Yahoo Groups archive

MOTM

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:35 UTC

Thread

Format Wars

Format Wars

2006-10-03 by Paul Schreiber

> DotCom is boring just because so few third-party suppliers have taken up
> the task of producing visually compatible modules for it. MOTM would be
> quite boring as a synthesizer by itself without Oakley, ModCan, etc. I'm
> switching to MOTM format because it's so easy to order a panel from FPE
> and make whatever I want.

Sitting here in my little studio,  I have equipment from Emagic, Korg, Yamaha, 
tc, Lexicon, Eventide and Roland. NONE of it looks the 'same', I didn't buy 
*any* of it because of what it 'looked like'. I bought it because of what it 
does.

Yet, one of the Many Lessons I have learned is the modular synths are somehow 
*perceived* differently. People, for whatever reasons, are 10X more passionate 
about the *physical appearance* of their modular. Put a MOTM module in their 
.com cabinet? NO WAY!!! Buy 1 little Frac Rack cabinet? THIS OFFENDS MY TASTE 
BUDS!

And these same people have 22 random guitar pedals lying on the floor :)

OK, I'll get off the soapbox. Got modules to ship!

Paul S.

Re: [motm] Format Wars

2006-10-03 by Jay

Paul Schreiber wrote:

> Put a MOTM module in their .com cabinet?

If the holes were already drilled, I'm sure it would be much simpler.

> NO WAY!!! Buy 1 little Frac Rack cabinet? THIS OFFENDS MY TASTE BUDS!

So, you're saying if I had one of these:

http://hotrodmotm.com/images/case/synth_of_doom_2.jpg

and was basically told that all new modules were going to be released in 
a different format that I wouldn't be a bit peeved?

Obviously cost is a major factor with your recent lust with Frac. I'm 
sure nobody would complain if the only way you were going to make new 
MOTM format modules was to do away with those $6 pots. But what do I know.

Re: [motm] Format Wars

2006-10-03 by Jason Proctor

>and was basically told that all new modules were going to be released in
>a different format that I wouldn't be a bit peeved?

please go and read this again --

http://www.synthtech.com/motm_plan.html

kits, and certain low-selling modules, are going away. that's all.

do you get it now?

Re: [motm] Format Wars

2006-10-03 by Jay

Jason Proctor wrote:

> kits, and certain low-selling modules, are going away. that's all.
> 
> do you get it now?

Are you sure YOU'RE the one that's been paying attention?

Re: [motm] Format Wars

2006-10-03 by Dale (Inquisitor Betrayer)

take way the pots Paul uses, why MOTM then?
Paul's quality is what keeps me around looking at his wares ...
If I go with another format, chances are, I remove the others pots and replace them with the $6.00 ones. ;-)
and on down the line with other parts Paul uses...
well, I guess I will wait another 5 years to see how all this falls out ...
by then maybe Frac will be sold at other places, a secondary market for the "must buy now" modules and maybe
some estate sales for some ... ;-)
dale
Recent events require your assistance to your charities. Do give when able. "without music, life would be a mistake"
Show quoted textHide quoted text
----- Original Message -----
From: Jay
Obviously cost is a major factor with your recent lust with Frac. I'm
sure nobody would complain if the only way you were going to make new
MOTM format modules was to do away with those $6 pots. But what do I know.

Re: [motm] Format Wars

2006-10-03 by Jason Proctor

>Are you sure YOU'RE the one that's been paying attention?

quite sure thanks :-)

you might have thought you were talking just 510 and FFB, as your 
polite private email (thanks) indicates, but your post said -

>and was basically told that all new modules were going to be released in
>a different format that I wouldn't be a bit peeved?

which isn't true. some modules may be frac only, and maybe for good 
reasons, but the 730 and others will be available in large format, as 
the MOTM news page says very clearly.

what's the problem anyway? take the module out of frac and put it 
behind a big panel if you want. maybe if you're nice to Paul for a 
change he might sell you a stuffed SMT PCB so you can bung some nice 
spectrol pots & switchcraft jacks on it too.

the only gripe i have with new era MOTM is that ideally i'd like Paul 
to stock PCBs for the discontinued modules. i don't care about panels 
or kits or assembled, just the PCB for me, thanks. it only takes 20 
$40 sales to get to the $800 laid out for a 100 PCB run and from 
there on in it's gravy.

any chance of cheaper rack rails? [fx: ducks]

Re: [motm] Format Wars

2006-10-03 by Pete

I would love to get the 510 before its gone. I just cant afford it. As a mater of fact the main reason I have not bought any new MOTM modules in a while is

