OB6 owners - will you keep yours if an OBX/OBXa is released?

[LPF83]

I know a lot of folks sold their P6 when the P5/10 was released.  I kept my P6 and find it different enough from my P10 that I can't ever imagine selling either one of them.  I've also heard a lot of folks regret selling their P6, and equally as many comments from those who have both a P6 and P5/10 and do not feel there is redundancy.

So, if the perfect Oberheim poly reissue is released, will the used market see an insurgence of OB6s?  Probably, but I plan to keep mine... I think it has a specific character to it that I would miss if gone. 

It's kind of an odd synth..., unlike my Prophets which are good at performing whatever job I delegate to them, the OB6 doesn't really behave, and prefers to *tell me* what sound it wants to make, then I find a way to work that sound into whatever I'm doing.  It sounds decidedly Oberheim, yet not really like an OBX/OBXa, so I think it brings a certain uniqueness that I won't let go of.

Thoughts?

[pfrf]

I like my OB-6 but I'm not attached.  This new Oberheim is wonderful news but I'm 100% sure I won't be able to afford it.  Actually, I probably could afford it but I have an internal spending limit on luxury items.  The OB-6 hit that limit, this new synth will be way more expensive.  I'm very interested to hear/play it, though.

[DavidDever]

I know a lot of folks sold their P6 when the P5/10 was released.  I kept my P6 and find it different enough from my P10 that I can't ever imagine selling either one of them.  I've also heard a lot of folks regret selling their P6, and equally as many comments from those who have both a P6 and P5/10 and do not feel there is redundancy.

So, if the perfect Oberheim poly reissue is released, will the used market see an insurgence of OB6s?  Probably, but I plan to keep mine... I think it has a specific character to it that I would miss if gone. 

It's kind of an odd synth..., unlike my Prophets which are good at performing whatever job I delegate to them, the OB6 doesn't really behave, and prefers to *tell me* what sound it wants to make, then I find a way to work that sound into whatever I'm doing.  It sounds decidedly Oberheim, yet not really like an OBX/OBXa, so I think it brings a certain uniqueness that I won't let go of.

Thoughts?

When the Prophet-10 (and -5r4) were released, I kept my Prophet-6: integrated, true-bypass effects processing, for those rare occasions when I "workshop" a synth, was too appealing to forgo. And-while I have some trepidation about having sold my OB-6 desktop some time ago, I never felt as if I would forever lose the ability to achieve that sound (owning a SEM reissue).

Now that the retail price has increased substantially, it is unlikely that an OB-6 is going to drop into my lap for so-called "ideal money", unless the range of products offered by Oberheim the entity wildly exceed all of our collective sonic expectations, which would flood the used market with available OB-6 devices priced closer to my own personal financial expectations.

[LoboLives]

Speaking as a Prophet 6 owner when the Prophet 5/10 came out. There was a sense of knee jerk reaction of wanting to "Upgrade" but for me, I'd rather look forward instead of just get things based on nostalgia. Stereo signal, hi pass filter, duo digital effects, arpeggiator, sequencer, pan spread, distortion.....I'd much rather have an instrument that allows for versatility rather than limitations. Yes sometimes limitations help inspire creativity but for the most part it's a rabbit hole effect. Get a Prophet 5, OBXa, APR 2600 reissue, Minimoog reissue for insane amounts of money.....and that's not even including all the outboard effects you'll need or external sequencer you'll need and then you'll need a better sounding mixer so you go and spend your money on an insanely priced high quality mixer, and if you want to go really old school then you get a Mara Machines reel to reel tape recorder. Like at what point does one retard themselves into oblivion simply based on nostalgia.  It looks great on paper but it's like getting an Orange amp or Marshall amp that only sounds good when you crank the volume at insane levels....it's not practical and as someone who does film/tv soundtracks I don't have the time or the want to be dicking around with trying to get the same functionality as a more modern synth. Arturia Matrixbrute> ARP 2600. Prophet 6>Prophet 5. OB6>OBX.

Maybe we are so obsessed with the past because we know there's no future.

