I am considering one to use with my Moogers, and Voayger.
Anyone have any experience with the .com pieces. I own nothing by them now.
thanks, any info appreciated.
Anxiously awaiting responses… I have thought about a dotcom sequencer for use with my Moogs for a long time. No reason that it wouldn’t work.
I have played around with a dotcom a bit, and know lots of people (via internet) who have them.
Some synth guys don’t like the fact that they are modeled after old Moog modules and think that some of the other manufacturers offer more interesting modules with more flexibility. Some complain that they are not compact enough. I have had other “boutique” lovers complain about the less than top of the line jacks, the thinner (but not really all that thin) face plate aluminum, and the non-sealed pots.
However, the people that I know who own them love them, and have no qualms about the build quality, and everyone praises the customer service.
You can always add other, matching format, modules from other companies if you want something different than what Roger offers.
A dotcom is definitely on my “to buy” list.
The question is which .com seqeuncer to use!
The Q119 or the Q 960? See: http://synthesizers.com/sequencers.html
This video has me hooked on the 960!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gNmzyZaqVwI
But the price for the 960 with the extra modules, power supply and case is a bit high for my budget right now!
I want to hear from someone who’s using a .com sequencer with their Voyager, LP or foogers.
The question is which .com seqeuncer to use!
I am heavily leaning towards the Q119. Price is the reason.
I agree, that video is amazing.
I have been looking into .com modules for a few years as well. They do have a few nice looking modules.
I just wonder how cool a sequencer would be once my two freq boxes arrive.
The price of a Q119 and .com cheapest power supply is about exactly what I just sold on ebay.
I can build a case.
Any opinions?
I have considered joining the .com forum… but I am not into joining yahoo just to talk about analog.
thanks
Please note that looking at that guys video and figuring that you can do what he does with a sequencer is like purchasing a Minimoog and figuring that you can now do what Rick Wakeman does.
The guy that did that video goes by the name of Morphius, and he is a well known sequencing master. Everyone is impressed by what the guy does. Also, I doubt that you can do what he does with one sequencer. You can check out his equipment on his website. He has a HUGE modular, one that dwarfs Keith Emerson’s. He has multiple sequencers and switches in his modular.
I am certainly no sequencing expert–I don’t know much past what I can do on my Alesis Andromeda. However, I think that matching what is done on that video is not all that simple.
Hey Everybody,
I have only two different Dot Com modules, the 960 X 2 and the 962 X 3.
The build quality seems to be very good. There is the mounting and power
issue. But if you can handle that, these seem to be a great addition to any
analog synthesizer.
Since way back in 1974, I wanted the Moog Sequencer Compliment they
sold as an add on to my Minimoog. It cost more than a Mini back then,
but there were not many options for Minimoog accessories. The Moog
sequencer was the biggest and probably the coolest. OK, the Ribbon
Controller and Percussion Controller were just as cool.
Anyhow, it wasn’t untill the Dot Com 960 clone, I was able to finnaly get
my hands on one. These are actually more fun than they look in that video!
You can set them up for so many different effects, about a limited as your
imagination.
Haven’t had much luck controlling my Voyager PE with it though. Seems
my Voyager CV input for the oscillator is not scalled to 1 volt per octave,
as all of the other analog synths I have around here. This is not really a
problem for just the 960 alone, as the stages can be tuned to any voltage.
Just a problem when trying to controll the Voyager via the 960 thru a scale
quantizer, or say trying to add another brand oscillator from the same CV,
the Voyager osc CV does not track the same. Bummer! (Is there a fix for
this?)
Any patch you would like me to try with the voyager, I’ll give it a shot.
The cool thing about patching in the sequencer is the keyboard will
transpose it and play normal. So you could do like in that video, and change
keys also by selecting from the 44 Voyager keys. Or you could set up a
one shot 8 note fast arpegio and trigger the sequencer from the aftertouch
or the gate from the tougch pad. Would make for a nasty solo!
Here is a photo of my Moog 960 Sequencer Compliment Clone.
Terry
I have a patch I’m curious about on the .com 960.
On a real 960 (I have one here), the main clock is voltage controlled.
Moog used a 901 vco circuit for this.
It’s therefore possible to use the 960 as a complex waveform vco by treating a row output as audio, instead of CV.
So the question is, does this work (track/play in tune) on a .com 960?
I think that matching what is done on that video is not all that simple.
I know that. I am not really looking to match what anyone does, I am just thinking of something fun to do with my FreqBoxes and RMs basically.
Thanks for the info CZ Rider… your set-up looks very fun!!!
Hey Kevin,
That is a great patch. It works really well. I patched in the CV from a
Roland System 100M using a 180 keyboard, pitch CV into the 960
oscillator controll input. And patched the sequencer row CV out to an
audio input on the 121 VCF. Set the 960 osc range to 6 and fine tuned to
the 100m oscillators with the 960 oscillator frequency verner.
Sounds awesome. A very different oscillator for sure. Changes pitch
depending on how many stages are running. But seems very accurate
into the higher notes. The onboard osc will only go so high, so I drove
the shift input with a MOTM-300 oscillator. Again it tracked great, although
there was a threshold where the 300 was so fast the 960 could not keep up.
A very high note though and it had quite a range from so slow it sounded
like a step sequencer to sounding like an oscillator in the 2" range.
