Several people have posted that because the CEM has a filter and VCAs ,we're somehow
getting the features for free (or even low cost). Look at all the additional pots, knobs,
jacks, connections and circuit boards required to implement these additional functions!

Ask any DIYer, usually the overwhelming cost and time is in those passive components -
not the semiconductors.

--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com , "selfoscillate" <synaptic_music@...> wrote:
>
> --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com , Chris Muir <cbm@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Aug 5, 2008, at 1:51 AM, selfoscillate wrote:
> > > i don't see a problem here. you can just add a vca of your
> > > choice to the patch to get dynamic fm.
> > > imho separate vca's give the best flexibility, as you can use
> > > them for other purposes too, if you don't use dynamic fm
> > > in your actual patch.
> >
> >
> > It's certainly true that you can patch a VCA into FM in. I mentioned
> > that in my original message.
> >
> > A complex vco like the A-111-2 is all about integration. By your
> > logic, why have an integrated filter or waveshaper Wouldn't a
> > separate filter [waveshaper] be more flexible
> >
> > All I was saying was that for a large class of FM sounds, dynamic
> > depth is important, and that, at least for me, having this VCA
> > integrated into the oscillator would be a good thing.
> >
> > Chris Muir
> > cbm@
> > http://www.xfade.com
> >
>
> hello chris,
>
> i totally agree with you that dynamic depth fm is great,
> but including such a function would be nothing else than
> adding a vca, which is already available in many incarnations.
>
> so why including a filter and a waveshaper on the a111/2
> because they are already on the cem chip, so it would be
> a waste not to use them.
>
> best wishes
>
> ingo
>