RE: [motm] Format Wars

2006-10-03 by Wheaton, Simon

There have been MOTM plans on the website in the past for modules that have not eventuated. Just because it is on the website, it does not mean it will actually happen that way.
What happens when those 95% of kit sales are no longer in the equation. What percentage of the previous 95% kit sales are going to purchase assembled MOTM modules instead of kits, and what percantage will move to building modules from other sources instead of MOTM?
If there is a large decline in MOTM format sales after the move to assembled only, won't more MOTM format modules be seen as being unprofitable, low-selling, and dropped from the range?
This is going to change the whole balance of the equation that Paul uses to decide what modules to keep in which format, I don't think you can say for certain what is going to happen. I expect we will see more modules dropped from the MOTM format, and these then available in Frac format, as is happening already, plus Frac only modules.
Oh, that's right, we will have the do-everything-you-want DX7 by then (sorry Audio Engine), we don't need all that expensive analogue crap anymore!
We should be able to voice our concerns without being put down for bitching, maybe more people would voice their concerns if not for fear of being attacked for doing so.
Simon
Canberra
AUSTRALIA
From: Jason Proctor
Sent: Wed 4/10/2006 3:49 AM

>and was basically told that all new modules were going to be released in
>a different format that I wouldn't be a bit peeved?

please go and read this again --
http://www.synthtech.com/motm_plan.html

kits, and certain low-selling modules, are going away. that's all.

do you get it now?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

This email, and any attachments, may be confidential and also privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete all copies of this transmission along with any attachments immediately. You should not copy or use it for any purpose, nor disclose its contents to any other person.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: [motm] Format RANT

2006-10-03 by thomas white

Hi all, 

Of course, people should also be able to "bitch" as it
were, but in doing the "bitching" it is important to
do so without putting Paul (and the other brave
modular companies) down for decisions he rightfully
makes in running his own business. He has the right to
do whatever he wants. End of story. We as
consumers/fans/spectators/etc have the right to buy or
not to buy. End of story. Supply versus demand. 

From what I understand, and even from witnessing the
volume on the message boards, demand for MOTM Kits was
dropping prior to the sale Paul had (when everything
sold out in 2 seconds). Bottom line: we were all
spoiled and waiting for the *next* great thing instead
of focusing on the *current* great modules in the
line. I am very guilty of having the thoughts about
the next module making my synth "finally " well errr.
"a bit" ... errr, well one module more complete. We
are lucky Paul even decided to make modules at all.
This modular is a history maker. Think about it, no
classic moog owner had anything to do with building
the modules but certainly the legacy behind them only
grows with time (as does repair costs wink wink). The
MOTM will still sound freekin' awesome whether it
comes from kits or an assembly line. Once it's built
it comes down to performance and Paul has *always*
made that his top priority. There has been no change
to this in making a second line of Frac modules, in
discontinuing kits, or in considering any and all
options to *stay* in business. IMHO Quality is the
foundation of MOTM, not the kits. 

I am in the group of folks who has a *largish* modular
and my MOTM purchases have evolved to include
purchases from other manufacturers. This is natural as
you expand a modular. Every manufacturer has a
selection of modules, sometimes wide and sometimes
limited. They also all have an area to complain about
when it comes down to it. For example Doepfer has
almost everything available but size and parts issues
are often mentioned. Buchla is nice but very
expensive. Synth.com is great but doe not have kits or
uses cheaper pots. On and on...

My only point here is that these guys are all
*small/independant* businesses and have to make
decisions about products based on their own biz model.
Paul has stated that the price of surface mount
components is much less than through hole and, as
such, we might see assembled (by machine) modules
costing the same as kits (meant to be assembled by the
end user). If the assembled price ends up being close
to the current kit price, the value only goes up for
me since I can spend my time playing with my modular
instead of assembling it. There are too many who focus
on the building of the shrine, opposed to the
celebration of it with music. Don't misunderstand this
statement, kits are a great hobby, but there are still
options for me to build them with MOTM moving to
assembled. Look at Oakley, MFOS, Blacet, etc. There
are wonderful options people. 

I for one have less time these days than I used to. I
still will build kits, sure, when time allows. These
may be of my own design or based on one of the *many*
pcb-only boards you can get off of the Internet these
days lately. BUT, I have grown to appreciate the fact
that modules arrive assembled sometimes and I can get
right up and work with them. Fun stuff. 

Look at the following track record to see into why
Paul is doing this (IMHO):

Cyndustries - no kits/sometimes pricey - SUCCESS
Doepfer - no kits - SUCCESS, largest of everyone in
history actually
Synth.com - no kits - SUCCESS
Serge - no kits - SUCCESS
WIARD - no kits - SUCCESS (mostly, sorry Grant)
MODCAN - no kits - SUCCESS


MOTM - yes, kits (but LONG lead times on shipping,
great for a lot of people but some people who are
*used* to buying assembled are discouraged by lead
times on assembled modules. I know Simon keeps posting
the "kits are 95%" of synthech, but that number will
obviously change once kits go away. When given the
option to buy assembled only from all manufacturers
mostly, it will be interesting to see who's boat still
floats. My vote is clearly for Paul, be it Frac or
large format. The fact is that Paul will still mainly
focus on large format only without kit versions. It is
good to have a Frac "option" with so many existing
Frac users out there. Good business decision. 

