Yahoo Groups archive

SergeModular

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:13 UTC

Thread

Re: Modcan

Re: Modcan

2001-06-06 by John Papiewski

I did have an opportunity to play with some Modcan for a few hours...
I can't say I was terribly impressed, but that's only my $.02.
I was particularly interested in the ladder LPF, was curious about the rest
of it.
The physical build quality was certainly solid, the layout was a little
quirky (the old Serge-style quad VCA being a little bothersome to figure
out). The VCF was all right but not IMO ballsy or anything. To me it seemed
thin/squelchy. Oscillators, that digital oscillator, s/h, etc all fine.
Show quoted textHide quoted text

On paper the Modcan looks very interesting, 'specially for the Serge users
looking to add just a few modules.
But the execution was a little bit of a letdown.
Any other Modcan opinions??

JP

Barry Michael wrote:

> Has anybody checked out the Modcan filters for
> additional options on a Serge? - They are fully patch
> compatible. Has anybody heard them?
> BarryM

Re: Modcan

2001-06-06 by C. Whitten

> Any other Modcan opinions??
Please don't think I'm a pain for suggesting checking the archives once in a
while, otherwise John P. and I are going to be continually re-running our
difference of opinion over ModCan. (Message 141 onwards)
Let me once again outline my opinions though.

The Negatives:
Cost. My 6 modules, case, psu and shipping worked out at $2,130.
Not that cheap considering you could get a Serge panel for under $3,000 that
would do a lot more.
Looks. ModCan has a certain charm but isn't a patch on a Serge panel IMO.

The Positives:
Availability. I got my system in around 6 weeks, need I say more.
Build Quality. Can't be faulted. If you open up the system the wiring is
very sturdy, obviously the work of a real enthusiast.
Modules. I can't find anything to criticise about my (Polyfusion) filter,
equally as valid (in a subjective way of course) as any Serge filter.
The Wavetable Osc is a wonderful module, clean and punchy. Because it is
nothing like the Wavemultiplier it gives you another palette to introduce to
your Serge system.
In conclusion, having bought into ModCan I would probably save up the extra
$600 and buy a Serge panel next time. The Wavetable Oscillator is a very
valid addition to a Serge system, you should control it from a regular
oscillator though (which in my case has to be tuned very low in order to get
the correct pitch out of the digi Osc).
To answer Barry's query, the ModCan Polyfusion type filter has been a useful
addition to my Serge set up. I found that when increasing the resonance a
lot of the body of the filter was quickly lost however. I opened up the
module and reduced the resonance pot and now I have a much wider range of
filter timbres before the resonance gets too strong. Maybe this is the
problem John P. encountered.
CW

Re: Modcan

2001-06-06 by matt wilson

"C. Whitten" wrote:

> Any other Modcan opinions??
Please don't think I'm a pain for suggesting checking the archives once in a
while, otherwise John P. and I are going to be continually re-running our
difference of opinion over ModCan. (Message 141 onwards)
Let me once again outline my opinions though.

The Negatives:
Cost. My 6 modules, case, psu and shipping worked out at $2,130.

ouch!!!!!

Not that cheap considering you could get a Serge panel for under $3,000 that
would do a lot more.
Looks. ModCan has a certain charm but isn't a patch on a Serge panel IMO.
i've only checked out the modcan stuff casually, and was distressed to see that their env is a
dead ringer for the serge XADSR, right down to the jack locations and the response switch...it looks like
modcan just flat out copied the serge. take a look for yourself. commentary invited! chris w., if you've got
the env module, is there any way you can open yours up for a scan or pic of the pcb? i'd like to see how far this scam
pervades.....and i'm sure rex would, too.

(and yeah, i consider a direct copy of a serge module's graphics/features to be a scam, personally)

matt

--
matt wilson is OdysseySounds
email: sebsi23@...
web: http://members.home.net/odysseysounds/index.htm
music: http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/242/matthew_b_wilson.html

Re: Modcan

2001-06-06 by C. Whitten

> is modcan using the harry davies knobs too?
You know I never noticed that 'til now.
I haven't got the Envelope module BTW.
Some of the modules I have are potentially copied. Obviously the Polyfusion
Filter and the Wavetable Oscillator seems very similar to the Digisound Digi
Osc. I haven't got a problem with this as neither module are otherwise
currently available and were never built for banana sockets.
CW

Re: Modcan

2001-06-06 by Real Name

Have you seen the new Modcan Boolean Logic module?

It looks very similar to the STS design... even down to the 2 inverter
sections top & bottom
of the module...

I wasn't too bothered about the resemblance to Serge until I saw this
addition... I guess I may feel
different if I was Rex.

Any more news about Serge availability? I called Rex last week at his new
no. - no return call as yet :-(

Also - somewhat off-topic... I'm also in the market for a CMS modular. I've
called Phil Cirrocco a couple of times
but he never calls back... anybody know him really well?

Kirk

PS. Thx for the patch & mp3 Chris... more pls SMOGer's! Also - anybody care
to explain technically what Chris' patch is doing??

PPS. I'm pouring over the Buchla 200 brochure that somebody posted the link
for. Its kind of hard to read and you can't read the legending on the
modules... if anybody has a readable hard copy they could copy for me pls
email me privately - THX!
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>> is modcan using the harry davies knobs too?
>You know I never noticed that 'til now.
>I haven't got the Envelope module BTW.
>Some of the modules I have are potentially copied. Obviously the Polyfusion
>Filter and the Wavetable Oscillator seems very similar to the Digisound
Digi
>Osc. I haven't got a problem with this as neither module are otherwise
>currently available and were never built for banana sockets.
>CW
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>SergeModular-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>Keep on Patchin'!
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Re: Modcan

2001-06-06 by John Papiewski

Check out the new Modcan boolean logic too.
He uses the Harry Davies knobs but I think has a different color scheme for
jacks... also will let you pick your own colors.
Other Serge "similarities" :
* quad vca is same as old Serge quad vca
* peak & trough module was from old Serge catalog
* 8 x 2 sequencer is pretty close
* "morph" module is same circuit as Serge Triple Wave Shaper or VC wave shape
on NTO
* boolean logic, as above
* adsr as mentioned earlier
etc... etc....

So he has an EMS type diode filter, Polyfusion & Moog style filters.... but
we know who he MOST admires, yes?

Having individual modules (as opposed to a panel at a time minimum) is a
plus.

