Minimoog Model D

Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #80 on: May 24, 2016, 09:47:29 PM »
Well, obviously I would want a mono synth at a mono synth price.  Sure, I could use a Prophet-6 in both modes, but I don't need another poly synth.  I'd rather get only a mono version and pay only for a mono version. 

The same issue existed with the Prophet '08.  Sure, you could use a P'08 as a mono synth.   Nevertheless, DSI saw fit to produce a Mopho Keyboard and a Mopho SE.  I'm thinking along the very same lines regarding the Prophet-6.

It would certainly be a rather expensive - and unchallenged - mono synth, that's true. The parallel with the Prophet '08 doesn't work though, as the Prophet-6 has a sub oscillator and allows for voice assignment (1 to 6 voices) in unison mode, which makes for a more flexible mono synth. - Okay, one could ignore the sub oscillator, since one could use one layer for that purpose. What remains though is the advantage of a configurable unison mode.

Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #81 on: May 24, 2016, 09:53:02 PM »
In addition to that I don't think that mono duties have ever been the Prophet '08's forte. It's a damn fine poly synth, but as a mono synth it can either be a little too weak or too much over the top with those chorus-like unison modes. The latter can work, but just not that well for analog mono synth bread and butter sounds. The Prophet-6 has just more oomph in that department. It doesn't need to hide from a Moog, for example.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2016, 09:54:38 PM by Paul Dither »

Sacred Synthesis

Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #82 on: May 24, 2016, 10:03:29 PM »
For my needs, the Prophet '08 makes an excellent mono synth.  True, the unison modes have limited uses (and I never use them), but the single voice setting is wonderful.  It sounds better than the Evolver does in mono.  I would even consider getting an additional Prophet '08 to use as a dedicated mono synth, due to its more reasonable price.  But it would be ideal to get the fuller rawer Prophet-6 analog tone in mono form.  In fact, if it only had eight voices, rather than six, I'd probably do somewhat as you suggest and buy a P-6 Module, control it with a Prophet '08 Keyboard, and then use it in mono mode when I needed to.  But with the mis-matched voice count, it wouldn't make sense, since the poly combination would be awkward.

DSI has generally done the poly-mono parallels for each of their instruments: Poly Evolver Keyboard/Mono Evolver Keyboard; Prophet '08/Mopho Keyboard and Mopho SE; Prophet 12/Pro 2.  I'm only suggesting more of the same with the Prophet-6. 
« Last Edit: May 24, 2016, 10:20:10 PM by Sacred Synthesis »

Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #83 on: May 24, 2016, 10:18:25 PM »
For my needs, the Prophet '08 makes an excellent mono synth.  True, the unison modes have limited uses (and I never use them), but the single voice setting is wonderful.  It's sounds better than the Evolver in mono.  I would even consider getting an additional Prophet '08 to use as a dedicated mono synth, due to its more reasonable price.  But it would be fabulous to get the fuller rawer Prophet-6 analog tone in mono form.

Hm, that's funny. I always preferred the mono voice of the Evolver due to the stereo filter that made everything a bit more alive. But yeah, the Prophet-6 definitely sounds fuller and rawer than the '08.

DSI has generally done the poly-mono parallels for each of their instruments: Poly Evolver Keyboard/Mono Evolver Keyboard; Prophet '08/Mopho Keyboard and Mopho SE; Prophet 12/Pro 2.  I'm only suggesting more of the same with the Prophet-6.

Sure, I know. I guess I'd just prefer to see them moving on and beyond.

Sacred Synthesis

Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #84 on: May 24, 2016, 10:27:25 PM »
Hm, that's funny. I always preferred the mono voice of the Evolver due to the stereo filter that made everything a bit more alive. But yeah, the Prophet-6 definitely sounds fuller and rawer than the '08.

With the Evolver's hardwired design, using only the two analogs oscillators in stereo produces a thin sound because, since each oscillator is sounding from a different side, the oscillator beating is reduced to almost nothing.  Hence, to get that nice rich oscillator beating back, you have to draw them together, losing the stereo depth. 

I find the stereo possibilities with the Prophet '08 to produce a better analog mono tone:  Use identical monophonic A/B layers, and then pan them at the mixer.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2016, 10:29:47 PM by Sacred Synthesis »

Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #85 on: May 24, 2016, 10:31:27 PM »
Hm, that's funny. I always preferred the mono voice of the Evolver due to the stereo filter that made everything a bit more alive. But yeah, the Prophet-6 definitely sounds fuller and rawer than the '08.