[Manbird]

Speaking as a Prophet 6 owner when the Prophet 5/10 came out. There was a sense of knee jerk reaction of wanting to "Upgrade" but for me, I'd rather look forward instead of just get things based on nostalgia. Stereo signal, hi pass filter, duo digital effects, arpeggiator, sequencer, pan spread, distortion.....I'd much rather have an instrument that allows for versatility rather than limitations. Yes sometimes limitations help inspire creativity but for the most part it's a rabbit hole effect. Get a Prophet 5, OBXa, APR 2600 reissue, Minimoog reissue for insane amounts of money.....and that's not even including all the outboard effects you'll need or external sequencer you'll need and then you'll need a better sounding mixer so you go and spend your money on an insanely priced high quality mixer, and if you want to go really old school then you get a Mara Machines reel to reel tape recorder. Like at what point does one retard themselves into oblivion simply based on nostalgia.  It looks great on paper but it's like getting an Orange amp or Marshall amp that only sounds good when you crank the volume at insane levels....it's not practical and as someone who does film/tv soundtracks I don't have the time or the want to be dicking around with trying to get the same functionality as a more modern synth. Arturia Matrixbrute> ARP 2600. Prophet 6>Prophet 5. OB6>OBX.

Maybe we are so obsessed with the past because we know there's no future.

While I'm a big fan of nostalgia and/or history (where would we be without it? etc), I didn't buy a Prophet 5 because I wanted to run away from the present or out of fear for the future. I bought it because it's one of the greatest instruments I've been lucky to work with and having a reliable model is a thrill. (My wife's rev 3 needs another trip to the doctor, the second in six months...) I love my Prophet 6 as well, maybe in part for all the slick "modern" (circa 2015, right?) silverware it brings to the dinner table, but the SOUND of the P5 pleases me like nothing else in my collection. I never think of it based on "limitations" any more than I wish my upright piano was a swimming pool. It's just an instrument that makes sounds I like.

Instruments are instruments, and humans can do anything we want with them. One person's rabbit hole is... one person's rabbit hole. I'm not obsessed with the past - fascinated, perhaps, but not obsessed. I'm obsessed with synths, however, and would love a new "old" Oberheim for zero practical reasons. Thankfully, my budget has other ideas, but I find it very exciting that Tom O and Dave S are doing more work together. How is that anything but a good thing in the world?

[LoboLives]

Speaking as a Prophet 6 owner when the Prophet 5/10 came out. There was a sense of knee jerk reaction of wanting to "Upgrade" but for me, I'd rather look forward instead of just get things based on nostalgia. Stereo signal, hi pass filter, duo digital effects, arpeggiator, sequencer, pan spread, distortion.....I'd much rather have an instrument that allows for versatility rather than limitations. Yes sometimes limitations help inspire creativity but for the most part it's a rabbit hole effect. Get a Prophet 5, OBXa, APR 2600 reissue, Minimoog reissue for insane amounts of money.....and that's not even including all the outboard effects you'll need or external sequencer you'll need and then you'll need a better sounding mixer so you go and spend your money on an insanely priced high quality mixer, and if you want to go really old school then you get a Mara Machines reel to reel tape recorder. Like at what point does one retard themselves into oblivion simply based on nostalgia.  It looks great on paper but it's like getting an Orange amp or Marshall amp that only sounds good when you crank the volume at insane levels....it's not practical and as someone who does film/tv soundtracks I don't have the time or the want to be dicking around with trying to get the same functionality as a more modern synth. Arturia Matrixbrute> ARP 2600. Prophet 6>Prophet 5. OB6>OBX.

Maybe we are so obsessed with the past because we know there's no future.

While I'm a big fan of nostalgia and/or history (where would we be without it? etc), I didn't buy a Prophet 5 because I wanted to run away from the present or out of fear for the future. I bought it because it's one of the greatest instruments I've been lucky to work with and having a reliable model is a thrill. (My wife's rev 3 needs another trip to the doctor, the second in six months...) I love my Prophet 6 as well, maybe in part for all the slick "modern" (circa 2015, right?) silverware it brings to the dinner table, but the SOUND of the P5 pleases me like nothing else in my collection. I never think of it based on "limitations" any more than I wish my upright piano was a swimming pool. It's just an instrument that makes sounds I like.

Instruments are instruments, and humans can do anything we want with them. One person's rabbit hole is... one person's rabbit hole. I'm not obsessed with the past - fascinated, perhaps, but not obsessed. I'm obsessed with synths, however, and would love a new "old" Oberheim for zero practical reasons. Thankfully, my budget has other ideas, but I find it very exciting that Tom O and Dave S are doing more work together. How is that anything but a good thing in the world?

A question was asked and I answered.

