SergeModular

Hi Trevor,

owning an Animal and a TKB, here is my recommendation for your one synth pa=
nel. I'd get
a modified Animal, in which the UAP has been replaced with an NCOM and an X=
FAD.

I am not so keen on VC panning, so I think I could do with just VC crossfad=
ing (and level
control, of course). In addition, the NCOM should be nicely useable as a vo=
ltage controlled
divider if you are looking to generate exact rhythm relationships between d=
ifferent steps
with a TKB or TENV – using one row of the TKB/TENV to control the divison o=
f the clock
clocking the TKB/TENV.

Right now I am using one half of my DTG for voltage-controlled divison, I a=
m glad that it is
possible at all (cheers to the patch programmability!), but I'd rather have=
an Animal with
NCOM/XFAD instead of UAP.

Of course, all subjective. If you are not interested in achieving exact rhy=
thmic
relationships, but can not live without VC panning, all the above makes no =
sense :-)

Best regards,
Jan-Hinnerk

--- In SergeModular@yahoogroups.com, "circlesround" <birdfrozentoabranch@h.=
..>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I've laboured long on the decision to purchase a new modular system
> (albeit dimunitive, as dictated by my budget), and needless to say
> the STS/Serge has long remained at the top of my short-list.
>
> That said, I offer the following for consideration ...
>
> Were you to design a single panel synth (as the STS Animal) to mate
> with a TEVS (Touch Envelope Voltage Source), what modules would would
> you choose to populate this panel? Or, would an Animal suffice in
> this instance?
>
> Further, after following the CMS vs. Serge thread on this forum ...
> what are delivery times averaging for new STS/Serge systems at
> present?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Regards,
>
> Trevor