With the Evolver's hardwired design, using only the two analogs oscillators in stereo produces a thin sound because, since each oscillator is sounding from a different side, the oscillator beating is reduced to almost nothing.  Hence, to get that nice rich oscillator beating back, you have to draw them together, losing the stereo depth. 

I find the stereo possibilities with the Prophet '08 to produce a better analog mono tone:  Use identical monophonic layers, and then pan them at the mixer.

Technically, that makes sense, yes. Yet, the Mono Evolver always sounded better to me as a mono synth. But that may also be due to its overall unique sound.

Sacred Synthesis

Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #86 on: May 24, 2016, 10:35:58 PM »
Sure, the Evolver sounds good in mono when you're using all four oscillators, because that obviously places two oscillators in each channel.  Perhaps that's what you have in mind.  But I've done many side-by-side comparisons between the PEK and the P'08 using the same mono patches, and my ear always favors the P'08 for its better analog sound.  I realize that the two instruments basically have the same analog engine, but there's obviously more to it than that.  In fact, the differences are quite audible. 
« Last Edit: May 24, 2016, 10:43:20 PM by Sacred Synthesis »

Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #87 on: May 24, 2016, 10:58:05 PM »
To get back on topic: Here's quite a good comment by Peter Kirn. He miscalculated the inflation-adjusted price though. An original Minimoog cost $1,495 in 1970, which would equal $9,218.95 in 2016.

http://createdigitalmusic.com/2016/05/minimoog-model-d-now-two-moogs/

chysn

  • *****
  • 1812
Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #88 on: May 25, 2016, 03:57:51 AM »
To get back on topic: Here's quite a good comment by Peter Kirn. He miscalculated the inflation-adjusted price though. An original Minimoog cost $1,495 in 1970, which would equal $9,218.95 in 2016.

When I worked at a musical instrument store in the early aughts, we acquired a Prophet 10. We bought it from the original owner who said that he sold his Corvette to buy it in 1980.
Prophet 5 Rev 4 #2711

MPC One+ ∙ MuseScore 4

www.wav2pro3.comwww.soundcloud.com/beige-mazewww.github.com/chysnwww.beigemaze.com

he/him/his

chysn

  • *****
  • 1812
Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #89 on: May 25, 2016, 04:14:26 AM »
I realize that the two instruments basically have the same analog engine, but there's obviously more to it than that.  In fact, the differences are quite audible.

Yes, maybe that's why I find myself missing the Mopho. Even without using the sub oscillators, they're definitely not the same.
Prophet 5 Rev 4 #2711

MPC One+ ∙ MuseScore 4

www.wav2pro3.comwww.soundcloud.com/beige-mazewww.github.com/chysnwww.beigemaze.com

he/him/his

Sacred Synthesis

Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #90 on: May 25, 2016, 05:59:09 AM »
One of the most frequently repeated errors that I come across on the forums is the matter-of-fact assertion that the Prophet '08 is simply the analog side of the Poly Evolver; therefore, the two are and sound exactly the same.  But it just isn't that simple.  I believe the Evolver uses AD/DA conversions that must be the cause of a substantial difference in tone.  Hence, I use the analog aspects of the two instruments in different ways.  They're certainly not interchangeable to my ears.   Even DSI's website goes no further than this:

"The analog oscillators and the analog low-pass filters are the same in both product lines, so it’s possible to make an Evolver sound very much like a Prophet ’08."

Yes, I agree they can sound "very much" alike.  But identical?  No way.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2016, 06:18:59 AM by Sacred Synthesis »

Sacred Synthesis

Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #91 on: May 25, 2016, 06:11:30 AM »
I realize that the two instruments basically have the same analog engine, but there's obviously more to it than that.  In fact, the differences are quite audible.

Yes, maybe that's why I find myself missing the Mopho. Even without using the sub oscillators, they're definitely not the same.

That will be happily resolved if you get a Prophet-6.  Is it still a possibility?