There's nothing wrong with nostalgia or buying whatever makes you happy. Again, like guitar amplifiers, I know people who won't buy anything under 100 watts and crank them to the hilt because they believe it sounds the best. They also refuse to buy any guitar not made in the USA. If someone is happy doing that then that's fine. I'm not into Eurorack but I know people obsessed with it. I'm even like that when it comes to cinema and filmmaking and celluloid vs digital but I guess when it comes to synths and guitars I'm not as passionate about something old....even something new "old".

For example Dave Rossum reissued his SP1200 drum machine around the same time ISLA Instruments brought out the S2400. The S2400 is the superior machine in every sense and indistinguishable sonically to the SP1200 but there are always going to be those who are adamant that the SP1200 sounds "Better" but also wouldn't be able to tell the difference in a blindfold test.

[LPF83]

I see the imminent upcoming Oberheim synth as being a much more polarizing product than the P5/10 Rev 4 was.  Some people are going to be willing to sell an organ (both types if necessary) to get one, while others will reject it for a laundry list of reasons.

I think these vintage reissues are targeted at the Generation-X demographic, those of us who grew up listening to classic rock of the 70s, new wave of the 80s, etc.  This particular age range is selected because its both most interested in the specific sound of these instruments because it will touch a nostalgic nerve, and also the most likely demographic to have the expendable income to be capable of buying them.

My P10 signal is currently going through a Boss CE2W, then a Mobius, then a Timeline, then OTO Bam, which means the total synth + FX constitutes almost a $6.5K instrument....  but sonically, the results are worth every penny, to me.  I totally get folks who won't or can't spend as much on gear.  I can remember the days where I had to sell all of the music gear just to be able to pay for books, computer hardware and tuition I needed for college.  So for me, the reissue of the Prophet 10 was kind of a dream come true -- a reward for all those times I was struggling and far removed from being able to afford the kind of gear I really wanted.

An OBX/a is another bucket list item for me... I totally get that not everyone grew up with that sound, and not everyone else is going to have that same connection with the sound.  And that's fine, there are plenty of cost effective options out there.

[LoboLives]

I see the imminent upcoming Oberheim synth as being a much more polarizing product than the P5/10 Rev 4 was.  Some people are going to be willing to sell an organ (both types if necessary) to get one, while others will reject it for a laundry list of reasons.

I think these vintage reissues are targeted at the Generation-X demographic, those of us who grew up listening to classic rock of the 70s, new wave of the 80s, etc.  This particular age range is selected because its both most interested in the specific sound of these instruments because it will touch a nostalgic nerve, and also the most likely demographic to have the expendable income to be capable of buying them.

My P10 signal is currently going through a Boss CE2W, then a Mobius, then a Timeline, then OTO Bam, which means the total synth + FX constitutes almost a $6.5K instrument....  but sonically, the results are worth every penny, to me.  I totally get folks who won't or can't spend as much on gear.  I can remember the days where I had to sell all of the music gear just to be able to pay for books, computer hardware and tuition I needed for college.  So for me, the reissue of the Prophet 10 was kind of a dream come true -- a reward for all those times I was struggling and far removed from being able to afford the kind of gear I really wanted.

An OBX/a is another bucket list item for me... I totally get that not everyone grew up with that sound, and not everyone else is going to have that same connection with the sound.  And that's fine, there are plenty of cost effective options out there.

100%. Although I wouldn't necessarily even say it's an issue with cost in some cases. Some people want more than 1 LFO, they want an actual screen, more than 200 preset memory locations, stereo signal etc. Could very well be a case of "Am I going to spend $6K on a synth with the bare minimum or should I put that money towards saving for a Moog One?" etc etc

[LPF83]

I see the imminent upcoming Oberheim synth as being a much more polarizing product than the P5/10 Rev 4 was.  Some people are going to be willing to sell an organ (both types if necessary) to get one, while others will reject it for a laundry list of reasons.

I think these vintage reissues are targeted at the Generation-X demographic, those of us who grew up listening to classic rock of the 70s, new wave of the 80s, etc.  This particular age range is selected because its both most interested in the specific sound of these instruments because it will touch a nostalgic nerve, and also the most likely demographic to have the expendable income to be capable of buying them.

My P10 signal is currently going through a Boss CE2W, then a Mobius, then a Timeline, then OTO Bam, which means the total synth + FX constitutes almost a $6.5K instrument....  but sonically, the results are worth every penny, to me.  I totally get folks who won't or can't spend as much on gear.  I can remember the days where I had to sell all of the music gear just to be able to pay for books, computer hardware and tuition I needed for college.  So for me, the reissue of the Prophet 10 was kind of a dream come true -- a reward for all those times I was struggling and far removed from being able to afford the kind of gear I really wanted.