JP

matt wilson wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> is modcan using the harry davies knobs too???? and red jack sleeves for
> gates and trigs?
> jeez!
>
> matt
>
> --
> matt wilson is OdysseySounds
> email: sebsi23@...
> web: http://members.home.net/odysseysounds/index.htm
> music: http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/242/matthew_b_wilson.html
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> SergeModular-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Keep on Patchin'!
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: Modcan

2001-06-06 by DarkStr717@aol.com

In a message dated 6/6/01 11:03:20 AM, opart@... writes:

<< Any more news about Serge availability? I called Rex last week at his new
no. - no return call as yet :-( >>

The first new panel shipped out last week so production is now off and
running. It's gonna be slow as there is still only one assembly person.
Kind regards
John D

Re: Modcan

2001-06-06 by matt wilson

Real Name wrote:


Have you seen the new Modcan Boolean Logic module?

It looks very similar to the STS design... even down to the 2 inverter
sections top & bottom
of the module...

I wasn't too bothered about the resemblance to Serge until I saw this
addition... I guess I may feel
different if I was Rex.

Any more news about Serge availability? I called Rex last week at his new
no. - no return call as yet :-(

heh...try this: call, and don't say anything about synths. just start saying a bunch of weird
shit. it'll intrigue him, you'll get a call back, then you can gently rope him in to talking about
serge gear and maybe place an order.

just a thought ;^)

matt
--
matt wilson is OdysseySounds
email: sebsi23@...
web: http://members.home.net/odysseysounds/index.htm
music: http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/242/matthew_b_wilson.html

Re: Modcan . 2 cents (a penny) on stealing

2001-06-06 by sonic@sonicboomuk.fsnet.co.uk

--- In SergeModular@y..., "Real Name" <opart@d...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> Have you seen the new Modcan Boolean Logic module?
>
> It looks very similar to the STS design... even down to the 2
inverter
> sections top & bottom
> of the module...
>
> I wasn't too bothered about the resemblance to Serge until I saw
this
> addition... I guess I may feel
> different if I was Rex.

That sounds a bit cheeky in the whole scheme , of course those simple
logic chips are very easy/cheap to buy..........but , I think
stealing designs from Polyfusion , is bad enough , but several
companys (including Modcan) also rip off EMS & Serge designs -i.e.
companies that are still trading .
There are also several companies offering EMS this or Oberheim
that .I think it really sucks when done on a commercial level -
cloning seems to be so mad anyway , that if someone wants to spend
200 hours & $1000 on parts etc. to copy something , good luck to
them....but selling clones of other peeples stuff seems about as
defensible as virus spreading........Modcan effectively will strangle
Serge's ability to continue by selling obvious steals from their
designs ?
I would have much more respect if Modcan got a few more of their
own ideas . Serge , while influenced by Buchla can hardly be accused
of stealing designs . (i.m.o.)



>
> Any more news about Serge availability? I called Rex last week at
his new
> no. - no return call as yet :-(
>
> Also - somewhat off-topic... I'm also in the market for a CMS
modular. I've
> called Phil Cirrocco a couple of times
> but he never calls back... anybody know him really well?
>
> Kirk
>
> PS. Thx for the patch & mp3 Chris... more pls SMOGer's! Also -
anybody care
> to explain technically what Chris' patch is doing??
>
> PPS. I'm pouring over the Buchla 200 brochure that somebody posted
the link
> for. Its kind of hard to read and you can't read the legending on
the
> modules... if anybody has a readable hard copy they could copy for
me pls
> email me privately - THX!
>
>
>
>
> >> is modcan using the harry davies knobs too?
> >You know I never noticed that 'til now.
> >I haven't got the Envelope module BTW.
> >Some of the modules I have are potentially copied. Obviously the
Polyfusion
> >Filter and the Wavetable Oscillator seems very similar to the
Digisound
> Digi
> >Osc. I haven't got a problem with this as neither module are
otherwise
> >currently available and were never built for banana sockets.
> >CW
> >
> >
> >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >SergeModular-unsubscribe@y...
> >
> >Keep on Patchin'!
> >
> >
> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >

Re: Modcan

2001-06-06 by Real Name

LOL
hehe - unfortunately I've ordered panels from him before - he'll know what I'm after!
Kirk
Show quoted textHide quoted text

heh...try this: call, and don't say anything about synths. just start saying a bunch of weird
shit. it'll intrigue him, you'll get a call back, then you can gently rope him in to talking about
serge gear and maybe place an order.

just a thought ;^)

matt
--
matt wilson is OdysseySounds
email: sebsi23@...
web: http://members.home.net/odysseysounds/index.htm
music: http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/242/matthew_b_wilson.html


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
SergeModular-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Keep on Patchin'!


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Re: Modcan

2001-06-06 by Sebastian Kuehnl

Hi Matt, Chris, John and all,

I would like to remind of a few things for the sake of balance:

The EMS filter has already been cloned by Doepfer, AS and others, not to
speak of the Moog 904 and Oberheim SEM filters.

Bruce Duncan used to work with Polyfusion.

As you all know Grant Richter's excellent Wiard, too, emerged from a DIY
project, uses the Harry B. Davies 1900-H knob, closely resembles an existing
faceplate format, Aries, and parts of it are loosely to very closely based
on Buchla, Digisound and other designs.

I am very happy that there is a peak/ through module currently made by
anyone.

If the Modcan trig/ gate jacks were not red, people might complain about
interfacing to the Serge. Serge took the red from Buchla. Weren't the knobs
on early Serges the same Davies 1600 as on pre-mid 70s Buchlas?

Etc.

Sebastian Kuehnl


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: Modcan . 2 cents (a penny) on stealing

2001-06-06 by Real Name

>cloning seems to be so mad anyway , that if someone wants to spend
>200 hours & $1000 on parts etc. to copy something , good luck to
>them....

i agree...

especially the recent attempts to recreate the Minimoog... all that
well-meant
time & effort could be far more better spent designing something original...

the only exceptions I can think of are when companies have a distinct link
to the original product -
eg. Moog CE, Universal Audio's 1176 / LA2 remakes, Neve classic range, etc.
That is justified. But new, unrelated
companies trying to copy other gear?? Hmmm... the only way it could possibly
be justified would be if the
original product were impossibly rare and discontinued and unless deceased,
the original designer
involved in some way... I say that because in the unlikely event of a new
company giving Don Buchla an unlimited
budget to exactly recreate his 200 series systems I would not be complaining
;-)


but selling clones of other peeples stuff seems about as
>defensible as virus spreading........Modcan effectively will strangle
>Serge's ability to continue by selling obvious steals from their
>designs ?

I hope not and doubt it... but Modcan's moderately fast turnaround time and
build-quality are tempting
in situations where Serge supplies slow-down - as is the case for the past
year or so.

> I would have much more respect if Modcan got a few more of their
>own ideas . Serge , while influenced by Buchla can hardly be accused
>of stealing designs . (i.m.o.)

v. true


K.





