Considering devices for use with protools utilize DSP chips that can then be used for instruments and effects and so forth, what about a “Moog Soudcard”. It would include 3 VCO’s, a VCF, and a VCA, then an analog out. Essentially the computer would allow you to apply digital sources as modifiers, waves, etc. and would be fully modular as it would be software that connected all of these components. For instance you could apply a VCO as VCA modification, or you could modulate the VCF with a digital source, or have 3 VCO’s, a digital waveform source (for instance you might run three digital oscillators), a digital mod source, and run that through your VCF and VCA making a huge analog/digital hybrid lead. You could also patch in digital effects prior to the analog out, or anywhere in line. You could run a minimoog emulation through a real moog VCF and VCA. Basically the sky would be the limit as to what could happen with routings and digital signals, and you’d still have real analog VCO’s, VCF, and VCA.
No thanks, not interested. IMHO, Moog should NOT make such a thing, but rather, stick to hardware that interacts with other hardware via big cables with 1/4" phone plugs. You know, like the old days, when synths were the size and cost of a house? 
No. Ask Korg.
I just thought that it would be really nice to basically have a modular analog synth. With a midi controller with knobs, how would it be that different than a slim phatty. I of course love hardware, but I’d rather have modular flexibility with something that only has 4 knobs and no keyboard. Obviously Moogs going in a great direction with the SubPhatty and minitaur going for one knob per function, but if they are going to build things like a Slim Phatty, why not do something like this that would be far more capable of an instrument?
Please please please, no computers… You’ll be obsolete every three years. My model D is pushing 40 and it’s not.
Today, it’s all about software and apps. That’s why Animoog was developed and is popular. Probably much more than a Moog Soundcard would be. Besides, producing apps costs almost nothing. But designing and producing hardware is extremely costly, even when made in China. The cost of a Moog soundcard would be prohibitive. Not to mention that the trend, in hardware synths these days, is toward getting back to basics: one-knob-per-function, rewarding, instantaneous hands-on experience (and gladly so)! A soundcard wouldn’t offer any of that.
Thanks, but no thanks.
You can’t have modular flexibility with four knobs. Not without sacrificing sound quality. You want a modular? Buy a modular. They aren’t that expensive these days. Start with three VCO’s a VCF and a VCA. See how that works out without envelopes.
I of course love hardware, but I’d rather have modular flexibility with something that only has 4 knobs and no keyboard.
I think you’re very alone in this category.
As far as the “Moog Soundcard”…I don’t want to be tethered to a computer. Not to mention that a lot of the big deal with analog synth hardware is having hands-on control…not just the sound.
It would never sell. A four knob modular without a keyboard, that you need a computer?
What would they call it, a 'Micromodular". 
At the end of the Moog/Norlin era, Moog was dabbling in the then new field of computers and music. One of the last Moog products was the Moog Songproducer for the C-64. There was a check box on the package indicating there was to be a hardware Moog analog module. Never saw the light of day, but interesting to wonder what they would have come up with in those early digital/analog pioneering days.
It would never sell. A four knob modular without a keyboard, that you need a computer?
What would they call it, a 'Micromodular".
[/quote]
I used to own one. Something tells me that if they had sold well there would be more floating around and Clavia wouldn’t have abandoned modular development. The micro modular really isn’t programmable from its front panel, all you can do is twiddle those knobs to whatever you assigned them to. I like the concept, but the Micro was janky (power plug especially)… I upgraded to the full deal.
I think that’s a really neat idea but aren’t the markets showing that pc and laptop purchases are down? I don’t even think that ipads are going to be around much longer.
There are many reasons I would NEVER want a real analog soundcard in my computer. Not interested in the least.
Wow… has it been one and a half years already?
I’ve already forgotten my first reminder
2013:
2011:
http://forum.moogmusic.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=12213&p=88184#p88184
Nowhere in Moog’s company mission does it say Analogue only. WHEN digital surpasses analogue (not even attempting to time-hack here) for sound quality… Moog will make a digital synth. Until then, I am thoroughly enjoying mi analogue oscillators with software flexibility.
I am glad you are, but as the owner of a Minitaur, i am NOT!!
Although I, like so many others, enjoy the sound of analog synthesizers, there is currently no technical reasons why digital could not be as enjoyable and as faithful to analog circuitry behaviors.
It’s only a matter of software, dedicated team of engineers, and time.