An OBX/a is another bucket list item for me... I totally get that not everyone grew up with that sound, and not everyone else is going to have that same connection with the sound.  And that's fine, there are plenty of cost effective options out there.

100%. Although I wouldn't necessarily even say it's an issue with cost in some cases. Some people want more than 1 LFO, they want an actual screen, more than 200 preset memory locations, stereo signal etc. Could very well be a case of "Am I going to spend $6K on a synth with the bare minimum or should I put that money towards saving for a Moog One?" etc etc

The thing is you don't need a Moog One or even a hardware synth at all to get lots of sound design features and options... softsynth offerings are off the chart, and if not software then there are plenty of hardware options.. Virus TI/TI2, Hydrasynth, Iridium come to mind.  No offense to the owners of the Moog One, but honestly I've never heard a sound come out of it that put it on my want list.  I think polysynths have never been Moog's thing, personally.  I get that a lot of fans of the Moog sound demanded a poly so they are trying to address demand, but the strength of the Moog sound was always rich mono bass and lead sounds, so it's kind of like expecting a maker of great sounding trombone to suddenly produce a great sounding violin.. yeah at some point they are probably going to do it, but it doesn't mean they necessarily should.

Try using modulation plugins in the DAW to do things the synth designers didn't add (I like Cableguys MIDIShaper personally).  To me the DAW is the ultimate screen anyway...  I feel I have more control editing modulation curves with the mouse than I would on a per-instrument screen.  I can add pretty much as many LFOs as I want to any synth.

[LoboLives]

I see the imminent upcoming Oberheim synth as being a much more polarizing product than the P5/10 Rev 4 was.  Some people are going to be willing to sell an organ (both types if necessary) to get one, while others will reject it for a laundry list of reasons.

I think these vintage reissues are targeted at the Generation-X demographic, those of us who grew up listening to classic rock of the 70s, new wave of the 80s, etc.  This particular age range is selected because its both most interested in the specific sound of these instruments because it will touch a nostalgic nerve, and also the most likely demographic to have the expendable income to be capable of buying them.

My P10 signal is currently going through a Boss CE2W, then a Mobius, then a Timeline, then OTO Bam, which means the total synth + FX constitutes almost a $6.5K instrument....  but sonically, the results are worth every penny, to me.  I totally get folks who won't or can't spend as much on gear.  I can remember the days where I had to sell all of the music gear just to be able to pay for books, computer hardware and tuition I needed for college.  So for me, the reissue of the Prophet 10 was kind of a dream come true -- a reward for all those times I was struggling and far removed from being able to afford the kind of gear I really wanted.

An OBX/a is another bucket list item for me... I totally get that not everyone grew up with that sound, and not everyone else is going to have that same connection with the sound.  And that's fine, there are plenty of cost effective options out there.

100%. Although I wouldn't necessarily even say it's an issue with cost in some cases. Some people want more than 1 LFO, they want an actual screen, more than 200 preset memory locations, stereo signal etc. Could very well be a case of "Am I going to spend $6K on a synth with the bare minimum or should I put that money towards saving for a Moog One?" etc etc

The thing is you don't need a Moog One or even a hardware synth at all to get lots of sound design features and options... softsynth offerings are off the chart, and if not software then there are plenty of hardware options.. Virus TI/TI2, Hydrasynth, Iridium come to mind.  No offense to the owners of the Moog One, but honestly I've never heard a sound come out of it that put it on my want list.  I think polysynths have never been Moog's thing, personally.  I get that a lot of fans of the Moog sound demanded a poly so they are trying to address demand, but the strength of the Moog sound was always rich mono bass and lead sounds, so it's kind of like expecting a maker of great sounding trombone to suddenly produce a great sounding violin.. yeah at some point they are probably going to do it, but it doesn't mean they necessarily should.

Try using modulation plugins in the DAW to do things the synth designers didn't add (I like Cableguys MIDIShaper personally).  To me the DAW is the ultimate screen anyway...  I feel I have more control editing modulation curves with the mouse than I would on a per-instrument screen.  I can add pretty much as many LFOs as I want to any synth.

100%. Let's be honest, hardware synths are completely irrelevant compared to a VST but we want a tactile experience and feel like we are working with an instrument. The modulation plugins working alongside hardware synths is an excellent hybrid setup. Especially if you never touch your hardware gear and just leave it on the rack and control everything via MIDI.