>
>
>
>>
>> Any more news about Serge availability? I called Rex last week at
>his new
>> no. - no return call as yet :-(
>>
>> Also - somewhat off-topic... I'm also in the market for a CMS
>modular. I've
>> called Phil Cirrocco a couple of times
>> but he never calls back... anybody know him really well?
>>
>> Kirk
>>
>> PS. Thx for the patch & mp3 Chris... more pls SMOGer's! Also -
>anybody care
>> to explain technically what Chris' patch is doing??
>>
>> PPS. I'm pouring over the Buchla 200 brochure that somebody posted
>the link
>> for. Its kind of hard to read and you can't read the legending on
>the
>> modules... if anybody has a readable hard copy they could copy for
>me pls
>> email me privately - THX!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >> is modcan using the harry davies knobs too?
>> >You know I never noticed that 'til now.
>> >I haven't got the Envelope module BTW.
>> >Some of the modules I have are potentially copied. Obviously the
>Polyfusion
>> >Filter and the Wavetable Oscillator seems very similar to the
>Digisound
>> Digi
>> >Osc. I haven't got a problem with this as neither module are
>otherwise
>> >currently available and were never built for banana sockets.
>> >CW
>> >
>> >
>> >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> >SergeModular-unsubscribe@y...
>> >
>> >Keep on Patchin'!
>> >
>> >
>> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>> >
>> >
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>SergeModular-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>Keep on Patchin'!
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Re: Modcan

2001-06-06 by Matt Wilson

matt wilson wrote:

Real Name wrote:


Have you seen the new Modcan Boolean Logic module?

It looks very similar to the STS design... even down to the 2 inverter
sections top & bottom
of the module...

double jeez! thats an outright copy of the serge design!

let me clarify my thoughts here, which are pretty much in line with peters:

*basing* your designs on deleted or discontinued or otherwise unavailable designs
is pretty much the nature of the musical instrument industry and i don't have any
problem with that process, morally, legally, aethestically, etc. i was impressed by
the effort put out on the new minis, and b/c bob let the trademarks lapse, i couldn't find much issue with the reissues even using the name (i am an attorney, btw).

what i see over at modcan is something different entirely: its effectively a rebadging
of the serge fascia. modcan took the serge Env graphic, slightly (and i mean ever so
slightly) altered it, and claims its a "modcan" module. same with the boolean logic module.
now, i see that they openly claim some designs are moog, ms50, etc. thats great. why aren't the
boolean and env modules credited to serge?

this is not good. i'm curious whether the insides are the same, too.

matt


--
MATT WILSON, ATTORNEY @ LAW
phone: 619 234-2200
fax: 619 234-2219
email: mbwlaw@...
website: http://www.mattwilsonlaw.com

Re: Modcan

2001-06-06 by C. Whitten

>now, i see that they openly claim some designs are moog, ms50,

I must say, I probably go with Sebastian on this one although I have every simpathy with the views expressed by PK, Kirk and Matt.
For one thing, just about every analogue synth has a similar envelope design, somebody copied somebody else's design somewhere.
OK so many of the ModCan modules are copies, but many are no longer available from the original source.
I'd hate to see Rex spending money chasing after other (minute) manufacturers when he could be continuing his good works with STS.

Re: Modcan

2001-06-06 by Matt Wilson

"C. Whitten" wrote:

>now, i see that they openly claim some designs are moog, ms50,

I must say, I probably go with Sebastian on this one although I have every simpathy with the views expressed by PK, Kirk and Matt.
For one thing, just about every analogue synth has a similar envelope design, somebody copied somebody else's design somewhere.

i'm not saying the circuitry is copied: the fascia/appearance of the modcan env and boolean are EXACT copies of the serge. a
total lack of integrity there, if you ask me.

OK so many of the ModCan modules are copies, but many are no longer available from the original source.
I'd hate to see Rex spending money chasing after other (minute) manufacturers when he could be continuing his good works with STS.
or conversely: "i hate to see modcan refusing to spend money copying other (minute) manufacturers when he could be
continuing his works with modcan".

i wish i could say more, but suffice it to say that the intellectual property, including trademarks and designs, owned by STS will be protected against theft and infringement.

matt

--
MATT WILSON, ATTORNEY @ LAW
phone: 619 234-2200
fax: 619 234-2219
email: mbwlaw@...
website: http://www.mattwilsonlaw.com

Re: Modcan

2001-06-06 by Sebastian Kuehnl

Please, I haven't voiced any opinion, and as of yet I don't have one. I'm
curious to hear Rex himself on this, nothing else.

Theory: it might (might) still be that the insides are Duncan's own work.
Alas, how many circuits may have been copied unnoticedly because they were
well hidden :^u

----- Original Message -----
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: "Matt Wilson" <mbwlaw@...>
To: <SergeModular@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 12:18 AM
Subject: Re: [SergeModular] Re: Modcan


:
:
: "C. Whitten" wrote:
:
: > >now, i see that they openly claim some designs are moog, ms50,
: >
: > I must say, I probably go with Sebastian on this one although I have
: > every simpathy with the views expressed by PK, Kirk and Matt.
: > For one thing, just about every analogue synth has a similar envelope
: > design, somebody copied somebody else's design somewhere.
:
: i'm not saying the circuitry is copied: the fascia/appearance of the
: modcan env and boolean are EXACT copies of the serge. a
: total lack of integrity there, if you ask me.
:
: >
: > OK so many of the ModCan modules are copies, but many are no longer
: > available from the original source.
: > I'd hate to see Rex spending money chasing after other (minute)
: > manufacturers when he could be continuing his good works with STS.
:
: or conversely: "i hate to see modcan refusing to spend money copying
: other (minute) manufacturers when he could be
: continuing his works with modcan".
:
: i wish i could say more, but suffice it to say that the intellectual
: property, including trademarks and designs, owned by STS will be
: protected against theft and infringement.
:
: matt
:
:
: --
: MATT WILSON, ATTORNEY @ LAW
: phone: 619 234-2200
: fax: 619 234-2219
: email: mbwlaw@...
: website: http://www.mattwilsonlaw.com
:
:


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: Modcan

2001-06-07 by Microtonal

I can't see why anyone would even bother to copy the design for a logic
module. Put schmitt triggers on the inputs for slowly rising signals, then
some CMOS gates, add some LED drivers, you're done. It's not rocket
science.

The Modcan Boolean Logic and VC ADSR panel layouts are one-to-one copies of
the Serge panels, but are we saying that a panel layout should be considered
intellectual property? I think it just shows a lack of imagination on the
part of Modcan.

