dieter's comments on complex modules are easy to understand.

with a very simple gate controlled sampler we have the ability to use
it much as we would use an oscillator i.e. a sound source and maybe fm
operator. the audio output is produced on the fly, operable by lfo's,
sequencers, random gates et al, opening up many possibilities.

it has been suggested that for normal looping purposes we should use a
boss rc-50 or similar. an rc-50 is what i use now, and the fact that i
can't control it from the modular in any way at all is exactly the
reason why i proposed an improved a112. plus every looper has its
downpoints that cannot be overcome - the rc-50, for example, stops
following/sending midi sync when all three loops are muted, the roland
mc-9 only has a stereo output, and so on.

there seems to be a barrage of posts on this idea that, with all
respect, amount to "the last very-complicated-suggestion won't work,
so here's my very-complicated-suggestion". can it be that those who
would prefer a simpler module feel intimidated by very technical
descriptions of very personalised variations on a theme maybe some
are just waiting for the poll, which is why i keep badgering bakis to
include a simple version :)

the simpler a sampler module stays, the more flexibly - and cheaply -
it can be integrated into a modular system. and the more people will
buy it, i believe. using digital samplers and even max/msp as role
models for a sampler module is like using a digital camera to design a
paintbrush :)

jm2c,

stu