Archive of the former Yahoo!Groups mailing list: MOTM

Re: [motm] RE: Vanilla versus double pecan ripple fudgeYep, synthesizers.com is
boring, looks like MOTM is headed in that same direction.
_______________________________________

Errr....no. If anything, the AudioEngine is going to cause an entirely different
sort of "problem": that is, now that there is so much power behind a 2U or 3U
panel, what do you DO with it? In other words, the difficulty will be in
∗thinking up∗ the modules, not in the execution of them. 64 individual wavetable
VCOs with VC loop points/morphing/cross-fades? Piece of cake. 1024 VC ADSR EGs?
2 hours of work, max. Entire DX-1 voice? OK! Any 200e module in the Buchla
catalog? Done!

I have not been able to support MOTM as much as I'd like, but I'm concerned that
when I can afford to, there will not be the interesting MOTM modules available
that I'd like to use.
______________________________________

OK, they here is YOUR assignment: what module that I don't have would you like
to use? See, circular arguments just like this doomed the 300 Series from Wiard.
You want strange/esoteric/bizarre? Grant handed it to you on a silver platter.
Bitch that it was 'too expensive'? Well, what you you ∗expect∗? Doepfer has 318
different modules, most of which are under $200. Are they not 'interesting'
enough? One would think the '510, the first truely unique analog module in
what....20 years, would sell 400-500 units. Errr.....nope. More like 80. And I
absolutely ∗promise∗ you that if the price was $99, I'd have sold only 100. This
is the point very few people understand.

If MOTM is the most expensive, most pain-in-the-ass to deal with, you have to
∗build∗ it and it is "boring", why am I #2 overall?

I guess I'm the only one that has these thoughts, as noboday else wants to voice
their opinion if they are thinking the same, so I'll drop it.
______________________________________

Not at all, and please don't feel like you are the 'lone voice in the outback',
so to speak. The future is not what it used to be :)

Paul S.