I created a voltage controlled counter circuit back in the 1980s, obviously
inspired by seeing the Serge design for the Divide-by-N Counter in the Serge
catalog. It had similar inputs, outputs and controls due to the nature of
the circuit. I'd hate for it to be considered an act of plagiarism. Now
that I've learned more about Serge designs, my implementation was probably
entirely different. I had a discrete 4 bit A/D followed by a digital
counter and gate logic while Serge probably had a modification of the
Universal Slope Generator hooked up as a divider.

John Loffink
microtonal@...
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> Theory: it might (might) still be that the insides are Duncan's own work.
> Alas, how many circuits may have been copied unnoticedly because they were
> well hidden :^u
>

Re: Modcan

2001-06-07 by Microtonal

Before this recent website update the Modcan banana jacks were yellow, green
and white. Some time ago I told Bruce Duncan this was a pretty disgusting
combination of colors. I guess my email may have had an effect?

John Loffink
microtonal@...
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> is modcan using the harry davies knobs too???? and red jack sleeves for
> gates and trigs?
> jeez!
>

Re: Modcan

2001-06-07 by Sebastian Kuehnl

What choices does one have, or not have, for laying out an analog Boolean
logic gate module in this physical format?

The Boolean functions are always listed in this order: AND, OR,
eXclusive-OR. I have never seen them mentioned, drawn, etc in a different
order anywhere. If one doesn't know what these are about in a synthesizer
system, just think of it as a rule as there are rules in grammar.

Also integral to the use of these functions are two inverters - one to
reverse the initial condition (one input), one to swap the output.

So if Duncan wanted to create a unique Bool module, he had only one and a
half alternatives: put the inverters together in one place instead of one at
top/ one at bottom (wow!);

Or choose a module with two or three sections of generalized paths: each
having two ins, one out, plus a switch to select one of the three functions
plus two switches for the inversions.

Visually, the latter option is slightly harder to use, and doesn't fit into
the Modcan design; it would rather look like a Buchla module (many of those
had more switches than jacks, but that's another topic).

I'm curious to hear other ideas as to what a Bool module should look like?


But more importantly: why would someone want to make a Bool module unique?
When Moog and Buchla made their first VCOs, they differed significantly in
design, because they originated from different intentions. *Everybody* after
these two adapted the design philosophy of the Moog "option" and proceeded
from there. Fixed control scale and quantity of waveform outputs were
considered more desirable than unique and remarkably better sounding FM
behaviour, unlimited control scale versatility and onboard wavecrossfading,
and most everybody accepts this as given. It set a standard for music
synthesizers, to which the PCO and NTO accord essentially too, if the least.
For a Bool module in musical application, the choices are just narrower.


I have to agree that the DADSR and the Panner modules are a different
matter. But concerning the Davies knobs, the Bool, Pk/Thr and Polyfusion
designs and the red trigger jacks, there are serious alternatives to
considering these things a lack of creativity or even theft.

I don't think that that the Serge is going to loose its (often mystified)
uniqueness - which it took it near two decades, a long evolution process of
the underlying philosophy and manufacturing principles, and a broad revival
of Analog to acquire.

Regards
Sebastian Kuehnl




_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: Modcan

2001-06-08 by thornburgh73@yahoo.com

(...)
> For a Bool module in musical application, the choices are just
narrower.
>

but not so narrow as to copy the ENTIRE layout... besides with
a "logic" module it seems far more could be done I.E> with
some simple flip flops, counters and so forth, changing the
idea somewhat.
I think having a few digital gates is kind of
weak despite what you can allegedly do with audio (feedback
loops)

besides, it's obvious even before this module was introduced,
quite a number of designs were copied. if this were merely an
accident and not a consistent pattern, don't you think steps
would have been taken to prevent even the *appearance* of theft,
regarding future designs?

>
> I have to agree that the DADSR and the Panner modules are a
different
> matter. But concerning the Davies knobs, the Bool, Pk/Thr and
Polyfusion
> designs and the red trigger jacks, there are serious alternatives to
> considering these things a lack of creativity or even theft.
>

Add to this the 8x2 sequencer with A,B,A-B (aka Sequencer 17A)
this is the EXACT same layout except the stepselect buttons
are on the right not left side. Almost every designer has
some radically different step sequencer design.

It's really a shame because it seems otherwise modcan has some
really good ideas, like the oscillator design and especially
the wavetable module. Who knows, maybe they are more creative
than Serge. But, due to these ethical considerations (which I
suspected, and felt uncomfortable about, before this was "exposed"
onthe list), I won't consider to order anything from Modcan. I
think (because obviously, they are creative) they are doing this
*specifically* to attract existing/prospective Serge customers and
undercut their business. A new "alleged theft" just further confirms
my suspicion.

Look, I usually take a quite different position when it
comes to "intellectual property" debates, especially because it
is well known to me, in the audio industry (rather in digital audio),
that certain companies exist just to patent fundamental concepts they
did not invent & make money off of royalties and licensing backed
by legal threats. The issue with
Modcan is not that it's core theoretical concepts, but *very specific
design decisions* that are being copied without attribution. I have no
idea about the legal matters but as a matter of personal ethics I
continue to stay away.

> I don't think that that the Serge is going to loose its (often
mystified)
> uniqueness - which it took it near two decades, a long evolution
process of
> the underlying philosophy and manufacturing principles, and a broad
revival
> of Analog to acquire.

well you're quite the utilitarian :) yeah "Maybe it doesn't affect
serge at all, and so forth..." That's not the point, copying
the minutiae of design decisions w/o attribution is just wrong. why is
that difficult to understand?

--Harvey

Re: Modcan -Madman

2001-06-08 by sonic@sonicboomuk.fsnet.co.uk

---
> Add to this the 8x2 sequencer with A,B,A-B (aka Sequencer 17A)
> this is the EXACT same layout except the stepselect buttons
> are on the right not left side. Almost every designer has
> some radically different step sequencer design.
>
> It's really a shame because it seems otherwise modcan has some
> really good ideas, like the oscillator design and especially
> the wavetable module.

This is a copy too b.t.l.o.i. I believe Digisound offered this in
the '80's ?
Seems Mr.Modcan is a Me-Too Maker........shame on his name....
p.k


>
> Look, I usually take a quite different position when it
> comes to "intellectual property" debates, especially because it
> is well known to me, in the audio industry (rather in digital
audio),
> that certain companies exist just to patent fundamental concepts
they
> did not invent & make money off of royalties and licensing backed
> by legal threats. The issue with
> Modcan is not that it's core theoretical concepts, but *very
specific
> design decisions* that are being copied without attribution. I have
no
> idea about the legal matters but as a matter of personal ethics I
> continue to stay away.

Any theft of intellectual copyright is surely just that in any event ?
p.k.

