> From: Junger Joerg <Joerg.Junger@...>I used to enjoy the same about my VCS3 when I had it, and have to agree
> Reply-To: SergeModular@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 09:56:59 +0200
> To: "'SergeModular@yahoogroups.com'" <SergeModular@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: AW: [SergeModular] Re: DIGI-TRIX --- good grief ----
>
> Hi John, hi list,
>
> it's right, the EMS synthis have variable outs. This could be simulated by
> having attenuators for the inputs of the matrix. At least one of the reasons
> why matricses are not so widely used, is cost. A good matrix is _very_
> expensive. But a good matrix also allows one to add/remove a pin without the
> noise that is often genereated if a plug is inserted or removed. This was a
> feature that I really enjoyed on the Synthi (apart from the size, ease of
> transportation, look... ;)).
> A stand alone matrix with the same quality as was used in a good EMS
> Synthi/VCS3: I think it would be a good addition for my Serge/Fenix.
that I find the idea of such matrix coupled with a Fenix attractive.
My focus is to find specific applications for my Serge, and to understand
the limitations of the approach. The Fenix is a lovely self-contained
system - has concrete boundaries, hence more accessible to a matrix method.
The Serge on the other hand, with custom panels and potentially large
configurations, is an issue to me, as I would have to dedicate a matrix
(or multiples of them) to very specific applications. It would not be
the general-purpose-save-all-your-patches-and-recall-on-a-whim solution.
And then there is the issue of knob positioning, voltage trimming and scale,
grounding, i/o attenuation, jack formats, physical packaging, interformat
connectivity (if possible), etc.
These issues do not render the approach useless or without merit - just
have to understand how it would work in my setup with respect to these
constraints.
Regards,
Bill
______________________________________________________________________
Bill Sequeira, Ph.D.
Principal, Axon Hillock