Maybe it's the depression talking but sometimes I wish I never really got into synths and just stuck with guitar and remained ignorant to gear in general.

[LPF83]

I see the imminent upcoming Oberheim synth as being a much more polarizing product than the P5/10 Rev 4 was.  Some people are going to be willing to sell an organ (both types if necessary) to get one, while others will reject it for a laundry list of reasons.

I think these vintage reissues are targeted at the Generation-X demographic, those of us who grew up listening to classic rock of the 70s, new wave of the 80s, etc.  This particular age range is selected because its both most interested in the specific sound of these instruments because it will touch a nostalgic nerve, and also the most likely demographic to have the expendable income to be capable of buying them.

My P10 signal is currently going through a Boss CE2W, then a Mobius, then a Timeline, then OTO Bam, which means the total synth + FX constitutes almost a $6.5K instrument....  but sonically, the results are worth every penny, to me.  I totally get folks who won't or can't spend as much on gear.  I can remember the days where I had to sell all of the music gear just to be able to pay for books, computer hardware and tuition I needed for college.  So for me, the reissue of the Prophet 10 was kind of a dream come true -- a reward for all those times I was struggling and far removed from being able to afford the kind of gear I really wanted.

An OBX/a is another bucket list item for me... I totally get that not everyone grew up with that sound, and not everyone else is going to have that same connection with the sound.  And that's fine, there are plenty of cost effective options out there.

100%. Although I wouldn't necessarily even say it's an issue with cost in some cases. Some people want more than 1 LFO, they want an actual screen, more than 200 preset memory locations, stereo signal etc. Could very well be a case of "Am I going to spend $6K on a synth with the bare minimum or should I put that money towards saving for a Moog One?" etc etc

The thing is you don't need a Moog One or even a hardware synth at all to get lots of sound design features and options... softsynth offerings are off the chart, and if not software then there are plenty of hardware options.. Virus TI/TI2, Hydrasynth, Iridium come to mind.  No offense to the owners of the Moog One, but honestly I've never heard a sound come out of it that put it on my want list.  I think polysynths have never been Moog's thing, personally.  I get that a lot of fans of the Moog sound demanded a poly so they are trying to address demand, but the strength of the Moog sound was always rich mono bass and lead sounds, so it's kind of like expecting a maker of great sounding trombone to suddenly produce a great sounding violin.. yeah at some point they are probably going to do it, but it doesn't mean they necessarily should.

Try using modulation plugins in the DAW to do things the synth designers didn't add (I like Cableguys MIDIShaper personally).  To me the DAW is the ultimate screen anyway...  I feel I have more control editing modulation curves with the mouse than I would on a per-instrument screen.  I can add pretty much as many LFOs as I want to any synth.

100%. Let's be honest, hardware synths are completely irrelevant compared to a VST but we want a tactile experience and feel like we are working with an instrument. The modulation plugins working alongside hardware synths is an excellent hybrid setup. Especially if you never touch your hardware gear and just leave it on the rack and control everything via MIDI.

Maybe it's the depression talking but sometimes I wish I never really got into synths and just stuck with guitar and remained ignorant to gear in general.

The VST vs hardware argument can become pretty compelling and hard to pick a winner when we talk about final results in the mix, since the mix ends up being somewhat perverted from the original sound anyway by the time it makes it to Spotify or YT or whatever.  But when it comes to analog hardware synths vs VSTs overall I still believe there is no contest, and it may be partially the magic that happens as the signal passes through the DAC and in theory a VST could be routed to outputs and back into inputs to pick up some of the same harmonic distortion, but there are a lot of reasons I don't do that, and one of them is that general purpose computers (Macs and PCs) will never be able to reach the same realtime sonic performance as analog hardware due to simple fact that Windows and OSX are not real-time operating systems, and they really can't be with all of the devices they need to support.

I love softsynths, and I think they are there with regard to emulating digital hardware (check out chipsynth OPS7 for a worthy DX7 emulation).  But for analog emulations they need so much treatment (set to max fidelity, add a harmonic exciter, add a saturation/transformer etc) to get them competitive with my hardware synths that they are usually occupying 40% CPU by the time they do for a single track.  And honestly even still it just takes too much tweaking and work to try to get Repro5 for example to sound as good as my P10.