>
> > I don't think that that the Serge is going to loose its (often
> mystified)
> > uniqueness - which it took it near two decades, a long evolution
> process of
> > the underlying philosophy and manufacturing principles, and a
broad
> revival
> > of Analog to acquire.
>
> well you're quite the utilitarian :) yeah "Maybe it doesn't affect
> serge at all, and so forth..." That's not the point, copying
> the minutiae of design decisions w/o attribution is just wrong. why
is
> that difficult to understand?
>
> --Harvey

Re: Modcan

2001-06-08 by sonic@sonicboomuk.fsnet.co.uk

--- In SergeModular@y..., "C. Whitten" <chris@c...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> >now, i see that they openly claim some designs are moog, ms50,
>
> I must say, I probably go with Sebastian on this one although I
have every
> simpathy with the views expressed by PK, Kirk and Matt.
> For one thing, just about every analogue synth has a similar
envelope
> design, somebody copied somebody else's design somewhere.
> OK so many of the ModCan modules are copies, but many are no longer
> available from the original source.
> I'd hate to see Rex spending money chasing after other (minute)
> manufacturers when he could be continuing his good works with STS.

m you've missed the point chris , think about it . the Serge
modules are not as cloned as you suggest above . you're tarring Serge
w/ the "normal" brush ?
P.K.

Re: Modcan .Modscam .

2001-06-08 by sonic@sonicboomuk.fsnet.co.uk

--- In SergeModular@y..., "Sebastian Kuehnl" <skuehnl@y...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> Please, I haven't voiced any opinion, and as of yet I don't have
one. I'm
> curious to hear Rex himself on this, nothing else.
>
> Theory: it might (might) still be that the insides are Duncan's own
work.
> Alas, how many circuits may have been copied unnoticedly because
they were
> well hidden :^u

Wot , ? this is bizzarre . are we talking casework here ? If a
design is "well hidden" as you imply , it can still be stolen
(Doepfers stock in trade...) , but by definition -If well hidden , it
obviously isnt such a close steal ? coloured knobs are not enough to
hide a design.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Matt Wilson" <mbwlaw@p...>
> To: <SergeModular@y...>
> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 12:18 AM
> Subject: Re: [SergeModular] Re: Modcan
>
>
> :
> :
> : "C. Whitten" wrote:
> :
> : > >now, i see that they openly claim some designs are moog, ms50,
> : >
> : > I must say, I probably go with Sebastian on this one although I
have
> : > every simpathy with the views expressed by PK, Kirk and Matt.
> : > For one thing, just about every analogue synth has a similar
envelope
> : > design, somebody copied somebody else's design somewhere.
> :
> : i'm not saying the circuitry is copied: the fascia/appearance of
the
> : modcan env and boolean are EXACT copies of the serge. a
> : total lack of integrity there, if you ask me.
> :
> : >
> : > OK so many of the ModCan modules are copies, but many are no
longer
> : > available from the original source.
> : > I'd hate to see Rex spending money chasing after other (minute)
> : > manufacturers when he could be continuing his good works with
STS.
> :
> : or conversely: "i hate to see modcan refusing to spend money
copying
> : other (minute) manufacturers when he could be
> : continuing his works with modcan".
> :
> : i wish i could say more, but suffice it to say that the
intellectual
> : property, including trademarks and designs, owned by STS will be
> : protected against theft and infringement.
> :
> : matt
> :
> :
> : --
> : MATT WILSON, ATTORNEY @ LAW
> : phone: 619 234-2200
> : fax: 619 234-2219
> : email: mbwlaw@p...
> : website: http://www.mattwilsonlaw.com
> :
> :
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: Modcan .millions of options -no imagination

2001-06-08 by sonic@sonicboomuk.fsnet.co.uk

--- In SergeModular@y..., "Sebastian Kuehnl" <skuehnl@y...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> What choices does one have, or not have, for laying out an analog
Boolean
> logic gate module in this physical format?


thousands at least . do you know how many types of boolean logic
exist ? there are dozens of differant functions possible , plus by
having duplication of some modules thousands of possibilities exist .
making the modcan a blatant no question rip-off .

>
> The Boolean functions are always listed in this order: AND, OR,
> eXclusive-OR. I have never seen them mentioned, drawn, etc in a
different
> order anywhere. If one doesn't know what these are about in a
synthesizer
> system, just think of it as a rule as there are rules in grammar.


check lab electronics (india) boolean logic trainer . look &
learn . they start & follow.....and / nor / nand / or / 3 input and /
3 input nor / 3 input nand etc etc etc. then onto not gate , x-or ,
flip-flopsn & decade counter ( actually a divide by 5 & divide by 2 ,
chainable)


>
> Also integral to the use of these functions are two inverters - one
to
> reverse the initial condition (one input), one to swap the output.

Rubbish . inverters are usefull to reverse any of the inputs &
outputs in any logic system , especially ,where several logic modules
exist.
>
> So if Duncan wanted to create a unique Bool module, he had only one
and a
> half alternatives: put the inverters together in one place instead
of one at
> top/ one at bottom (wow!);


Rubbish .


>
> Or choose a module with two or three sections of generalized paths:
each
> having two ins, one out, plus a switch to select one of the three
functions
> plus two switches for the inversions.
>
> Visually, the latter option is slightly harder to use, and doesn't
fit into
> the Modcan design; it would rather look like a Buchla module (many
of those
> had more switches than jacks, but that's another topic).



..which you probably best not pronounce upon before checking out
your boolean logic...........
>
> I'm curious to hear other ideas as to what a Bool module should
look like?


you only need a jot of imagination & knowledge of boolean logic to
come-up w/ myriad possibilities.

Thats enough for now . theres too much in this mail that is
incorrect.
>
> > Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: Modcan .millions of options -no imagination

2001-06-09 by Sebastian Kuehnl

Hi Mr Rubbish (?),

: ---
: > Add to this the 8x2 sequencer with A,B,A-B (aka Sequencer 17A)
: > this is the EXACT same layout except the stepselect buttons
: > are on the right not left side. Almost every designer has
: > some radically different step sequencer design.
: >
: > It's really a shame because it seems otherwise modcan has some
: > really good ideas, like the oscillator design and especially
: > the wavetable module.
:
: This is a copy too b.t.l.o.i. I believe Digisound offered this in
: the '80's ?
: Seems Mr.Modcan is a Me-Too Maker........shame on his name....
: p.k

WHAT??? Is every VCDO (and designs can differ widely) a copy of Digisound
only because they made it first, two decades ago? Following this logic, you
must regard most every synth VCF a copy of Moog's (Buchla's very earliest
did not have a similar impact on following models). Next, one could say that
the Wiard Wavecity is a theft of both the Digi VCDO and the Serge TWM!?
Next, the Serge TWM would be a copy of the shape circuitry immanent to the
Buchla 259 and 208?

