Re: [AH] Re: vocoder thoughts ...

From James Husted
Sent Wed, Mar 26th 2008, 20:23

  The only vocoder I have is in my Nord G2 so is not analog by any  
means and is not as programmable as I would really like. You have no  
control over the slew rates of the analysis CV or any means to really  
modify them as you do in a truly modular system like the Doepfer. I  
could of course make my own Vocoder system on the Nord with tons of  
"modules"  Since I don't do the classic "Robot Voice" type of  
vocoding, I use it more for tonal spectrum mapping of one sound onto  
another and being able to re-arrange the filters is more important to  
me. I am not familiar with the units out there mentioned in this  
thread - do they have decent programming in this regard, or do most  
of them have the filters mapped straight across (i.e. low filters  
driving low etc.)? I would imagine the way you plan on using a  
vocoder will make a big difference in which ones work best for you.  
When vocoding became the thing to do in "the day" it was always the  
"robot voice" thing and many units had the time had the analysis  
filters mapped out with vocals in mind - narrower filters in the  
vocal range for instance - and they sounded better for the "robot  
voice" thing because of it.


On Mar 26, 2008, at 11:50 AM, charles graef wrote:
> I do.
> As to the versatility factor, I haven't pushed the A129 anywhere  
> near its
> limits, and it's nice to know how far away they are.
> --Chuck
> -----Original Message-----
> From: []
> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 1:23 PM
> To: analogue heaven
> Cc: jonathan_snipes
> Subject: [AH] Re: vocoder thoughts ...
> i have never tried the Doepfer vocoder system, but IMO versatility is
> not important if the sound is not right.... and i have yet to hear of
> anyone who loves the sound of the Doepfer vocoder system