hello florian,

i had that idea for two bbd-chips on one module
because i think this enables the user to obtain
delay, chorusing and flanging with only one module,
so there is no need to decide which one should buy,
because the module does it all.
different outputs are not expensive to add and probably
give nice stereo effects. after all a module with two
bbd's will be cheaper that two separate modules,
and it will keep dieter from offering two modules,
which will further lower the price.

i can see that two modules offer even more possibilities,
but nothing keeps us from buying two modules anyway.

best wishes

ingo



--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com , Florian Anwander
<Florian.Anwander@c...> wrote:

>
> Hi Bakis
>
> Hmm, sorry; perhaps now I spoil ingo's suggestion, but I think it

would

> be a waste of ressource.
> If I have two BBDs, I want to modulate their clock from different
> modulation sources in 80 percent of all cases. Lets take as example

the

> famous Roland chorus, which is two BBDs whereone is modulated

direct by

> the LFO the other by the inverted LFO signal.
>
> Either I'd like to have two separate modules or at least one module

with

> two separate delaylines. There are a lot of famous BBD-based

devices

> like the Dynacord TAM-21, the A/DA or the Roland Dimension-D. At

the

> moment these examples look like the targets of a possible Doepfer
> BBD-module, but they should be the starting point from where a
> developement goes further on.
>
> Florian
>
>
> Bakis Sirros wrote:
>
> > hello dieter,
> > ingo's idea of putting two different stages BBD's into
> > each module is great.
> > as i always say, the more capabilities, sockets and
> > knobs in a module, the better.
> > best regards,
> > bakis.
>