The Digisound VCDO schematics are at Kevin Lightners' Synthfool Lite site
http://www.sonicstate.com/synthfool/schm.html


: thousands at least . do you know how many types of boolean logic
: exist ? there are dozens of differant functions possible , plus by
: having duplication of some modules thousands of possibilities exist .
: making the modcan a blatant no question rip-off .
(...)
: check lab electronics (india) boolean logic trainer . look &
: learn . they start & follow.....and / nor / nand / or / 3 input and /
: 3 input nor / 3 input nand etc etc etc. then onto not gate , x-or ,
: flip-flopsn & decade counter ( actually a divide by 5 & divide by 2 ,
: chainable)

You are right. Firtsly, I was only thinking of the three most frequently
used. As for adding functions to the Serge model, why not suggest it to Rex;
but even in a very esoteric system there's limits I suppose. But, secondly,
many other logic functions can be done by using the BLOG together with STS'
comparator, divider, rectifier etc modules!
So it may make sense to use only these three in the Serge. Of course -
Modcan has no comparators.

Sebastian Kuehnl


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: Modcan

2001-06-09 by C. Whitten

> m you've missed the point chris , think about it . the Serge
> modules are not as cloned as you suggest above . you're tarring Serge
> w/ the "normal" brush ?
No Peter, you misread my contribution (again).
At no point did I mention Serge in my email, let alone imply there were any
cloned modules. My point was: in the world of everyday synths there are
thousands of envelopes and oscillators all virtually identical. If the first
designer who came up with the now standard envelope or oscillator design had
claimed intellectual copyright where would today's musician be.
I didn't say that Rex shouldn't pursue ModCan over direct copies of esoteric
modules, I just tried to make a general point about synthesizer designers
suing each other.

Sebastian said:
>Is every VCDO (and designs can differ widely) a copy of Digisound
>only because they made it first, two decades ago?

Actually as an owner of the ModCan Wavetable Oscillator and past owner of a
Digisound version I would say that they are almost identical. That's not to
say the internal circuits haven't been changed.

My opinion and it is only my opinion!.....is that I would be surprised if
ModCan has stolen any substantial business from STS. In addition the market
for both systems has got to be so small, what in cash terms would be
achieved if Rex sued? It would probably cost him more than anything he would
recoup.
When this thread kicked off I thought Smoggers would have been saying
"great, another banana based system with alternative modules and you can buy
modules separately". I'm surprised that the overall tone so far has been
"lets get the lawyers in".
CW

Re: Modcan .no excuses surely ?

2001-06-09 by sonic@sonicboomuk.fsnet.co.uk

--- In SergeModular@y..., "C. Whitten" <chris@c...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> > m you've missed the point chris , think about it . the Serge
> > modules are not as cloned as you suggest above . you're tarring
Serge
> > w/ the "normal" brush ?
> No Peter, you misread my contribution (again).
> At no point did I mention Serge in my email, let alone imply there
were any
> cloned modules.


sworry I was under the illusion this discussion was on the Serge
site , and we were discussing Modcan's cloning of Serge ?




My point was: in the world of everyday synths there are
> thousands of envelopes and oscillators all virtually identical. If
the first
> designer who came up with the now standard envelope or oscillator
design had
> claimed intellectual copyright where would today's musician be.
> I didn't say that Rex shouldn't pursue ModCan over direct copies of
esoteric
> modules, I just tried to make a general point about synthesizer
designers
> suing each other.


Yes , and my point remains -thes4e "arguments" cannot be so easily
applied to Serge , who's designs are almost completely
unique/original.......I think it's you who's misunderstood ? I am
pointing out this argument doesnt either make it right to steal
designs . There are plenty of goode examples of original designs -
you have a Fenix I think ? and EMS are another that springs to mind ,
oh and Buchla , so.............seems copycat design is'nt really in
any way excusable...? If someone re-did some of your music w/ diff
instruments , but no credit to you , you'd be pissed off ?
do you see my point ?
>
> Sebastian said:
> >Is every VCDO (and designs can differ widely) a copy of Digisound
> >only because they made it first, two decades ago?
>
> Actually as an owner of the ModCan Wavetable Oscillator and past
owner of a
> Digisound version I would say that they are almost identical.
That's not to
> say the internal circuits haven't been changed.
>
> My opinion and it is only my opinion!.....is that I would be
surprised if
> ModCan has stolen any substantial business from STS. In addition
the market
> for both systems has got to be so small, what in cash terms would be
> achieved if Rex sued? It would probably cost him more than anything
he would
> recoup.
> When this thread kicked off I thought Smoggers would have been
saying
> "great, another banana based system with alternative modules and
you can buy
> modules separately". I'm surprised that the overall tone so far has
been
> "lets get the lawyers in".
> CW

Re: Modcan .millions of options -no imagination (cubed)

2001-06-09 by sonic@sonicboomuk.fsnet.co.uk

--- In SergeModular@y..., "Sebastian Kuehnl" <skuehnl@y...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> Hi Mr Rubbish (?),


As per usual , You call me Mr. Rubbish (very witty...) , but you
cant even justify your own assertations ?


>
> : ---
> : > Add to this the 8x2 sequencer with A,B,A-B (aka Sequencer 17A)
> : > this is the EXACT same layout except the stepselect buttons
> : > are on the right not left side. Almost every designer has
> : > some radically different step sequencer design.
> : >
> : > It's really a shame because it seems otherwise modcan has some
> : > really good ideas, like the oscillator design and especially
> : > the wavetable module.
> :
> : This is a copy too b.t.l.o.i. I believe Digisound offered this in
> : the '80's ?
> : Seems Mr.Modcan is a Me-Too Maker........shame on his name....
> : p.k
>
> WHAT??? Is every VCDO (and designs can differ widely) a copy of
Digisound
> only because they made it first, two decades ago?


No , a copy is a copy. The Modcan design may be differant , I have
no experience of it , but the modules concept is not original as
implied in the post I was responding to . (is'nt that the game
here ...call & response.? demystification ?

Following this logic, you
> must regard most every synth VCF a copy of Moog's (Buchla's very
earliest
> did not have a similar impact on following models).



Next, one could say that
> the Wiard Wavecity is a theft of both the Digi VCDO and the Serge
TWM!?


Is it ? surely not .anyway , making a motorbike from an engine & 2
wheels is hardly stealing from mr.wheel or mr.engine ?

All I know , Grant Richter , respect to him , is very honest about
the design origins of some of these ideas........check it out , at
least he has the decency to incorporate many unique angles &
features . He is an expert on Serge , Buchla , EMS , EML ,
etc.......and is very honest & I think cool about the origins of his
inspiration...