As another example of this, check out Adam Szabo Viper (Virus emulation VST) compared to an actual Virus.  They are patch-compatible.. but even in the YT comparisons which strive hard to get them sounding identical, there are subtle differences which really reveal the limitation of VSTs.  A lot of folks with VST emulations of the real thing, who compare them side by side, will tell you that the software gets you 95% of the way there but its that last 5% that seems to contain the explosive inspiration factor, that little bit of detail that seems to make all the difference in the world.

I just seem to have that experience over and over again with soft synths -- they are great for certain uses, and I still use a lot of digital FX in the DAW, as they seem less susceptible to real-time processing issues, but I don't think that a general purpose operating system is ever going to be as good of an instrument from a musical standpoint as a hardware synth -- especially true of analog synths but still true even of digital ones to some degree.

[LoboLives]

I see the imminent upcoming Oberheim synth as being a much more polarizing product than the P5/10 Rev 4 was.  Some people are going to be willing to sell an organ (both types if necessary) to get one, while others will reject it for a laundry list of reasons.

I think these vintage reissues are targeted at the Generation-X demographic, those of us who grew up listening to classic rock of the 70s, new wave of the 80s, etc.  This particular age range is selected because its both most interested in the specific sound of these instruments because it will touch a nostalgic nerve, and also the most likely demographic to have the expendable income to be capable of buying them.

My P10 signal is currently going through a Boss CE2W, then a Mobius, then a Timeline, then OTO Bam, which means the total synth + FX constitutes almost a $6.5K instrument....  but sonically, the results are worth every penny, to me.  I totally get folks who won't or can't spend as much on gear.  I can remember the days where I had to sell all of the music gear just to be able to pay for books, computer hardware and tuition I needed for college.  So for me, the reissue of the Prophet 10 was kind of a dream come true -- a reward for all those times I was struggling and far removed from being able to afford the kind of gear I really wanted.

An OBX/a is another bucket list item for me... I totally get that not everyone grew up with that sound, and not everyone else is going to have that same connection with the sound.  And that's fine, there are plenty of cost effective options out there.

100%. Although I wouldn't necessarily even say it's an issue with cost in some cases. Some people want more than 1 LFO, they want an actual screen, more than 200 preset memory locations, stereo signal etc. Could very well be a case of "Am I going to spend $6K on a synth with the bare minimum or should I put that money towards saving for a Moog One?" etc etc

The thing is you don't need a Moog One or even a hardware synth at all to get lots of sound design features and options... softsynth offerings are off the chart, and if not software then there are plenty of hardware options.. Virus TI/TI2, Hydrasynth, Iridium come to mind.  No offense to the owners of the Moog One, but honestly I've never heard a sound come out of it that put it on my want list.  I think polysynths have never been Moog's thing, personally.  I get that a lot of fans of the Moog sound demanded a poly so they are trying to address demand, but the strength of the Moog sound was always rich mono bass and lead sounds, so it's kind of like expecting a maker of great sounding trombone to suddenly produce a great sounding violin.. yeah at some point they are probably going to do it, but it doesn't mean they necessarily should.

Try using modulation plugins in the DAW to do things the synth designers didn't add (I like Cableguys MIDIShaper personally).  To me the DAW is the ultimate screen anyway...  I feel I have more control editing modulation curves with the mouse than I would on a per-instrument screen.  I can add pretty much as many LFOs as I want to any synth.

100%. Let's be honest, hardware synths are completely irrelevant compared to a VST but we want a tactile experience and feel like we are working with an instrument. The modulation plugins working alongside hardware synths is an excellent hybrid setup. Especially if you never touch your hardware gear and just leave it on the rack and control everything via MIDI.

Maybe it's the depression talking but sometimes I wish I never really got into synths and just stuck with guitar and remained ignorant to gear in general.

The VST vs hardware argument can become pretty compelling and hard to pick a winner when we talk about final results in the mix, since the mix ends up being somewhat perverted from the original sound anyway by the time it makes it to Spotify or YT or whatever.  But when it comes to analog hardware synths vs VSTs overall I still believe there is no contest, and it may be partially the magic that happens as the signal passes through the DAC and in theory a VST could be routed to outputs and back into inputs to pick up some of the same harmonic distortion, but there are a lot of reasons I don't do that, and one of them is that general purpose computers (Macs and PCs) will never be able to reach the same realtime sonic performance as analog hardware due to simple fact that Windows and OSX are not real-time operating systems, and they really can't be with all of the devices they need to support.

