Here’s a segment from an interview with Jim Scott, one of the three who designed the original minimoog:
/////
“Another contribution to the cleanliness of the instrument is the absence of any microprocessor circuitry on
board to control the analog sound chain. Very high frequency digital clock pulses have a nasty habit of
sneaking around at low levels and finding their way into the audio circuitry, where they can induce subtle
effects to muddy the sound. This is exemplified in the MicroMoog, a cut down version of the Mini, which I
designed using an ultrasonic clock as part of the keyboard in order to develop triggers for the envelope
generators. Tom Rhea reports that this instrument sounds markedly better if it is played from an external old
style Modular keyboard, with the MicroMoog keyboard circuitry shut off.”
Well, if I knew that this opinion was being said by another person, I would thought that is just analog-anorak-hardcore
talk, but since he’s is the man that contributed in the creation of minimoog,micromoog and crumar spirit (together with Bob Moog and Tom Rhea in this one also) his opinion carries A LOT of weight I think.
I just wanted to discuiss a little (phatty) bit this segment
so I call the more technically oriented of us to offer their opinions -if this is true, then it means that every digital (and midi) controlled analog synth, is plagued by the same
problem
What do you think?
Thanks, sorry for the bad English
Peace
Nick_the_space_nerd
-Greece
Of cause there are synths with a noticeable bleed through of high frequencies from digital clocks or components.
And even a Minimoog is affected in sound by the setting of an unused oscillator that is switched off.
Did one yet told us about the Minimoog sounding better on 60 Hz or 50 Hz mains ?
But anyway, even a Minimoog if not technical perfect. But most of us like its character.
And if one dislikes such high frequencies, then never listen to CDs or even worse mp3s.
I know way to many people searching for real analogue sound but publishing their music only as mp3. This new generation of mp3-only listeners are not the right judges of pure sound.
And some synth need to have the high frequencies to sound the way they are. For example:
PPG waves (they do NOT run on some “sample frequencies” in kHz due to their accumulation oscillators) are full of very high signals in their line out. And you can hear these frequencies interacting with the actual signal in the audio range if heard straight from the mixer. But when you record them, these signals get lost due to the limited frequency range of anlog tape or by the nyquist theorem on digital sounds.
Even an average loudspeaker at your mixing desk has a better high frequency range then your CD player.
Thanks Till,
to be truly speaking, maybe my recording equipment is way too low-fi about now just to judge (a pc), but really I don’t mind about aliasing artifacts.
Speaking about PPG, I LOVE the way they sound! For me PPG wave it’s the most beautiful sounding digital synth ever: it has this metallic wild quality to it and the older you go the better! (think wave computer 360)
All the other digitals sound boring to me…except wavestation maybe.
Although, digital synth with clear and high end resolution, are required from many musicians for delivering clear sound and clarity. PPG’s aren’t suitable for many softer music styles.
Also, I don’t like zipper noise in my analog synths, but as proccesors get faster and faster thing are getting better.
Anyway, there are many reasons why some analog synths sounding better than others (discrete vs IC’s, and the rest you know )
Is just the question for the perfect analog sound that maybe makes some of us so picky sometimes
Nick
