hey folks, newbie to Moog here.
i’ve been using my korg microkorg xl to control minimoog v, (vst) through cubase, i just bought the minimoog v vst & i am impressed with the sounds though i’m told they will not compare to the real thing.
i was wondering if the little phatty sage II will have similar sounds to the minimoog v? such as the string & brass sounds?
thanks in advance
well, it doesn’t have polyphony for a start
so those strings and brass sounds are going to be limited
but the real thing is always better hands down
You can do a lot more with a Mini V, but what the phatty can do, it does it so much better. The Phatty always stands out in a mix, it’s got a sound that just cannot be touched by software or VA.
I agree with the others. Minimoog V is a better software synth then some of them out there… but it does’nt do what the LP does. The LP will always stand out better in your mix than software synths. It’s all up to taste I suppose, but definitely try one out first and see for yourself.
My microkorg is collecting dust since going Moog. You’ll see why if you try one out.
as soon as you tweak the filter knob in the LP you will see the light of hardware
#1: Have you ever played a Moog instrument? I suggest finding a Guitar Center near your home and actually playing either a Little Phatty or a Voyager, to see first hand what all the fuss is about.
#2: A VST or software synthesizer like the Minimoog V is a simulator. Meaning it is attempting to be something it is not.
#3: You shouldn’t ever pay for a software synthesizer, since there are so many freeware synths out there. Do a little digging and you’ll find plenty of really, really great sounding software synths for free!
#4: The Little Phatty is a miraculously crafted instrument. You’ll see 
And I agree with others here.. ALthough I would like to be more bold, the Arturia sounds no where near as good as the hardware. Sure it can do a lot more, but a real moog really sounds so much better, play with one and you’ll know.
Even in this age, the software is no competition. I thought it was and worked digital for years and ditched all my synths.. But now I have some analog synths again, it’s a different league. Synths like the moogs don’t deserve to be compared to the software.
BUT.. they can both have a very useful spot in your productions! VST/AU synths aren’t bas per se, but hey just aren’t what some people claim they are. Although I must admit, since I got a lil phatty and a prophet 08 I very rarely use plugin synths. THe P08 can make some pretty complex sounds, and the moog is just FAT. 
Do you think the software will ever catch up, sound-wise only, not considering hands on control?
it’ probably will, seeing how knowledge and technology increases fast. But when, no idea, but it’ll come.
I think the Fabfilter Twin 2 is worth shelling out for.
Not only is it one of the most analog sounding soft-synths I’ve ever used, it’s really, really intuitive and easy to use.
/off topic
I’ve been checking out software synths since they first came out on the Amiga 25 years ago, and when they finally got them right by the late 90s. Since the MiniMoog V, MiniMonster and other emulations came out, I’ve been trying to find out, exactly what can a real Moog do that the software can’t? I don’t doubt there are at least some slight variations from all the feedback over the years, but let me tell you, I’m really impressed with soft synths. I’ve been able to faithfully reproduce nearly every sound I ever wanted from 80s rock bands like Journey, The Cars or Rush, to 70s Prog-rock bands like Yes, ELP, Styx, Kansas or Genesis. Nearly every synth I ever wanted has been fairly reproduced in software. In fact, the software emulations are usually much closer than what the original bands have toured with not too long after the prime days of their music.
I know all the advantages of the software, which are: Low cost, Having multiple “truck loads” of synths all in a laptop or Receptor module (Moog, ARP, Oberheim, etc) , tuning stability, polyphonic, and having some stage room and not needing roadies to move a Rick Wakeman setup.
Someone, please make a Youtube video or something that really shows what a real Moog can do that software can not. After years of extensive comparison, I’ve yet to really understand exactly what I’m missing. The one thing I really do notice is the coolness factor. A real Moog just looks cool. I love the logo and the physical aesthetics. I wish Moog would sell a MIDI controller without the expensive analog hardware for people like me.
I never could hear a “significant” difference between a real analog synth and a very good digital emulation. Most of us listen to our music on CDs (it’s digital), so I’m not sure what I’m missing. Being a huge Genesis fan of the 70s, years ago I bought a 1972 analog ARP Pro Soloist. Sounded fantastic when I got it, although needs a good cleaning now or something. Recently, even that was emulated very faithfully. Looks cool, but what do I need the original for?
The 3 Guitar Centers in my area, or any store for that matter, do not stock Moog products. I’d love the opportunity to spend some serious time with a Little Phatty, Voyager, etc. The only short time I got to play with a real MiniMoog, I couldn’t get anything out of it that impressed me.
It’s noteworthy that in a discussion like this on a forum where most of the participants have had to save up and buy the product in question, or if not, they’re interested in it, it’s going to be very difficult to get impartial answers . If you want someone to tell you not to buy an analogue synth this isn’t a good place to come .