Sacred Synthesis

Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #92 on: May 25, 2016, 06:20:49 AM »
The next "synth shootout" that begs to be made is a side-by-side comparison between the new Minimoog and the Prophet-6 in mono mode.  I would enjoy listening to that.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2016, 05:16:22 AM by Sacred Synthesis »

Sacred Synthesis

Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #93 on: May 25, 2016, 06:24:24 AM »
To get back on topic: Here's quite a good comment by Peter Kirn. He miscalculated the inflation-adjusted price though. An original Minimoog cost $1,495 in 1970, which would equal $9,218.95 in 2016.

http://createdigitalmusic.com/2016/05/minimoog-model-d-now-two-moogs/

So, regarding the new Minimoog Model D, in place of the term "re-issue" is the expression "exact recreation."  I wouldn't expect to see many instances of these.  Perhaps only this one.

The article says,

"That means we now have essentially two iterations of Moog Music. One is making luxury recreations of its original history, in their original form. The other is making new products and new designs – and for a larger audience (especially because of price)."

This sounds familiar.  Dave Smith has two lines now as well, although the comparison is only approximate, since the Sequential line is not one of "exact recreations," but one of new improved versions of old instruments.  Of course, we don't know exactly where the Sequential line is going.  It may just remain the VCO line of instruments, without any references to past Sequential Circuits instruments.  I would be fine with that.  JUST MAKE A MONO VERSION OF THE PROPHET-6!
« Last Edit: May 25, 2016, 06:40:09 AM by Sacred Synthesis »

chysn

  • *****
  • 1812
Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #94 on: May 25, 2016, 06:39:46 AM »
That will be happily resolved if you get a Prophet-6.  Is it still a possibility?

Two paths diverged in a yellow wood, and I took the one strewn with eurorack modules. All my money is going into building my own monosynth now.
Prophet 5 Rev 4 #2711

MPC One+ ∙ MuseScore 4

www.wav2pro3.comwww.soundcloud.com/beige-mazewww.github.com/chysnwww.beigemaze.com

he/him/his

Sacred Synthesis

Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #95 on: May 25, 2016, 06:42:02 AM »
You're truly the Robert Frost of the forum, Chysn.

chysn

  • *****
  • 1812
Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #96 on: May 25, 2016, 06:54:14 AM »
You're truly the Robert Frost of the forum, Chysn.

"...Sorry I could not travel both. But this $#!%'s expensive." --Robert Frost
Prophet 5 Rev 4 #2711

MPC One+ ∙ MuseScore 4

www.wav2pro3.comwww.soundcloud.com/beige-mazewww.github.com/chysnwww.beigemaze.com

he/him/his

Sacred Synthesis

Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #97 on: May 25, 2016, 07:02:48 AM »
That was the first version that never got published.  And he was talking about the costs of those good fences that make good neighbors.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2016, 08:07:17 AM by Sacred Synthesis »

Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #98 on: May 25, 2016, 07:38:58 AM »
The next "synth shootout' that begs to be made is a side-by-side comparison between the new Minimoog and the Prophet-6 in mono mode.  I would enjoy listening to that.

That would be pointless, since the Prophet-6 is not meant to be a recreation of the Prophet-5. That aside, it would still be apples and oranges.

Re: Minimoog Model D
« Reply #99 on: May 25, 2016, 08:04:23 AM »
To get back on topic: Here's quite a good comment by Peter Kirn. He miscalculated the inflation-adjusted price though. An original Minimoog cost $1,495 in 1970, which would equal $9,218.95 in 2016.

http://createdigitalmusic.com/2016/05/minimoog-model-d-now-two-moogs/

So, regarding the new Minimoog Model D, in place of the term "re-issue" is the expression "exact recreation."  I wouldn't expect to see many instances of these.  Perhaps only this one.

The article says,

"That means we now have essentially two iterations of Moog Music. One is making luxury recreations of its original history, in their original form. The other is making new products and new designs – and for a larger audience (especially because of price)."

This sounds familiar.  Dave Smith has two lines now as well, although the comparison is only approximate, since the Sequential line is not one of "exact recreations," but one of new improved versions of old instruments.  Of course, we don't know exactly where the Sequential line is going.  It may just remain the VCO line of instruments, without any references to past Sequential Circuits instruments.  I would be fine with that.  JUST MAKE A MONO VERSION OF THE PROPHET-6!

The major difference is not only that Sequential doesn't do exact copies of past models, but that it's currently limited to one synth anyway. There are no concrete signs yet, as to whether this was only a one-off, or whether more products are going to follow. Even the ingredient VCO doesn't seems to set that line apart, otherwise we would have seen an OB-6 by Sequential and Tom Oberheim.