Hi All,
I’ve had to keep my mouth shut until Moog announced it,
but I’ve been playing with a prototype of the MF-104M for
a while now, and have made an in-depth video as well as
14 guitar audio examples:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74S-FgRdtoY
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/MF104M/
In the mean time, can I answer any hands-on questions?
I’ve been banging on it pretty hard;-)
I’ve got one. How different is it (internally) to that of the ClusterFlux.
I’ve seen comparisons here that detail the fact that the positive/negative infinity is unique to Flux, fair enough. And obviously longer delay times. The question is… IF the 104M Delay can be modded to allow very low ms delay times, could it produce some of what Flux can do?
There are other differences obviously and I’m really looking fwd to the spillover (I also wish I could get 1.4 sec or whatever). But it looks really nice. Looking fwd to it.
Dan, how do you adjust the Feedback Insert Loop Gain?
How many will Moog make?
To be clear, I have only mild knowledge of circuit design and
great admiration for those who actually do it. I just program
and play with these things. So… I can only say that,
cosmetically and functionally, the MF-104M is a lot like a
ClusterFlux with a much longer delay time.
Can one be made to act like the other? To a degree. The Chorus
I was able to get from an MF-104M is beautiful and dreamy.
Even though it’s monaural (unlike the stereo ClusterFlux), I kept
swearing that I was hearing stereo. I honestly had to check each
step of my system to be sure I wasn’t somehow making the left
speaker different from the right speaker. That’s just how 3D the
chorus sounds to my ears.
By trying various tricks to get the delay time as short as possible,
I felt that, at one point, I was closer to a Flange effect than a
Chorus effect. It was then that I really noticed not having both
positive and negative feedback.
Moog really took a chance and had enough faith in their customers
to offer the ability (via extreme Tap Tempo or CC#-only parameters)
to take the delay times waaay past their “legal” limits. Coloring
“outside the lines” can result in quite a few interesting artifacts but, I
would be seriously bummed if we were restricted only to the “safe zones”.
As far as “modding” the 104M to the shorter delay times of the ClusterFlux:
The filtering of each pedal was specifically designed to provide the best
possible results. You can make either of them act somewhat like the
other, but each is CLEARLY optimized for their intended effects.
It now has to be done externally. In the case of Moogerfoogers,
the Drive and Output knobs will often suffice. If you have
something you’d like to insert that doesn’t have In or Out gains,
you could use a mixer or sometimes even a simple attenuator
somewhere in the Send/Return path to get the desired amount
of gain. I still need to explore the Feedback Loop a lot more!
As is always the current limitation with Analog Delay quantities:
It totally depends on how many BBD chips they have.
I’ll leave it to Moog Music to say how many that is.
Hi Dan, I was thinking you might have been given a demo!!
I have a few questions:
when switching between tempo’s via the tap tempo switch, does the tempo rate change immediately, or can it be more of a gradual change - a la Leslie? Is this the slew setting in the manual?
can you “play” the delay feedback like in your clusterflux demo?
how controllable is the self oscillation? Is it as easy to let it linger in the background for example as the 104z?
more of an opinion question: if someone didn’t use MIDI, and already has a 104z & 108, do you see value in switching units, or duplication? I guess I’m asking with respect to the the sound quality, manual playability etc. as I realize there are specific features that set the Z / SD / M apart like tap tempo etc.
Thanks!!
I asked the rep at gearfest today and he said that he couldnt be sure because things could change based on availability of the parts but at this time they have enough to make less than 1000. That is a specific as he could or would get.
Besides Midi how different is it from the 104z?
Is there anything that the z can do that this cant?
Thanks Dan
Thanks for starting this thread!
I’ve browsed the manual, and noticed that there is a slew rate parameter, and the delay time can be synced to MIDI clock…
I was wondering if this means that, for example, if a 16th note delay time is extended to a 1/4 note delay time, will the slew limiter smooth the transition, or does MIDI clock sync ‘snap’ the delay time immediately from one value to the next?
i.e. Does MIDI synced delay time override the slew limiter?
200 more msec of delay, thats it. The m throws the Z a beating in every other way.
I’d be curious to see if the basic BBD use/design is identical (same ICs being used) and that the ‘short’ delay sound is of higher quality (increased clocking). I’m not an electronics genius like many of the posters here so I’m not completely up to speed on how “increased headroom” translates to sound quality.
I’m coming from a Diamond ML2 which has slightly north of 600ms with no ‘long’ mode and the sound quality was stellar with a tilt EQ that could darken things off by rolling off highs. Interested to see how the Diamond and 104M compare sound-wise.
I only can speak about the MF-104z, but having heard some MemoryLane 2 demoes, the most obvious difference to me is the ML is much more “middy” -pun not intended haha- than the Moog which is as you may know darker.
Yup, that’s precisely what the Slew Tempo Rate parameter is for.
It goes from instantaneous to a few seconds of slew.
Yes, but the significantly longer delay times in the MF-104M means
that you’re not hearing “pitched” feedback like on the ClusterFlux.
It’s more of a rapid way to change delay times. Both units observe
the “1 octave = 2x Delay Time” formula.
As an experiment, I fed an M and a Z the exact same source, matched
their gains and Delay Times as close as I could, and sent one to the left
speaker and one to the right.
In this test, I found that it was far easier to keep a delayed sound going
as a pad on the MF-104M than either of the two MF-104Zs that I had.
The MF-104Zs tended to get garbled or “clacky” over time while the
MF-104M just kept going and going.
In every case I personally preferred the MF-104M over the MF-104Z every time.
When I played a piano sample into both I was surprised at how much more the
first piano echo sounded “like a piano” on the MF-104M. Plus Spillover Mode,
Extreme Delay Times (with quirks), Tap Tempo, lower noise floor, and the
ability to create delicious Chorus effects with Echo make it a no-brainer. But
that’s only my personal preference.
Thanks for answering some questions man…very awesome of you! Does the mf-104m use nos Panasonic chips or are they the new cool audio ones?
Having done the spillover mod on my 104z I definately notice a difference in the bypassed signals tone when the spillover mod is engaged…is this also true on the 104m?
Thanks again!
You preferred the Z to the M every time? Is that a typo?
Ohhh Crap! I read and re-read everything and still screwed it up.
TO BE CLEAR:
In every case I personally preferred the new MF-104M over the MF-104Z every time.
{I corrected it on my original post.}
(Thanks, Aaron!!!)
In advance of getting any cynical posts questioning my allegiance to any company about these matters:
Those who know me know that Delays are among my favorite performance “instruments”.
I think of them and perform with them, not as effects processors, but as methods of creating sound.
I stand behind the delays I like (Moogerfoogers, Strymon Delays, DigiTech TimeBender, etc., and,
for the price, the Visual Sound Axle Grease) and I will not say anything about the ones I don’t like…( see? ) 
No prob, It forced me to double take because I thought you meant it the other way around. Especially after reading the rest of the post : )