Having said that, many of us have done at least a little bit of experimenting (especially those of us who bought the thing new). And more have had experience in the general area.
I’ve been able to faithfully reproduce nearly every sound I ever wanted from 80s
Yes - there’s little doubt about this - that is after all pretty much what the emulators are for. The open question is to what level of quality or character can they achieve this? Some people insist there’s no important difference, others point out audible quality difference.
Someone, please make a Youtube video or something that really shows what a real Moog can do that software can not
As soon as I have access to a LP emulator, I’ll certainly give this a shot. I’d be surprised if no one has done this yet.
I wish Moog would sell a MIDI controller without the expensive analog hardware for people like me.
Moog doesn’t but Korg does exactly that:
http://www.vintagesynth.com/korg/legacy.php
(Personally I think there’s something very un-cool about it, but each to their own )
I never could hear a “significant” difference between a real analog synth and a very good digital emulation
I just haven’t got the required empirical evidence to offer a proper rebuttal on this point (although there are many others claim to… people have done PhDs on it). Because I only ever buy commercial software, I haven’t yet used an LP emulator.
I did however run mine up against the analogue synth emulator bundled with PT 8 - Vacuum - a plugin that I initially found to be very authentic-sounding, and has received reasonably favourable reviews elsewhere. http://s3.amazonaws.com/audiotuts/151_protools8/7.jpg
Now I’m unsure of the physics behind this, but I can say that without a doubt, I easily achieved a universally fatter sound from the LP, which I couldn’t match from the Vacuum plugin even after a heap of tweaking. Clearly I’m not offering this as some sort of scientific proof. Anecdotally, it’s just one thing I happened to do - you can take it or leave it. Basically I found that the LP sounded louder, rounder, thicker, warmer and just basically nicer, when I rigged up an emulation of similar analogue processes on Vacuum, and when I could see the meters peaking at more or less the same DB level.
If I ever get a hold of an LP emulator I’ll definitely try a similar experiment (and perhaps do a video).
Oh, I should add…
I bought the LP because I wanted the Moog sound in my mixes. I was at that point making extensive use of plugins to get lead sounds. But they weren’t cutting through the way the LP does with incredible ease. Quite honestly, I’ve only ever had to fade the LP down in a mix . So as far as I’m concerned - if you really, really want ripper synth leads, get a dedicated instrument (whether or not it’s an LP or even an analogue instrument is beside the point).
Another thing I’ve never found replicated with the same sort of unpredictability as an analogue synth is resonance. Admittedly I haven’t tried all that many plugins, but in every case the resonance on the filter added very little to the sound when compared with real resonance on a real filter - the plugins resonance are cold and predictable.
I’d even go so far as to say that before using real analogue synths I was confused as to what exactly the resonance variable was supposed to do - because the plugins I was using didn’t properly replicate the real effect. The same can be said for that setting on my Nord - the resonance is just not the same.
(And analogue modelling synths in general have features like this - they often come close, but don’t go all the way. Mind you, I think this often results in them having their own particular sound - like the Nord Lead, which is pristine, clear, tight and very well controlled - quite unlike a Moog sound. It’s not better or worse- just different. Same goes for other synthesis - FM, sampling, whatever).
Thanks for the feedback. I’m curious to hear what others have to say as well. I’ve been trying to figure this out for many years. I’m not debating if there are differences or advantages to having a real Moog over software. But for what I use synths for, the differences have not been “black & white” enough to justify me buying a real one, “so far”. Someone convince me. Then again, I haven’t had opportunity to play with real ones for comparison as I much as I’d like to have, except for one trip to a synth museum in the early 2000s. Verses software, I wasn’t impressed with the tones out of “any” of the dozens of real analog synths (Mini-Moog, ARP 2500, OB 2 voice, etc, etc). Boring patches setup on them? Probably. Am I too used to really good programming? (I listen to bands like ELP, Yes, Genesis, Styx, etc). Not sure.
I not only emulate synths with computers, but also older computers & especially coin-operated arcade games. I’ve done extensive comparisons of the emulations vs the real arcade games (Pacman, Asteroids, etc) and when using the original controls, with the original monitors, in the original cabinets, “I can’t tell the difference” with most of the emulations vs the real machines. And I doubt 98% of those that played the originals could either. I assume the same is “more often true than not” for synth emulations. I’m sure those in this group would be far more likely to pick up on the differences, and I’m trying hard to understand what your hearing that I’m not. I have really excellent hearing with tonal differences. Not as good for perfect pitch as my guitarists have sometimes picked up on when learning songs.
