Well, I'd say one man's "strange" is another man's normal... I probably use my wiard Noise Ring more than any filter in my rig (tho I'd be surprised if that was a majority practice). And I'll probably buy a 510 before I add another VCO. But that's the point of modularity, ain't it: to assemble an instrument uniquely suited to the individual musician?
I think most of us may not have a good perspective on the synth "business" and economies of scale. In the grand scheme of things, we are smaller than "niche. I think I heard that Tony produced a total of 10 Octal Resonators--great module, glad I got one, but I was floored at how small the market was. To me, Cynthia's order of 200 panels for a $650 module (that competes for market share with 4 other identical modules in different formats) seems like either extreme optimism or a unique "understanding" of her business.
bbob drake
>
> Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 19:15:39 -0600
> From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
>Subject: Re: Zeroscillator and a thought for Paul
>
>Well, there are several ways to approach building
>'strange' modules:
>
>a) the #1 selling MOTM module is the MOTM-800 EG
>b) the MOTM-510 WaveWarper has sold less than the
>MOTM-420 VCF by 2:1
>
>I call this the 'Buchla Pyramid' effect: the
>stranger your modules, the smaller
>the customer base. You begin to approch the limit
>of only 1 person in the world
>wanting what you have :)
>
>I have several 'strange' modules in the works. 2005
>was spent trying to ship all
>the un-strange ones on order (mostly from June of
>last year, when prices were
>about to go up and over 700 modules were ordered in
>a span of ∗10 days∗).
>
>The other issue with 'strangeness' is people want
>∗different degrees∗ of it.
>Again, take the '510. Larry Hendry told me he tried
>to use it for 10min before
>audio even came out. He never used it again. Robert
>Rich took the prototype and
>made ∗entire tracks∗ on his last CD 'Lithosphere'
>using it.
>
>Paul S.
>
>