Very impressive indeed.
Not much luck interfacing with the Voyager though. On paper you should
only need two patch cords and the VX-351 expander. Patch the keyboard
CV out to the 960 osc control input, and the 960 row out to the Voyager
external audio input. I could not get the Voyager CV out to maintain a
1 volt per octave range. So I used a MOTM 820 lag (Buffer/Follower)
between the Voyager and the 960. Then I was able to get the nessessary
1 Volt per octave output. So the voyager needs a voltage follower on the
CV out. ( I thought this was a circuit built into the VX-351?). When I finally
did get the oscillator to track properly, the range is lower than I expected.
Was like having an extra oscillator set at the 64’ range. So it really needs
another precision circuit to offset the voltage higher to a more useable
range, while still maintaining the 1 volt per octave scale.
So in short the Dot Com 960 clone works great as a complex waveform
VCO, but to answer the original post, it will not work really well with the
Voyager without some extra modules. So I can’t recommend this as a good
choice for a Voyager accessory. There are some great MIDI sequencers
that will work great with the Voyager, and if you include a VX-315 this CV
output from the MIDI sequencer will definatly be fun to patch into any of the
Moogerfoogers.
Terry
Terry,
I’m not sure if this will help or not. . .I believe you can adjust the VX351’s CV Keyboard Pitch out voltage via a trim pot on the bottom of the unit. I believe you have to take off the back plate. Amos told me about this the other day.
Whoa!
Thanks for the excellent review using that patch on the s.com.
Good to know it works as designed.
I’ve set up dual 960 cabs that way before and it’s nice to have them track together.
The range of the vger cv out might be increased by using a (dc) mixer and adding in an offset voltage for the 960’s cv input, though limiting the number of stages used might do it enough too.
The frequency of the clock is divided by the number of stages being used.
I suppose a 962 could be used as a waveform selector here also.
One could even use multiple rows and a mixer to define the top and bottom peaks of a waveform.
A vc’d lag could be used on a row allowing complex but non-square waveforms.
Variable skew sawtooths would be nice. 
Thanks again.
I have had a FR777 for ages, that I have used a number of times to sequence both my Voyager and Moogers. It is really sweet, but I think I want a sequencer with knobs.
Hey Mark,
How’s it going.
The Voyager outputs a perfect 1 volt per octave through the VX-351. It is
just that sometimes the device it is driving will cause this voltage to droop
a bit. There was a thread a while back where users noticed that when driving
multiple oscillators this occured. It happens when driving too many devices
from a single CV output. Even my Miniwave as a quantizer will only drive
about three or four oscillators before it goes out of tune because it was
not designed to drive such a load. This is where the MOTM 820 was handy.
Although it is labled as a Lag circuit, it doubles as an oscillator driver, for
when you need to drive many devices from one CV. Placing this module
after the Voyager keyboard CV out fixed this bit of droop. The other
incompatibility with the CV out on the Voyager is that the second F on the
keyboard gives out zero volts. The lowest F would be minus 1 volt. Most
other manufactures have zero volts as the lowest C. So not only will the
CV out on the Voyager keyboard be transposed a few octaves low, it is out
of tune by a fourth. This is why it was difficult to to drive the 960 oscillator
input properly from the Voyager. On paper the idea sounded so cool. Not
only could you do regular step sequences, but the 960 would double as a
fourth complex waveform oscillator. Unfortunatly it doesn’t work as well as
one might think. Not with the Voyager anyhow. It worked very well with a
Roland System 100M and my Minimodular and the MOTM modules.
I’ll be the last one to list what a synthesizer can’t do. I would rather
concertrate on the things it does best. But someone did ask just how
compatable the Voyager would be with a Dot Com sequencer, and they
do not seem to perform well together without some additional modules.
Terry
PS: Mark, how did that gig in Harrisburg go?
Terry, I PM’d you.
I’ve been using the Q119 with my Voyager for two years now and it’s the ONLY sequencer I use. For what it does…metronomic/rigid sequences/no midi/knobs only…it’s the best. I hooked my Voyager up to it with absolutely no problem…the filter and volume outputs, among others, make it seem like the sequencer was made just for the Voyager. Until Moog actually decides to make a sequencer again, this is the closest we can get to one.
Also…aesthetically it matches Moog products PERFECTLY.
thanks for the info.
The Dot Com works well with your Moogers as well I take it?
I bet it would be cool to control the Volume on the Voyager with a sequencer. Expecially when using delay.
Is there anything you dislike about the Q119?
I am awaiting a few answers from Roger or Margo concerning the Q119. We’ll go from there.
I’ll let you know.
More comments encouraged. 
Do you have any mp3’s of the Q119 driving the Voyager, I like to hear that!
Is the Q119 that different than the 960 in regard to being compatible with the Voyager? anyone know why? Thanks !
just confirmed an order for a q119.
Congrats!!
Keep us posted on the results.
I will do that.
I would like to post pics, because I am having a family friend build a custom cabinet for it.
My FreqBoxes should arrive on Thurs, the q119 on Fri.
I have Monday off too! (maybe slam a Red Bull and play all night)
I will “rig” it up so I can use it over the weekend, but then it will be gone for a day or two to build into the cabinet.
I have so many ideas going through my head on what I want to ty once the 2 Freqs and q119 arrive, that I have no idea what will be first.