> Next, the Serge TWM would be a copy of the shape circuitry immanent
to the
> Buchla 259 and 208?



I've no idea , but your all wrong here , were talking about fairly
specific stuff ....lets talk some more about your pronouncements on
Boolean logic & it's alphabetically arranged logic units....that made
my ribs hurt...


>
> The Digisound VCDO schematics are at Kevin Lightners' Synthfool
Lite site
> http://www.sonicstate.com/synthfool/schm.html
>
>
> : thousands at least . do you know how many types of boolean logic
> : exist ? there are dozens of differant functions possible , plus by
> : having duplication of some modules thousands of possibilities
exist .
> : making the modcan a blatant no question rip-off .
> (...)
> : check lab electronics (india) boolean logic trainer . look &
> : learn . they start & follow.....and / nor / nand / or / 3 input
and /
> : 3 input nor / 3 input nand etc etc etc. then onto not gate , x-
or ,
> : flip-flopsn & decade counter ( actually a divide by 5 & divide by
2 ,
> : chainable)
>
> You are right. Firtsly, I was only thinking of the three most
frequently
> used.


This again is untrue . You mean the only ones you know about ?????
Alphabetical order is irrelevant to boolean logic.......



As for adding functions to the Serge model, why not suggest it to
Rex;
> but even in a very esoteric system there's limits I suppose.



Hunh.....are you just poppin' spit ? limits ? to even simple let
alone "esoteric" systems , there are billions of possible
connections/settings/functions -more than you could ever try in 2
lifetimes................there are NO limits to this....thats the
idea...?


But, secondly,
> many other logic functions can be done by using the BLOG together
with STS'
> comparator, divider, rectifier etc modules!
> So it may make sense to use only these three in the Serge. Of
course -
> Modcan has no comparators.


Rectifiers (full or half wave) , dividers have entirely differant
functions . comparators are obviously more closely related , but
still offer differant , complimentary but non-negational (it do'nt
make any boolean modules redundant) options.

regards
Mr. Rubbish (I kinda like that....)

>
> Sebastian Kuehnl
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: Modcan .no excuses surely ?

2001-06-09 by C. Whitten

> sworry I was under the illusion this discussion was on the Serge
> site , and we were discussing Modcan's cloning of Serge ?

You are incredibly pedantic aren't you.
We *were* discussing ModCan and the fact that multiple modules my have been
'copied'. I never mentioned or even implied that Serge had cloned anybody
else's designs.
My original text:
>For one thing, just about every analogue synth has a similar
>envelope
> design, somebody copied somebody else's design somewhere.
> OK so many of the ModCan modules are copies, but many are no longer
> available from the original source.

How do you arrive at your statement:
>the Serge
> > modules are not as cloned as you suggest above

I think in the context of the discussion I was asking at which level modules
could be regarded as intellectual property and therefore subject to possible
lawsuits.
Rex maybe has a case with regard to Boolean Logic Modules, especially over
the similar face plate design. I was floating the concept that a DADSR is a
far more common module.
It really is as simple as that.
CW

Re: Modcan .millions of options -no imagination (cubed)

2001-06-09 by Sebastian Kuehnl

So it's time for that killfile. You can go on calling me all the things you
want - behind my back. It is useless to discuss with you!

You have never showed respect for any opinion that differs from yours. Which
is what discussion is about. So I can't care to defend nor to correct my
points to you.

No matter wether we agree on sth or not, you twist and reverse my words and
make up your own logic, like a mind manipulating fascist politician. You
still have to write that "translator" that makes me understand the language
you speak - the only correct one out there.


: As per usual , You call me Mr. Rubbish (very witty...) , but you
: cant even justify your own assertations ?

I thought that you liked this word because you repeated it frequently in the
previous post. You deserved this nickname. Or would you prefer The One And
Only Justificator?


: Hunh.....are you just poppin' spit ? limits ? to even simple let
: alone "esoteric" systems , there are billions of possible
: connections/settings/functions -more than you could ever try in 2
: lifetimes................there are NO limits to this....thats the
: idea...?

"No limits" - LMAO. The perception of a limit is solely depending on the
angle of view. A Serge would be an infant if one needed a general analog
computer; a Buchla is more preconceived about usage (AC/DC split etc ---
Serge Tcherepnin: "I'm also really proud of the overall system concept,
which was not to use music as the basis for making choices, but using
electronics as the basis." ---) and thus even less suitable for analog
computer functions; but on the other hand the Buchla has the least limits
regarding FM sound and analog sequencing, far exceeding the Serge
capabilities. So whats the point in geeky comparisons all the time?


:
: But, secondly,
: > many other logic functions can be done by using the BLOG together
: with STS'
: > comparator, divider, rectifier etc modules!
: > So it may make sense to use only these three in the Serge. Of
: course -
: > Modcan has no comparators.
:
:
: Rectifiers (full or half wave) , dividers have entirely differant
: functions . comparators are obviously more closely related , but
: still offer differant , complimentary but non-negational (it do'nt
: make any boolean modules redundant) options.

Read: more Boolean logic functions than the three on the STS BLOG module
(i.e. many of those you mentioned in logic trainer hardware and programs),
can be done if you COMBINE it in a PATCH with the other modules. Why is that
so difficult to understand? You're pretending.


Sebastian Kuehnl


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: Modcan .no excuses surely ?

2001-06-09 by John Papiewski

There's an underlying ambivalence to this discussion:
On the ONE hand, yes, it's very common to copy/clone someone else's good designs
... saves years of your own r&d.... plus, there may only be a finite set of
optimal designs anyway.
On the OTHER hand, when Serge copied Buchla's stuff, he usually added his own
creative twists/improvements... or at the very least moved the knobs around.
On the OTHER OTHER hand, even cloning someone else's stuff is extremely time
consuming ... if he's on his own, Mr Duncan has managed to develop a fairly nice
module family ... only so many hours in a day.

JP

Re: Modcan .no excuses surely ?

2001-06-09 by Sebastian Kuehnl

Thanks John; your logic is a step ahead of mine :<)

Yes, Duncan has a factory but it was his own DIY project initially (also see
picture on synthmuseum.com).

----- Original Message -----
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: "John Papiewski" <johnp@...>
To: <SergeModular@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2001 2:12 PM
Subject: Re: [SergeModular] Re: Modcan .no excuses surely ?


:
: There's an underlying ambivalence to this discussion:
: On the ONE hand, yes, it's very common to copy/clone someone else's good
designs
: ... saves years of your own r&d.... plus, there may only be a finite set
of
: optimal designs anyway.
: On the OTHER hand, when Serge copied Buchla's stuff, he usually added his
own
: creative twists/improvements... or at the very least moved the knobs
around.
: On the OTHER OTHER hand, even cloning someone else's stuff is extremely
time
: consuming ... if he's on his own, Mr Duncan has managed to develop a
fairly nice
: module family ... only so many hours in a day.
:
: JP
:
:


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: Modcan .no excuses surely ?