By far though the best business decision made lately
is the one by Paul to stay in business creating
assembled only versus going out of business riding the
kit train to la la land. I am grateful for all that
MOTM has brought to my life. Do I wish aspects had
gone differently? Sure, I am still waiting for modules
announced in 98 when I started building. But, if it
all ended tomorrow I know I have awesome designs from
Paul and Co that will last a long long time. 

Thank you Paul primarily, but one cannot forget the
Daves, the Brewster, Mr. Marsh, Elhard, the other
Paul, Larry (RIP) and all of the other people who have
helped to make this journey more than interesting. The
list continues to make great discussion and great
company happen. 

Thomas White

Thomas White
  Natural Rhythm
www.naturalrhythmmusic.com


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [motm] Format Wars

2006-10-30 by Kenneth Elhardt

Paul S. writes:
>>I have equipment from Emagic, Korg, Yamaha,  tc, Lexicon, Eventide and
Roland. NONE of it looks the 'same', I didn't buy *any* of it because of
what it 'looked like'. I bought it because of what it does.  Yet, one of the
Many Lessons I have learned is the modular synths are somehow   *perceived*
differently. People, for whatever reasons, are 10X more passionate  about
the *physical appearance* of their modular. And these same people have 22
random guitar pedals lying on the floor.<<

But a modular is considered a single instrument and putting in modules that
are different sizes, colors, and styles doesn't look good in the same case,
nor will many of them even fit.  Imagine if 1/3 of a Jupiter-8 looked like a
Memorymoog, and another 1/3 looked like an OB-8.  Yikes.  With rack gear,
there is at least a 19" standard, so everything is the same size.  And
pedals on the floor just like rack gear, are separate individual devices,
not a single instrument.  That's at least how I see it.

-Elhardt

Re: [motm] Format Wars

2006-10-30 by John Mahoney

At 08:02 PM 10/29/2006, Kenneth Elhardt wrote:

>But a modular is considered a single instrument ...

Well, opinions vary. Bob Moog -- maybe you've heard of him -- said 
that a synthesizer is "a collection of instruments". I can't recall, 
but I think that quote is in the Moog movie.

In any case, modules that look different can be functionally 
compatible. For example, MOTM, Modcan "B" and Synthesizers.com 
modules look different but play well together. Trying to mix MOTM, 
Serge, and Doepfer would be another story! ;-)
--
john

Re: [motm] Format Wars

2006-10-30 by Kenneth Elhardt

John Mahoney writes:
>>Well, opinions vary. Bob Moog -- maybe you've heard of him -- said that a
synthesizer is "a collection of instruments".<<

It's a collection of modules or sound modifying devices.  One can think of
it however they want, but that collection forms a whole instrument.  Of
course some people don't mind if their synth looks like a mess of different
modules, and I've seen pictures of some ugly synths like that.  I have three
different modular systems, but they're in completely separate cases.  I'm
sure nobody has a problem with the way that looks.

>>In any case, modules that look different can be functionally
compatible....  Trying to mix MOTM, Serge, and Doepfer would be another
story!<<

True, but this was all about the looks.  However, I mix MOTM and Doefper
with no problems.  I just wouldn't want them in the same case.  That would
look goofy.  Some people also find the look of an instrument inspiring for
creating music on.  Perhaps that's another aspect.

-Elhardt

Re: [motm] Format Wars

2006-10-30 by Joe Kearney

On Oct 29, 2006, at 8:02 PM, Kenneth Elhardt wrote:
> Imagine if 1/3 of a Jupiter-8 looked like a Memorymoog, and another  
> 1/3 looked like an OB-8. Yikes.
Wait, thats my dream synth!  That would be awesome!  It'd be  
beautiful...

Joe

Re: [motm] Format Wars

2006-10-30 by Mark

On 10/29/06, John Mahoney put forth:
>In any case, modules that look different can be functionally
>compatible.

This is true.

>For example, MOTM, Modcan "B" and Synthesizers.com
>modules look different but play well together.

The Modcan "B" series has some very nice modules, including a dual
quantizer not available in their "A" series.  Although, I have to
wonder why they decided to make the "B" series white.  Considering
MOTM users as a potential market, that seemed like a poor business
decision.  I'm not saying that modules in MOTM format from other
manufacturers should should be absolutely identical.  While the
Encore modules have different sized knobs and different lettering,
they look perfectly fine installed along with Synthesis Technology's
modules, as opposed to standing out like Pee-wee Herman at the Source
Awards.

>Trying to mix MOTM, Serge, and Doepfer would be another story! ;-)

Perhaps some of the voltage ranges are different, but you can connect
them fairly easily using adapter modules or adapter cables.

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.