Yahoo Groups archive

PLAN B analog blog

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:10 UTC

Message

Re: [PLAN_B_analog_blog] M26 Slew

2008-11-06 by Steven Taylor

Well if it's any consolation... I read a lot about synths daily and I haven't come across these rants. I remember reading about tuning issues with the oscillator but they never seemed to get particularly heated.
In fact the first I heard about the production problems was when you posted to say steps were already in progress to solve them

Steve


On 6 Nov 2008, at 15:21, (i think you can figure that out) wrote:

This issue has come up twice now in the last few weeks, some of which
stemming from the recent and I dare say contagious Plan B puke-fest
which has bubbled up from the underbelly of internet blogs over the
last few weeks (do I sound spiteful?).

Comparisons have been made between the response of our Slew Limiter
and that of Doepfer's, with them always earning the 'why can't you
just do it right like he does" accolades and Plan B usually getting
bitch-slapped (do I sound spiteful?)

Here's the big news: the circuit in our M26 Slew Limiter is 99.9999999% identical to the one in the bottom half of the Doepfer A-170. Is it time now to start a new thread somewhere on my inability to come up with original designs, opting instead to steal from others? Hardly, as Dieter's (and Plan B's) bi-control slew is straight out of
Electronotes and very standard. My intention was to create two ranges
which overlap - yet one getting much 'slewier' in that ours switches between a .047 uf and 10mf r/c time.

Dieter has three ranges, one taking it down to .01uf if I remember
correctly but in both units, you can get slews which are equally as
subtle. But if you are insistent that his works better, just replace
the .047uf in ours with a .01uf, but please don't hit us up when the
two ranges in the M26 no longer overlap.

OK, so,,,yeah... it gets frustrating at times over here. We 've had
our share of quality issues, we've addressed them. We've spent a lot
of $ to do that and while I've seen many a post about how horrible our
work is, at no time did I see these people mention the corrective
actions we've put in play. I've seen comparisons between two halfs of
Plan B dual modules with speculations that they are not performing the
same and have explained the technicalities -all of which our beyond
our control - which cause it, yet at no time did I see these comments
listing these valid reasons, more just making a case which points to
our inability to to things correctly.

Que lastima...

The only thing I do need to add though is to to keep in mind that the
15 minutes of fame an internet rant may give you greatly effects the
spirit and pride of seven individuals who spend their work weeks
basically frantic at Plan B HQ to make shipments to meet your musical
needs, inspection and criticism. If in the event you contact me and
get a response which eludes to your observations being unimportant,
trite, unworthy of my attention then by all means I invite you to let
me have it because at that point I deserve it. I say this with
confidence because I never have and never will take this tact. Taking my lead from President-elect Obama, I try to listen even harder when
the two parties disagree.

But to make comments without even contacting us first...which happens I dare say a lot more than with many of the other manufacturers who are no less culpable, I see this a bit of a blow below the belt.

Give us a shot. If we don't listen, then shoot us...but please
give us a chance before using us for target practice. It does effect
our reputation, something which is foremost on my mind with every
module I ship.

best,

Peter Grenader


Attachments

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.