I love softsynths, and I think they are there with regard to emulating digital hardware (check out chipsynth OPS7 for a worthy DX7 emulation).  But for analog emulations they need so much treatment (set to max fidelity, add a harmonic exciter, add a saturation/transformer etc) to get them competitive with my hardware synths that they are usually occupying 40% CPU by the time they do for a single track.  And honestly even still it just takes too much tweaking and work to try to get Repro5 for example to sound as good as my P10.

As another example of this, check out Adam Szabo Viper (Virus emulation VST) compared to an actual Virus.  They are patch-compatible.. but even in the YT comparisons which strive hard to get them sounding identical, there are subtle differences which really reveal the limitation of VSTs.  A lot of folks with VST emulations of the real thing, who compare them side by side, will tell you that the software gets you 95% of the way there but its that last 5% that seems to contain the explosive inspiration factor, that little bit of detail that seems to make all the difference in the world.

I just seem to have that experience over and over again with soft synths -- they are great for certain uses, and I still use a lot of digital FX in the DAW, as they seem less susceptible to real-time processing issues, but I don't think that a general purpose operating system is ever going to be as good of an instrument from a musical standpoint as a hardware synth -- especially true of analog synths but still true even of digital ones to some degree.

I just don’t think the average listener can hear a difference and moreover they don’t care. Of course the person recording will know and can hear a difference (either psychological or actual) but even then it seems counter productive to dwell on something so frivolous.

[LPF83]

I see the imminent upcoming Oberheim synth as being a much more polarizing product than the P5/10 Rev 4 was.  Some people are going to be willing to sell an organ (both types if necessary) to get one, while others will reject it for a laundry list of reasons.

I think these vintage reissues are targeted at the Generation-X demographic, those of us who grew up listening to classic rock of the 70s, new wave of the 80s, etc.  This particular age range is selected because its both most interested in the specific sound of these instruments because it will touch a nostalgic nerve, and also the most likely demographic to have the expendable income to be capable of buying them.

My P10 signal is currently going through a Boss CE2W, then a Mobius, then a Timeline, then OTO Bam, which means the total synth + FX constitutes almost a $6.5K instrument....  but sonically, the results are worth every penny, to me.  I totally get folks who won't or can't spend as much on gear.  I can remember the days where I had to sell all of the music gear just to be able to pay for books, computer hardware and tuition I needed for college.  So for me, the reissue of the Prophet 10 was kind of a dream come true -- a reward for all those times I was struggling and far removed from being able to afford the kind of gear I really wanted.

An OBX/a is another bucket list item for me... I totally get that not everyone grew up with that sound, and not everyone else is going to have that same connection with the sound.  And that's fine, there are plenty of cost effective options out there.

100%. Although I wouldn't necessarily even say it's an issue with cost in some cases. Some people want more than 1 LFO, they want an actual screen, more than 200 preset memory locations, stereo signal etc. Could very well be a case of "Am I going to spend $6K on a synth with the bare minimum or should I put that money towards saving for a Moog One?" etc etc

The thing is you don't need a Moog One or even a hardware synth at all to get lots of sound design features and options... softsynth offerings are off the chart, and if not software then there are plenty of hardware options.. Virus TI/TI2, Hydrasynth, Iridium come to mind.  No offense to the owners of the Moog One, but honestly I've never heard a sound come out of it that put it on my want list.  I think polysynths have never been Moog's thing, personally.  I get that a lot of fans of the Moog sound demanded a poly so they are trying to address demand, but the strength of the Moog sound was always rich mono bass and lead sounds, so it's kind of like expecting a maker of great sounding trombone to suddenly produce a great sounding violin.. yeah at some point they are probably going to do it, but it doesn't mean they necessarily should.

Try using modulation plugins in the DAW to do things the synth designers didn't add (I like Cableguys MIDIShaper personally).  To me the DAW is the ultimate screen anyway...  I feel I have more control editing modulation curves with the mouse than I would on a per-instrument screen.  I can add pretty much as many LFOs as I want to any synth.

100%. Let's be honest, hardware synths are completely irrelevant compared to a VST but we want a tactile experience and feel like we are working with an instrument. The modulation plugins working alongside hardware synths is an excellent hybrid setup. Especially if you never touch your hardware gear and just leave it on the rack and control everything via MIDI.

Maybe it's the depression talking but sometimes I wish I never really got into synths and just stuck with guitar and remained ignorant to gear in general.

