This is from an SOS article about the E-mu modular system which is certainly classic and certainly from the era you describe:

"There was also a series of logic
modules, for use with the sequencer modules. These included a hex
inverter, which was six simple inverters, and functioned more like a
switch depending on what sort of pulse it received, and a 'Triple Or
Gate' which logically outputs when it sees a 'logical input' (no, I
don't understand it either...). A triple latch module and a pulse
shaper, which is useful for converting audio to digital triggers,
complete the line-up. With some of these modules, you
suspect that the designers must have been doing things just because
technology meant they could! The hex digital inverter, for example, came into being simply because a CMOS hex inverter chip became available
which gave just those functions."

As far as people calling your concerns fetishistic I am certainly not one to judge, but if you want to be historically accurate (which I am finding increasingly disappointing in general when it comes to the motivations of modern artists) then it is possible that you haven't quite defined your aesthetic approach based on an accurate assumption about the era you seem to want to emulate.



________________________________
From: codotinc < doubleopards@... >
To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2012 11:12 PM
Subject: 1 Re: A-149-1 and A-149-2 -- digital or analog


 


Sorry -- I just find it tacky when words like 'fetishist' get thrown into the conversation. I've been *actively* performing and recording electronic music for more than 15 years, and while I may be new to analog synths in the larger scheme (like probably 95% of us), I'm not uninformed about electronic music. With my modular I want to make electronic music based on the systems which would be found in a modular from the 'classic period' of electronic music, i.e. 1960s-1970s. Yes, pioneers like Barry Vercoe and Denis Smalley used early computer technology, but for the most part, digital technology wasn't widely used in electronic instruments until the 1980s. I can't come even close to affording an original instrument from the time period of my interest, so -- like so many of us in this field -- I am building one from newly-built/-designed components.

I don't want computers in my modular. I've used tons of digital effects (you can't beat a long dead-clean digital delay), I record onto a computer. But for this ONE instrument, I want to constrain myself to a certain set of parameters which are -- to me -- *not* 'arbitrary'. And to try to make the best music I can within those limits.

--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com , "Mr julian" <jujulilianan@...> wrote:
>
>
> Calm down, it's just a modular synth discussion on the internet. And I'm
> not sure you're even being judged.
>
> As florian already asked, we were interested to know more about what you
> consider your informed choices about not having digital modules.
>
> You're the one making the distinction, not others.
>
> It seems that "contains a microcontroller" Is your definition. Fair enough.
> There was a pretty good chance the 149 didn't have one of those, so it's
> interesting to know what your response would be if it was just shift
> register based, and it was mixing shift register bits with resistors to
> form voltages.
>
> ------- Original message -------
> > From: codotinc <doubleopards@...>
> > To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: 3.5.'12, 5:49
> >
> > It's my instrument to make my music through my set of informed decisions.
> >
> >
> > Everyone else, resume your squabbling over the ridiculousness of many
> > modular users' distinction between analog and digital.
> >
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]