2001-06-09 by C. Whitten

>On the OTHER hand, when Serge copied Buchla's stuff, he usually added his own
>creative twists/improvements... or at the very least moved the knobs around.
A very valid point.

> if he's on his own, Mr Duncan has managed to develop a fairly nice
> module family ... only so many hours in a day.
Very generously put, especially from someone who wasn't particularly
impressed by some of the ModCan modules.

I guess at minimum Bruce Duncan can be criticised for not moving a few knobs
or changing faceplate design. There has been no word yet as to whether he
has customised his circuitry.
CW

Re: Modcan .no excuses surely ?

2001-06-09 by =?iso-8859-1?q?=20?= <r_a_quirk@...>

hi,
I visited bruce in late 99. he demonstrated his
modules, etc.
he also had a modular for a client that had just been
finished. I noticed a module in it that wasn't from
his website. I said isn't that a serge module, the
variable slope one - he said it was a one-off at the
client's request. It had exactly the same layout,
just with a Modcan panel & the module didn't have a
name.
come to your own conclusion.

regards,
Richard

p.s.
nice pic of a fenix/serge (7panel) setup at
www.motorcitymusic.com. reminds me of the buchla pic
in mark vail's book.

____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.ie

theft of schems/module design

2001-06-09 by =?iso-8859-1?q?=20?= <r_a_quirk@...>

I don't who else here is also on the synth-DIY list,
but just for your info there was a report recently
about Doepfer copying one of Tony Oakley's VCF
designs.
From the emails that went back & forth, Tony
definitely wasn't happy about it but also decided not
to take legal action with Doepfer.
I guess the best we can home to do with companies that
are stealing designs is to not buy from them, and
inform people that we come across who are thinking of
buying from them of the whole story.

Regards,
Richard

____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.ie

Re: theft of schems/module design

2001-06-09 by C. Whitten

> Tony
> definitely wasn't happy about it but also decided not
> to take legal action with Doepfer.
I was quite surprised to see Doepfer actually print Wasp Filter on the face
plate of their A-124 module. At least ModCan don't do that.
(Didn't stop me from buying one however)
CW

Re: theft of schems/module design

2001-06-09 by skuehnl@yahoo.de

Chris Huggett, ex-EDP, supposedly was flattered when hearing about
Doepfer considering the Wasp clone. Buchla laughed when offered
provisions for the 292-clone Borg filter by Grant Richter. (Note that
Hugget was not asked by Doepfer himself, though.) These modules are
old, as is the Pk/Thr.

Doepfer customers usually don't know about backgrounds and just awe
at modules like the multiladder (although it isn't so special, each
of the Wiard filter modules can do that), so I guess I find heated
SMOG discussions preferable <;-)


Richard wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> I guess the best we can home to do with companies that
> are stealing designs is to not buy from them, and
> inform people that we come across who are thinking of
> buying from them of the whole story.

The dozen views on a story, you mean...

As for the SDIY discussion about the Multiladder theft, I
specifically liked Grant Richter's arguments. Unfortunately, the SDIY
archives were corrupt during this discussion; without warranty, I
recall his point was that Oakley could start advertising like "The
Oakley systems filter! which is so good that it is being adapted by
other companies!" etc you know. Don't waste a second on complaining
but see how you can take advantage out of such a situation.

Sebastian Kuehnl

Re: theft of schems/module design

2001-06-09 by Mark Deal

Sebastian Kuehnl did:

>Doepfer customers usually don't know about backgrounds and just awe
>at modules like the multiladder (although it isn't so special, each
>of the Wiard filter modules can do that), so I guess I find heated
>SMOG discussions preferable <;-)

What? Are you saying that people who buy affordable, entry-level modulars are intrinsically stupid? That’s awfully nice of you to say so. I know the history of what I’ve got in my enchanted breadbin.

Am I clever enough to own a Serge?

Cheers,
Mark

Re: theft of schems/module design

2001-06-09 by skuehnl@yahoo.de

Hi Mark,

--- In SergeModular@y..., Mark Deal <mdeal@c...> wrote:
> > Sebastian Kuehnl did:
> >
> >> >Doepfer customers usually don't know about backgrounds and just
awe
> >> >at modules like the multiladder (although it isn't so special,
each
> >> >of the Wiard filter modules can do that), so I guess I find
heated
> >> >SMOG discussions preferable <;-)
> >
> > What? Are you saying that people who buy affordable, entry-level
modulars are
> > intrinsically stupid?

No.


> > That¹s awfully nice of you to say so.
> > I know the history
> > of what I¹ve got in my enchanted breadbin.
> >
> > Am I clever enough to own a Serge?

Surely - I've never heard that owning something required intelligence
>;-p

> >
> > Cheers,
> > Mark

I used to lurk on the Doepfer billboard where you are as active as
knowledgeable, and the *average* level of tech/ hist./ musical
knowledge is much lower than in a Serge forum, but why would that be
something bad or even qualify anyone as "stupid"??

The term entry-level that you used even applies to the price only,
not the good function lineup.


Sigh, I hope this "justified" me ;-)

Cheers -
Sebastian

Re: theft of schems/module design

2001-06-09 by =?iso-8859-1?q?=20?= <r_a_quirk@...>

>I used to lurk on the Doepfer billboard where you are
as active as knowledgeable,

if you think he's stupid, just say it - why be vague
or clever or whatever. nobody gets anything out of a
slinging contest - why don't you guys do in private!


____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.ie

Re: theft of schems/module design

2001-06-10 by skuehnl@yahoo.de

--- In SergeModular@y..., <r_a_quirk@y...> wrote:
> >I used to lurk on the Doepfer billboard where you are
> as active as knowledgeable,
>
> if you think he's stupid, just say it - why be vague
> or clever or whatever. nobody gets anything out of a
> slinging contest - why don't you guys do in private!
>

What????????????? I have made a statement that without knowing the
billboard can't be rated at all?? Mark was (when I was lurking)
*very* active there. He knows a lot more than me about many aspects
of e-music. And again, why would having less knowledge qualify
someone as "stupid"?

Putting these things into my mouth publicly is more than assumptive
(which is always part of email), it is very disrespectful.

Knowledge is the easiest thing to acquire. In my definition stupidity
defines a lack of ability to *learn* which is totally different, but
this topic has nothing to do with any of the former posts about
Serge - Modcan - Doepfer.......

Sebastian Kuehnl

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.