My rock solid aesthetic approach at a little house party. The bassline was made using a Roland System 100. A-100, and a Pro One. Sorry about the audio quality, someone shot this with a minicam. http://www.youtube.com/watch v=GG-l-JhpEGE



________________________________
From: PAUL BURTON < basicmodel101@... >
To: " Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com " < Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com >
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2012 4:40 AM
Subject: Re: 1 Re: A-149-1 and A-149-2 -- digital or analog


 


Dude, seriously what is so hard to understand about "Quantized Random Voltages" Quantization requires a choice to be made on the part of the device. It's a binary function. Random is a digital term for a number generation. The voltage part for sure is analog. You claim to have been making "electronic music" for fifteen years but have just recently discovered analog like 95% of the people on this list.  I'm on this list, and I bought my a-100 basic system from a magazine ad in electronic musician before they even had an internet presence at least 15 years ago. You are splitting hairs. If you don't understand that people are going to question your rationale about a question as absurd as is this "quantized random voltage" module really analog, well I don't know what to say. Consider yourself lucky that you received the intelligent and informative answers that you did. If you want my opinion you should be concerned with the circuits that are actually in the
signal path. A lot of the Doepfer modules use Curtis IC's which were prominent in the 1980's and a lot of them use modern OP amps, all of which ARE analog and NOT from the era you speak of. Does the irony escape you that you asked if a module was analog on an analog modular synth forum and people were defending what could be construed as digital about this certain module I for one am not privy to the genius of the world that exists within the "useful constraints" you speak of. Please explain to me, if the Buchla module that the Doepfer A-149-1 and A-149-2 are based upon accomplishes this without digital components what the advantages or limitations be I'm here to learn.

To: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2012 1:34 AM
Subject: 1 Re: A-149-1 and A-149-2 -- digital or analog

Oh, thanks Paul Burton! I will now re-define my aesthetic approach based
on the fact that *some* modulars used chips in *some* of their modules!
You noticed, maybe, that I mentioned Barry Vercoe Perhaps you know the
1970 album 'Computer Music' on Nonesuch on which he uses a *gasp*
computer to make *swoon* music Check it out, it's great. I.e., I am
aware of the use of computers by many composers and experimenters in
electronic music, even during the classic era. I choose not to use
computers in my modular. At this point in time that choice is important
to me.

And I'd love to hear about your rock-solid aesthetic approach, in all of
its minutiae.

--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com , PAUL BURTON <basicmodel101@...>
wrote:

>
> 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
>
>
> Â
>
>
> 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]
>

 



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