Hot damn NAMM

[Andrew Tarpinian]

Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 20, 2015, at 8:24 PM, K9 Kai Niggemann <kai at kainiggemann.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 20.01.2015, at 23:16, Andrew Tarpinian <andrewtarpinian at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> and/or a Mutable Braids
> 
> I think Mutable modules are the devil. They are *so much* like using presets. To me that goes totally against the idea of using a modular... Well, maybe "clouds". Well. Maybe a umpteenth case with all digital modules, analogically controlled? ;-)

You know, I was thinking this too. I was looking closer at braids and was thinking isn't this kind of like cheating?
"Sound source… like an oscillator? Not really.

Most of the timbres it generates are so complex that approaching them with a classic analog modular setup would require a full case of oscillators, filters, VCAs, waveshapers and ring-modulators – that’s why we call it a macro-oscillator – "

So in other words, it takes all the fun out of it... :)

I mean it sounds great and peoples universal praise made me think it was complex and deep, despite seeming presety on the surface. (That other one with the internal drum sounds, I didn't get the point of that)

I thought Clouds looked interesting as well. Was thinking of getting Frames to add some more vca's.

I really want to add a digital sound source to expand, the Shapeshifter seems to give me maximum bang for buck/space. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.music-bar.org/pipermail/music-bar/attachments/20150120/9a3aab6d/attachment.html>