In Tom's defense. :)

[Andrew Schrock]

On Wed, 5 Aug 1998 jorgen.bergfors at idg.se wrote:
> Tony Clark writes:
> >I think it is clear that there was obviously too much expectation on 
> >the part of certain individuals for mind blowing advances in circuit 
> >design.
> Well the kicker here is that Tom created that expectation himself by writing 
> such things as "I keep looking for the perfect VCO. The VCO-3B almost fits 
> bill", "This is a GREAT VCO!", "This is worlds most dangerous VCF ".
> It's fine to publish simpler circuits, that are easier and cheaper to build, as 
> long as you clearly declare what they are and not pretend they are world class. 
> I'm sure he has put a lot of effort into this, but think about how much time 
> DIYers around the world might waste if they build the circuits in the belief 
> that they really are the best you can find? 
> There is definitely a place for simplified circuits too, as long as they are 
> labeled as such.
> I'm all for using cheap easy to get components and I think Tom's initiative is 
> a very good one. It's just the prose on his web site that bothers me a bit. And 
> I think suppliers of high quality kits like Paul Schreiber must be even more 
> bothered. 
> To build stable and reliable analog circuitry is not trivial. Even the pros 
> like Moog had problems with that. Beginners deserve to know what the pitfalls 
> are before they waste too much of their time.
> I don't have all the answers myself but I listen to the other people on this 
> list and try to avoid making the mistakes that they have done. I also think I 
> should warn the others not to make the mistakes that I have done. 
> I like to check with the other people on the list what their opinion on a 
> circuit is, before I try to build it. Why waste time if somebody else already 
> has found out that the circuit has problems? Or that a better one exists, that 
> is just as simple to build?

This brings up some good points... I have tomg's designs right alongside
MOTM modules, and although I appreciate both, the difference between the
two is great. The noise on the MOTM units is literally nil. I've worked
with modular Buchla and Doepfer systems before, but the MOTM stuff really
does blow them away. I haven't done any in-depth A to B comparisons, but
the noise on the MOTM literally isn't audible. On the other stuff, eh, you
can pick up static, problems here and there.. some general noise here and
there; I also had to redo my power supply wiring scheme to accomodate one
of my maxx VCF's. Much of the noise I see is definitely from the manner in
which the design is constructed: ie on protoboard vs. a well-done PCB
with plated-through holes. I had lots of trouble with the same VCF just
since I was stupidly stealing a ground from a _very_ bad place. In this
case, there's nothing wrong with the design, just my construction. I can
see why tomg would get bugged by the same type of question over and over. 

If you consider the price difference we're talking about here, the quality
difference is warranted.. for an MOTM kit it's $125-130. For a maxx module
(specifically the VCF I'm mentioning here) it cost me around $15, mostly
for connectors, pots, and knobs. Much of the time I just don't WANT to
blow that much money on something I can throw together for peanuts, like a
VCA or LFO. Yes, the results may not be spectacular, but the results are
more useful than not! Bottom line, I simply couldn't afford (or patiently
enough way for ;) a completely MOTM system. 

Both tomg _and_ Paul Schreiber have been very forthcoming with helpful
info, even though neither of them (tomg ESPECIALLY) really _has_ to.
There's a place for both types of module, and I think both have a place
here on this list. (not that anybody's disputing that) 

With that said, I can see why some would be confused by tomg's claims. I
think his web site is, literally, indespensible to me personally for plans
and ideas, but I've really had to tweak things around a bit to get the
modules working properly. Please don't take this as a flame against
tomg.. I would much rather have tomg enthusiastically do his thing and put
up literally dozens of helpful schematics than go away forever. Perhaps we
could assemble some comments on tomg's designs to take some of the load
off him? (like has been done with the asm-1) There's no reason why he 
should have to handle it all by himself. 

Andrew

| Andrew Schrock							|
| Network Programmer, Synthesizer and electronic music enthusiast	|
| aschrock at cs.brandeis.edu						|