Thanks for the info. I’m not looking for super ballsy pads, more like subtle ambient stuff. Just ambient sounds, organs (non-hammond) and maybe some strings.
I was under the impression that the Ion and Micron used the same sound engine, with a few additions to the Micron since it came out after the Ion. I think that the Micron has an arpeggiator, but the Ion doesn’t. I could be wrong though. The real reason I’m interested in the Micron and not the Ion is the size. I like my studio to be compact.
ebg31, the Andromeda isn’t a modeling synth, its all analog. Its also the last synth Alesis released before they almost went under. So all you people saying Moog should make an analog polysynth, be warned it is not a wise commercial move!
You are correct, same engine in both synths. The Ion has “set” arps, you can pick for a list of different types. The Micron is more flexible in that respect, has more memory locations, reverb chip. Just a lot less controls. You can edit patches relatively easy though. If you’re going to keep it in a studio and not move it around, less chance of breaking the control knob off.
Now, can you tell me if the nasty thing includes a vocoder? One reason that I’ve focused on the “more affordable” digital gear is that the MicroKorg, the Micron, the MS-2000, the Ion and the Novation X-Station all include a vocoder. To me, that’d be a crucial feature (as well as an alternate lead sound), if I bought one of those.
After all, I think I already have the one for pads, sweeps, pads and other effects.
The Andromeda does not have a vocoder. I was going to buy one, but I got the Voyager instead. The A6 is a great sounding synth, but it has such poor build quality. I would like to have one someday, but honestly, I don’t think they will stand the test of time very well.
One thing I can say is AVOID the MicroKorg. I had an MS2000 for 3 or 4 years (my first synth) which has the same sound engine. I thought it sounded awsome at the time, but grew to dislike the synth once I found out what a real synth sounds like. Vocoder is not good, and the zippering effect of the filter is just ridiculous. NOT good for pads or strings. The only good thing about it was the built in step sequencer.
I am not an analog purist in the least. In fact, I find digital synthesis can often sound more “organic” and “real” than analog. Ever used granular or wavetable synthesis? Unimaginable! Completely unrealizable through subractive analog. The trouble you run in to is when you compare digital and analog. I’m a 4th year EE student and I know enough about both to know that their behavior is completly different. I think digital should be celebrated for its “digitalness” and the same goes for analog. Many modern digital synths sound awsome and many sound terrible. Many vintage analogs sound awsome and many sound like crap. It should be left at that.
In the light of the fact that my favourite type of pad is one where you allow the natural variances in oscillators to play against each other to create the movement in the pad (rather than stacked modulations), I had a few reasons:
there’s not quite enough movement in the individual oscillator. Listening to a single osc over an extended period (as one is wont to do with pads) I could hear the period in each waveshape repeating itself. Ironically, because the micron’s basic oscillator model has quite a bit of presence, this quality seemed more obvious than in VAs like the virus or nord, which are equally static (or even more so in the case of the virus), but which seem less obviously so for some reason. There is an analog drift (or suchnamed) parameter but it doesn’t introduce the minute imperfections in the waveshape (NOT the pitch) that are occurring all the time with an analog wave. Even with this parameter on I could hear this period. This is a pretty fine point but when I returned the micron I did a quick comparison with the andromeda they had at the shop. Immediately I heard the movement I felt was lacking in the micron. It’s a very subtle thing, though and this might not bother you at all.
to my ears, the oscs don’t stack up right. Whereas one osc on the ion and one osc on the voyager sound fairly similar, 3 on the voyager is a totally different prospect to three on the micron. Perhaps it’s due to the periodicity I was talking about but there seems to be a far greater degree of synchronisation between the micron’s waves. If anything, 2/3 oscs confirmed my feelings about its inherent periodicity rather than dispelling them
I didn’t like any of the preset strings or pads. Normally, I would expect to find at least one, but none of them grabbed my attention at all.
Still this criticism should be seen in light of the fact the micron didn’t represent enough value to me, given my existing setup, to really warrant getting into it to see if I could create the sound I was after. So perhaps it can, but good pads didn’t tumble out of the unit the way that, say, good basses or leads do. However, I would still recommend one highly.
