Re: [AH] EML, EMS, Doepfer

From Andrew Parker
Sent Mon, Apr 3rd 2000, 22:19

Hi Matt

I use an A100 system mainly for drones and fx. Simple effects like
outputting waveforms of other oscillators (or an oscillators own waveform)
back into the CV Pitch can produce some nice phasing effects especially with
multiple oscillators on the go that are slightly out of tune to each other.
Run this through a reverb and sit back for endlessly shifting tones. Adding
the doepfer triple resonant filter bank with its 3 lfo's makes it even more
interesting ;).

I cant really vouch for any other modulars since I've not really used any
except the little semi-modular MS20, oh an the maplin 5600s which had a VCS
3 type pin matrix, I've always wanted a VCS3 myself though :).

The MS20 is nice for processing stuff through but I eventually got board of
it, I would like the MS20 filter in a nice doepfer module though, I think
Analogue Solutions do something like this called the SY02 which fits into
the a100 casing or something.

Are  VCS3's still being produced ?


----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: <>
Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 8:57 PM
Subject: [AH] EML, EMS, Doepfer

> I'm considering an EML 101, VCS 3 or a Doepfer A100.  I'd like something
> flexible, patchable and dependable.  I'll be using it primarily for
> drones, textures, sound effects and treatments.  I'm having a hard time
> finding substantial information and opinions on these three synths (incl.
> archives) and I'd like to know, specifically from users, what these synths
> excel at and what their drawbacks are, keeping in mind what I'll be using
> for...
> The EML 101 and Doepfer A100 are within my price-range while the VCS 3
> require some tough decisions to be made.  I've also considered the MS 20,
> I'm not sure this is as suitable for what I want as the others are.  If
> can think of any other synths, preferrably semi-modular, that fit my
> criteria, please let me know... I've been using d*g*t*l synths and hybrids
> for my drones and textures, but they just don't satisfy me the way my
> (to be sacrificed for the semi-modular) does.
> Thanks,
> Matt