Hi there,
I don't own an MAQ16 (would really like to though) but I have been
an a100 user since 1996 and very happy with the build quality.
I hear people talk about things wear out and rub off, but I have had
no problems, it works and looks 100% sonce I bought it, BUT my
system stays in my studio and not out gigging so that could be a big
factor.

You said you found a couple of websites saying doepfer are rubbish,
I don't know the sites but I found UK one by FAME. They used to
distribute doepfer in UK but lost it to another company and I can
tell you he loved the system, he thought it was the best, but as
soon as he lost it he said it was terrible and waste of money...
So is he true or just upset

By the way, he used to charge £120 for a VCF, the new company
charges £50!

Anyway, I'm not biased about doepfer, it was poor quality I would
tell you, but MY a100 is 100% perfect, am I the only one

Oh yes, apparently there is some problems with the MAQ midi clock
features, not sure what as I don't own one but there was som
discussion about it.


Thanks
John

--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com , "jauer9" <jauer9@e...> wrote:
> I am new to Doepfer, and I am seeking more info on the build
quality
> from all the experienced users here.
>
> My first excursion will be a MAQ16, but I have heard that the
quality
> of these devices is poor: legends rub off, MIDI loses sync, the
> rotary encoder wears out quickly. Admittedly, this opinion comes
from
> only one or two websites in the UK, so there may be some
unmentioned
> bias happening in the background from these sources.
>
> Nonetheless, I would greatly appreciate anyone's comments about
the
> overall quality of Doepfer instruments, the MAQ in particular.
>
> Would anyone suggest the blue LED version Would it be more
reliable
> (blue LEDs draw less current, as I understand it, so less taxing
on
> power supply...maybe)
>
> There are two other "MAQ" Yahoo groups, but there is no activity
> there and few members and many SPAM porn posts.
>
> I looked into SoftStep, but this is a completely different beast
and
> although similar to the MAQ, lacks some of it's features (but adds
> lots more for algorithmic composition) SoftStep can't replace the
> MAQ, IMHO.
>
> I don't really need bells and whistles, just a basic SQ-10-like
box
> to get me started in modular synthesis control.
>
> I have some old modular CV stuff, but would like to go towards all-
> Doepfer eventually.
>
> Again, anyone's comments would be greatly appreciated. I mean, if
> these products are well made, this should be made known! If the
> quality is not-so-hot, this should be stated, too.
>
> Thanks to all!!
>
> (and sorry for the newbie 'tude)
>
> ja