That’s one thing that always bothered me about Moog Music’s original run (along with ARP). It only reached far enough into the 80’s to join the fleet of companies pushing microprocessor-controlled analog synths. What would’ve happened if the design crew (such as Dr. David Luce) had attempted to produce a digital wavetable, or additive synth.
I do know that Dr. Moog (along with Roger Powell) views analog sound generation as a much purer enity than digital generation. But hell, look at Sequential’s product line: they concluded their run with three awesome digital pieces: the Prophet 2000, P3000 and VS. And, even Oberheim made a module for playing back samples. It amazes me that the first digital tool to have the Moog stamp on it is the Piano Bar. It would’ve been nice to see an 8-voice keyboard to compete with the PPG Wave 2, Korg DW-8000, Korg DSS-1, or the Ensoniq ESQ-1. Haven’t played any of those yet, but I’d imagine that they’d sound great through genuine Moog filters.
Bob has no interest in making a digital synth and I am guessing he doesn’t have the experience/skill for such things (given that the digital side of the Voyager was created by Rudi Linhart). Currently MoogMusic is all about creating analog boxes, so I reckon we won’t see anything digital coming out of moog until Bob is no longer head of engineering.
The Pianobar was designed and developed by Buchla, and was then sold to moog . . the only addition moog did was to add a card reader for patches but I’m betting the implementation was either done by Rudi or Don Buchla and not Bob himself.
The PPG Wave 2.3 had analog filters and envelopes . . the filters used the ballsy SSM chips which gave the digital waveforms a very analog twist . . in fact, I can get some VERY analog sounds out of my Wave 2.3 if I just use a simple root waveform (and no wave cycling).
Moog Music did develop the SL-8 which had a digitally controlled oscillator. It was supposed to be their answer to the Junos and the Poly 6. The only problem was it could not be released soon enough to avoid being blown out of the water by a synth called DX-7 . Such a shame.
I wouldn’t want Moog to make a digital synth, they should stick with what they do best. Dave Smith’s Evolver is a great idea, perfect digital/analog hybrid. I’m just not a big fan of the Dave Smith sound. While the Evolver’s demos have impressed me, it still has that sound I don’t like.
Based on the picture I’ve seen, the SL-8 looked like it could’ve been “too much, too late.” After all, it looked more like a prototype than a finished product. It didn’t look small enough to fit into a single cabinet, like the Memorymoog (even though the front panel looked similar). I don’t know how easily they pushed the Memorymoog, before its run ended. Just try pushing a synth like that SL-8 to the masses at the tail end of your company’s existance. How did it even make it to the AES show?
The problem with ALL the analog polysynths of that time was that they were over-engineered . . you want more voices, you need more Curtis chips. Just look at the memorymoog, the OB-8, the Elka Synthex etc, etc . . they all were very unstable puppies . . too much technology, poor power supplies and ventilation, it was only a matter of time before a new technology would make these dinosours obsolete and Yamaha, with it’s VSLI “many chips in one footprint” did that with the DX-7.
Having owned an early ION (I sold it as I had too many knob problems), I see no reason why moog or Alesis for that matter, could make a hybrid synth . . I for one quite like the idea of taking a sample playback synth and running it through real analog filters and output stage and I’m sure it is possible to build into the DSP a certain amount of “analog veriation” . . like pitch wobble and random waveform shape fluctuations.
Not all of the old analogs were unstable puppies. The early ones were, by their nature, they tended to drift in a room where the temperature wasn’t constant. Later models were a lot more stable, after they made appropriate design changes. They still produced a fat sound. The reason Moog, DSI, MacBeth and others are still building and selling analogs, is they sound great. That doesn’t mean the modern digitals are “no good”, just different technology. Of course, there are advantages of digitals too. They’re always in tune, more voices for less money, modern features, better user interfaces.
Accept either analog or digital for what it is. I think its great that we have both.
. Such a shame.