i did not understand from the
> envelooper announcement that feedback about the module is desired.



same.  i was under the impression that it was pretty much right around
the corner for release