Thanks to all that responded. I greatly appreciate and value your
opinions, being the Doepfer experts that you are.

I know I'll be reading posts here frequently.

I rechecked and it was indeed only the UK FAME website that trashed
Doepfer, and it does sounds like sour grapes. I believe a 50% failure
rate was quoted. Hmmmm....

From what I gather, the rotary encoder is in fact a bit dodgey, but I
guess with some care, the encoder will not be a problem even though
it *is* fun to spin them real fast.

The lettering that rubs off, well, perhaps by the time that happens,
one has memorized all the functions anyway, and isn't this what those
old Dymo label makers were made for

As for MIDI timing, from what I've read, the problem affects the
Shaltwerk too, and seems to be caused by non-timing events in the
clock input. The advice I'm getting is, only send MIDI clocks, no
notes, no pitch bend, AT, etc., just MIDI clocks.

Now, what is better, blue LEDs or red
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--- 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