I compare it to the time and efforts it took to build a machine that could finally beat chess grandmasters. It only took a really dedicated company, and team, to develop hardware and software capable of doing so.
A good example of one of the machines that comes close is the Alesis Ion. It was the same team of dedicated engineers that had designed the Andromeda that created it. Unfortunately, time and money were limiting factors and resulted in too many compromises made. If it weren’t for the limited bandwidth frequency response (8 KHz only) due to anti-aliasing schemes (for lack of high enough DAC conversion rates), and different software bugs that were never corrected (the audible looping white noise generation, and strange glide behavior, just to name a few), this could have been a huge success.
The idea was there: creating a machine that could convincingly reproduce true analog sounds and behaviors using powerful DSP technology. Unfortunately, Alesis went bankrupt and had to be bought out by another company that has no interest in music synthesizers. So the Andromeda and Ion remain unfinished products, both with buggy hardware and software.
But, all that being said, since I own a few analog classics like a Minimoog D and Korg Mono/Poly, and a few others, I know that the task of capturing the essence and reproducing such diversity of sounds and behaviors faithfully using digital technology is no small task. But so was going to the Moon back in the sixties using the crude technology of the day.
Improbable, but not impossible once mankind puts its mind to it.
As for iPads not being here for long, this post was written using mine, that I have had for 2 years now and has replaced my laptop completely since.
(I do have a Mac for all the other things the iPad can’t do…yet)
But enough babbling…
I thought that’s why MIDI was implemented into the Moog product offering - ie digital control and repeatability of analog components generating sounds? They are essentially sound modules already… I don’t see your point, unless you are talking about replacing CV cables with software, but then again, any DAW in combination with MIDI currently does this.
If I shift my perspective, I see what you are trying to get at, but I don’t see the benefit, because it certainly would not be cost. Portability maybe?
My personal perspective is that the current product offerings by Moog and other synths is playability. Remember that part in the Moog movie where Bob says something like: “…it’s about this, the musician connecting with the instrument” while he made the circular motion over his head towards the instrument? That’s why the knobs are there. You can feel the instrument, you can make it change organically. Sure you can do this through digital instruments too, but it’s just not the same. It’s like making pottery with plasticine, and not real clay.
As thealien666 & others say, maybe one day digital will get there, but I doubt it.
As a side note, I think the digital / analog issue can be summed up as: analog is a flow of electrons, regardless of hearing ability, digital is an organized movement of electrons that tricks our ears into believing there is flow - fully playable, but missing the between the lines magic, because between the lines are 0’s.
Well actually, there is a flow of electrons in both systems. Because it all ends-up as an analog signal to be amplified to make the air vibrate accordingly so we can hear the result. There is absolutely no difference in perceived sound between a Minimoog D being played live, and a digitally recorded performance of the same synth being played back on a 44.1Khz 16bits digital recorder. None whatsoever. And people who think they can tell the difference are deluding themselves. I have proved it many times, with lots of friends of mine, in blind tests. As for emulating the sounds and behavior, in all the minute details, of such a complex machine with mathematical algorithms, however, that’s another ball game.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m NOT a proponent of digital technology for subtractive synthesis emulation, unless much more care and dedication is put into it. The efforts made by engineers and companies so far aren’t terribly convincing. And until digital algorithms can emulate chaos to a certain extent, there will always be a “static” quality/disadvantage to this technology. And we all know how hard it is for digital to be imprecise (in a good way)!
The combination of analog and digital technology, as in the Moog Voyager, is a good one. The ability to memorize settings with great accuracy, thanks to Bob having chosen high resolution digitization of the knobs, with the warmth and unpredictability of analog subtractive synthesis circuits, is a great marriage.
Digital is good, but not everywhere…yet.
One of my favorite shootout tests between two MIDI keyboards is to
surreptitiously connect the MIDI Out of each to the MIDI In of the other,
and then turn off the Local Control on both of them. Now, let your
subject play both keyboards as much as they want. (No knob turns or
patch changes unless the units are similar enough to respond in the
exact same ways.)
Inevitably, they’ll point out all sorts of sonic “proof” for whatever point
they wanted to make. It’s fun to show them that they just “proved” the
exact opposite of their point (or at least that the difference is negligible.)
This is especially useful for arguments like “All units with Serial #s higher
than XXXXXXX aren’t as good as the older units.”
In this instance I was using the word “flow” in a non technical, artsy fartsy manner. I guess that got lost in the 0’s…
The point was this: