Re: Gremlins and other oddities

[matthias@bahianet.com.br (Matthias)]

>On Tue, 17 Sep 1996, Ed Drake wrote:
>
>> Andre La Fosse said:
>> >but there are at least a few unfortunate
>> >gremlins floating about in the initial version that have caused me a 
>few
>> >headaches).
>> Andre -What are some of the gremlins you are talking about?

Andre starts his list:
>The most problematic for me is that the reverse function has an erratic
>and unpredictable tendency to introduce a popping noise at the initial
>loop point, which is generally unremovable.  In a transparent loop, this
>is a real bummer, dude.

So sorry man. Then +Reverse+ was just incredibly complicated. Now a
structural change made it simpler and killed the clicks.

>Beyond that, there's a function called "loop copy" which was apparently
>not finished in time for the initial shipment of the Oberheim; the slot on
>the front panel reserved for this function doesn't actually do anything,
>so you have to use a slightly less direct combination of commands to get
>this going (although it does work flawlessly when you use it).

Its done now. I wonder whether you are really going to use it. As you say,
with +Next-Multiply+ or +Next-Insert+ you can do the same, more flexible
for my taste.

>I've also noticed that the delay mode of the unit tends to be a bit
>tempramental in terms of how and where it decides to place the loop point.

The Start Point, you mean? Yes, it jumped around under a certain condition
I do not remember. Fixed.

The +Next-Next+, to keep recording over various loops, I did not implement
at first, because I did not recognize its use and thought to simply stop
recording would be the most intuitive. Its not easy to imagine the
practical use of functions, sometimes...

Andre again:
>> I have a suggestion: In order to demonstrate to Oberheim just how much
>> demand there is for the upgrade, perhaps we should initiate an e-mail
>> campaign demanding that the upgrade be released

Michael solidarizes:
>excellent idea, Andre. Maybe it will stir up something at Oberheim 
>Central.
>Kim and Matthias: who do you think we should send the email to?

I have some doubt:
The intention is nice, thanks. But would it have the right effect? Kim?

Matthias