That was hysterical - the bit about 1/4 inch jacks and baked
potatoes and I hear you. Some of those guys are bunch of
whiners!

I will post sound when I can. Two small delays: I forgot to pay
the renewal for my domain name, so that's down for another day
or so and my ISP's email system has crashed for the ninth time
in two months, so I'm waiting for them to fix their server before I
have email again.

And I too don't grok the whole diss Dieter thing on both AH,
either. Jealousy maybe, who knows. All I do know is Dieter
created the market that all these other manufacturers make their
living on now. They should be thanking him and taking more his
lead as Doepfer has been busier than a one-legged man in an
ass-kicking contest releasing new instruments this year. I'd like
to see a little more of THAT from the others as well! Outside of A.
Systems, Cynthia and Modcan and of course Dieter, it's been a
REAL slow year in product development from the others.

- P





--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com , "unknown freak"
<cgraef@n...> wrote:

> Hey, Peter -- awesome post. Sound files -- any kind of sound

files -- would

> be very interesting to hear, if you get a chance. It's easier to get

the

> implications in the context of an mp3.
>
> Maybe post this to AH too The absurd attitude toward Doepfer

of a lot of

> voices on that list sort of burns my ass. I mean, is Doepfer or

is Doepfer

> not offering a truly tantalizing flight of great new modules
>
> Come to think of it, I can just see the Konkuro response:

"Random voltages

> are useless! This has nothing to do with music! It's a module

for morons!

> All you need is 1/2 an oscillator, a bandpass filter, and a baked

potato, as

> long as they all have 1/4" jacks!"
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: (i think you can figure that out)
> > [mailto:petergrenader@h...]
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 12:46 PM
> > To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: 1 A-149- fist impressions
> >
> >
> > Hello to list. Sorry I've been away so long.
> >
> > Yesterday I took delivery of the new 149 Quantized/Stored
> > Random Voltages and I thought I'd inflict you all with my first
> > impressions..
> >
> > Interesting little bug indeed.
> >
> > As always, I am the WORST when it comes to reading

manuals

> > and spent about an hour with it before I downloaded Dieters
> > instructions. Once I did, things that I was noticed were 'oddly
> > related' made a lot more sense and I suggest to the lovers

of all

> > things random out there that you do the download first,

because

> > if you leave it to Don Buchla's typically cryptic graphics (which
> > Dieter also incorporated), like me you won't really have a clue
> > what is actually going on.
> >
> > The top half first:
> >
> > The top half of the 149 consists of two separate outputs of
> > quantized stepped random voltages. Given that both run off

the

> > same random source, they track each other in a remarkable

way,

> > which again is modeled after the characteristics of the

Buchla

> > 266. The top output (n+1) is quantized in 1V increments and

the

> > bottom one (n squared) in 1/12 volt increments. Connected

to

> > the 1V/oct input of a VCO, this means that one is giving you
> > octaves and the other semitones - and because both run off

the

> > same random source, they track one another. Connecting

two

> > VCOs (one to each of the two quantized outputs) will yield

some

> > intriguing counterpoints which every once in a while resolve
> > themselves to unisons.
> >
> > There is a pot which controls the depth of the spread which

can

> > also be controlled by an external input. The level of this VC

can

> > be attenuated manually with its level pot.
> >
> > One thing to mention: the 149, at least mine, reacts to the
> > TRAILING EDGE of the incoming clock. If you want your
> > envelope to to track these voltage changes, you're going to

have

> > to invert its trigger (an 165 being the easiest solution) to get it

in

> > sync with what's coming out of the 149. It took me a while to
> > realize this as I thought at first the n squared out was

frequency

> > doubled from n+1 ( the second reacting tto both rising and

failing

> > edges).
> >
> > Outside of the usual applications, my immediate thought

was

> > using the N+1 out to control the 1V/oct VC input of an LFO

used

> > to pace a sound event, thus rendering random musical

rhythmic

> > intervals. Being a big fan of this type of control, I have a pretty
> > good idea where the n+1 is going to get a lot of use.
> >
> > The bottom half:
> >
> > The bottom half behaves in a less predicable manner than

the

> > quantized section. It's outputs relfect a true random selection

of

> > 256 available levels generated within the module, also in
> > accordance with the conventions of the Buchla 266. So,

yeah, it's

> > not true random in that there are only 256 possible

resolutions,

> > but the net effect is pretty much the same. I guess what I'm

really

> > saying is that limitation is not perceivable to me.
> >
> > The top output will give you a sampling from all 256 levels at

any

> > given time. The bottom output has an adjustable range

(either a

> > pot or external VC) which in effect allows you to tune the
> > bandwidth of these fluctations. Although I;m not 100%

positive, I

> > think it's reacting like a low Q bandpass filter, the peak of

which

> > is the pointer of the pot. But instead of passing voltage, you're
> > passing and attenuating numbers within the range of 256. .

Fully

> > CCW will attenuate the high numbers and give you

emphasis on

> > the low numbers with a gradual taper into the mid range.
> > Centering the pot will emphasize the center with a graudual
> > taper to both the low and high ends, and fully CW will fully
> > attenuate the lower scale and give emphasis on the high
> > numbers with a gradual taper into the mid.
> >
> > In any event, the result is very musical. Atonal, but musical if

that

> > makes any sense.
> >
> > One thing to mention is the while this module is set up like

and

> > behaves much in the manner of the Buchla 266, Dieter's

method

> > to derive the random internally is not the same as Buchla's
> > approach. Dieter opted for digital noise while Don Buchla

used

> > a noise-modulated triangle wave as the source, much like

Serge

> > and Wiard did, but their's use a saw wave. Because this
> > difference (digital noise), I would be interested to hear the

149

> > agianst a 266. I know of a 266 locally and wil be suggesting

a

> > face off in the newar future and will report back to you all,
> > possibly even with audio examples.
> >
> > In any event - if you're lover of random voltage as I am (my
> > system now has six souces for stepped random) - buy the

149,

> > it's great.
> >
> > hope this helps,
> >
> > Peter
> >
> >