The VST vs hardware argument can become pretty compelling and hard to pick a winner when we talk about final results in the mix, since the mix ends up being somewhat perverted from the original sound anyway by the time it makes it to Spotify or YT or whatever.  But when it comes to analog hardware synths vs VSTs overall I still believe there is no contest, and it may be partially the magic that happens as the signal passes through the DAC and in theory a VST could be routed to outputs and back into inputs to pick up some of the same harmonic distortion, but there are a lot of reasons I don't do that, and one of them is that general purpose computers (Macs and PCs) will never be able to reach the same realtime sonic performance as analog hardware due to simple fact that Windows and OSX are not real-time operating systems, and they really can't be with all of the devices they need to support.

I love softsynths, and I think they are there with regard to emulating digital hardware (check out chipsynth OPS7 for a worthy DX7 emulation).  But for analog emulations they need so much treatment (set to max fidelity, add a harmonic exciter, add a saturation/transformer etc) to get them competitive with my hardware synths that they are usually occupying 40% CPU by the time they do for a single track.  And honestly even still it just takes too much tweaking and work to try to get Repro5 for example to sound as good as my P10.

As another example of this, check out Adam Szabo Viper (Virus emulation VST) compared to an actual Virus.  They are patch-compatible.. but even in the YT comparisons which strive hard to get them sounding identical, there are subtle differences which really reveal the limitation of VSTs.  A lot of folks with VST emulations of the real thing, who compare them side by side, will tell you that the software gets you 95% of the way there but its that last 5% that seems to contain the explosive inspiration factor, that little bit of detail that seems to make all the difference in the world.

I just seem to have that experience over and over again with soft synths -- they are great for certain uses, and I still use a lot of digital FX in the DAW, as they seem less susceptible to real-time processing issues, but I don't think that a general purpose operating system is ever going to be as good of an instrument from a musical standpoint as a hardware synth -- especially true of analog synths but still true even of digital ones to some degree.

I just don’t think the average listener can hear a difference and moreover they don’t care. Of course the person recording will know and can hear a difference (either psychological or actual) but even then it seems counter productive to dwell on something so frivolous.

Software has made recording music a lot more accessible, to be sure.  And a lot of good music has been created with software only.  But that extra 5% sound difference I mentioned is hugely inspirational to me, and it helps me care enough about a given track... and since I'm not trying to make money in the music industry (I chose a different career path altogether), that inspiration and enjoyment of my craft is everything to me.  So it's not something I dwell on or even seek out directly, it's sort of like this passive benefit "spark" that's present with hardware and just missing with software.

[AlainHubert]

Since my OB6 is heavily based on Oberheim SEM, and not Curtis chips (CEM3320) like the OB-Xa, I would definitely keep my OB6.

[kpatz]

For me, it will largely depend on the feature set and sound of the new "OB-X", assuming that is really what's coming.

If it's more or less a reissue of the original OB-X, I'll keep the OB-6 for its state variable filter and other features an OB-X lacks.  If it's more like an OB-Xa with Curtis filters, I'll definitely hold on the OB-6 for its SEM filters.  But if the new OB-X is basically an OB-6 on steroids, the 6's position in my setup might wind up in jeopardy.

But, if this new synth sounds like an OB-X, I'll probably be saving up for it and putting it alongside my OB-6 module.

[LPF83]

Since my OB6 is heavily based on Oberheim SEM, and not Curtis chips (CEM3320) like the OB-Xa, I would definitely keep my OB6.

I'm hoping for an OBX-SEM/OBXa-Curtis switch like the Rev1-2/Rev3 switch on the P5/10

[tapewolf]

For what it's worth, I got my OB-6 as the closest available thing to an OB-X currently in production.  So if there is an actual OB-X reissue in the offing, my OB-6 will likely be finding a new owner.  Yeah, the additional filter modes on the OB6 are nice, but at the end of the day mine spends most of its time trying to be an OB-X, so getting something closer to that with the full 8 note polyphony would be worthwhile for me.

[RobustAmerican]

I'll be keeping my OB-6. It just might be getting a new big brother. I might consider letting go of my original Model D though. It needs some love and I haven't used it on anything in a few months. 

[GuitarCh3f]

I will be keeping my OB-6, and ordering a new OB-X8.

[thedigitalman]

I'll be keeping my OB6 and have a OBX8 on pre-order. I have a voyager and a voyager OS and think will be selling the voyager to make room in the studio and help pay for the new synth

I know sounds ridiculous, but I sometimes bring the OB6 (and sometimes my profit 6) along with me (have a nice travel case for it) to the cottage for inspiration and like that it has onboard effects etc. so will keep it around at least for that (for now).