Primarily I use software synths for live performance to cover bands from the 80s & 70s. I haven’t done a lot of recordings. The software synths cut through the mix almost too well at our shows. Maybe when recorded, the differences are more obvious. But at the shows, I’m usually the loudest instrument. They have to turn me down more than the lead guitarist with an old Marshall cabinet. Since I’m not playing original music too often, I’m not worried about if my tones are “unique” the way someone recording an album might be. What I want is lots of presets, and the ability to tweak the patches very close to the songs were covering. If I thought having a real Moog would allow me to do a better job of this than using software, I’d seriously consider switching. I think, more the opposite since I not only have the Mini-Moog in my laptop, but lots of other classic synths such as ARP, Oberheim, Prophet, etc.
The LIttle Phatty is affordable enough for me to consider (and looks cool). It seems a Mini-Moog has more features, or the Little Phatty would cost similar money to a Mini-Moog. I’d also think the emulation of the Mini-Moog would also have more features too. The software also emulates an arpegiator and other additional hardware too. By the way, there is a Little Phatty emulator. But I’m not sure why someone would want this over a Mini-Moog emulator. http://www.kvraudio.com/news/13612.html
I didn’t care for the modern Korg MS-20 controller noted by the way. I love the concept, but that one is a toy. Mid-sized keys? Come on. I wish it had been a Mini-Moog design. What I need is a professional quality 61 key MIDI controller with aftertouch, a light touch (wouldn’t use it for pianos, but various synths & organs). It needs to look cool & like a classic synth, not some modern day design. The Mini-Moog layout would be ideal. Wood grain case or designed to look like it would be nice. Or all black at the very least. Organ drawbars would be nice, but overall design should look more like a Mini-Moog. I don’t care for the design, or build quality of the stuff from M-Audio or other similar controllers. They seem way too cheap, and don’t cost much. I use their Fast Track Pro sound card, and also their wireless MIDI with my Keytar however, very good. I’m willing to spend maybe $1500 on a MIDI controller. $2000 tops. I’d rather spend less, but don’t want a toy. The Mini Moog Voyager XL looks ideal to what I want, but not the expensive hardware inside. I don’t require the real patch cable inputs either. Ribbon controller would be great, since I’d like to use the Yamaha CS-80 emulator. I’d love a controller with multiple MIDI Outs. I’m tired of unplugging cables to switch between the laptop and a sound module. Most soft synths by default talk on every MIDI channel (why?), and I’d had trouble figuring out how to disable that in every program. Anther MIDI Out on the controller would solve that. I currently use a Casio CZ-1 as my soft synth / module controller. I love the action on the keys and the aftertouch. It was the best Casio ever made, listed at $1700. The synth actually looks nice, but I really need built in analog knobs. It only has the mod wheel I can assign. I have a Keyfax Phatboy controlller (16 knobs), but I’m usually short on time at the shows to hook it up. The CZ-1 is very heavy. Pros & cons to that. Looking for a Moog like controller keyboard to replace it. I use a Korg workstation as my main instrument, but do a lot of synth leads.
Here’s a suggestion Moog Music. Build a controller for me. I can’t be the only one looking for this kind of thing.
Analogue synths have a continuous waveform, much like that of an acoustic instrument, and thus I think they sound more organic, while digital emulations have a set number of bits, which they step through at a fixed frequency, giving them what I perceive as a harsher tone. As for the you tube video, the low quality, compressed digital you tube sound could mask any difference. A moog is something one really should hear in person (with a sub). There"s nothing like a live analogue synth. And about the phatty cutting through i mix, yeah it does that, I often have difficulty keeping it from over powering other instruments in live situations, even when their inputs on my pa are turned all the way up, and the phatty has the gain all the way down, and only a quarter volume sent to the mix, even while the volume on the phatty is at about half. It really is phat, that’s not hype.
You should really try to arrange a session with an LP. But I have to note 1 thing. It is recommended you have some knowledge (preferably a lot) of substrative synthesis. Although you could just go knob turning/pushing like a maniac of course , but this would diminish the overall experience. On the other hand there’s the complete opposite of this, it’s a superb synth to learn how to use substrative synthesis!
But as I mentioned above, try to borrow one for a day and use it to replace synth sounds in a song you made. I used to be all digital but this synth is so far above this I can’t understand why Moog decided to license their name to arturia. Arturia sure makes nice plugins, but it’s far from the real thing.
I do have to say one more thing, I do think it’s true power can’t be appreciated by someone without a trained ear. This does sound strange, but when trained you’ll hear the difference, instead of only thinking it sounds great. For me the difference between analog and virtual wasn’t big so I sold all my synths, only to find out years later that is does sound totally different. I think I can be fooled in a va vs analog test (sound to sound) but not when playing one. A LP is an experience, a plugin is useful.
The way I see it, a soft-synth is a tone generator and a Little Phatty is an instrument. I don’t even have the same type of fun with my other analog hardware synths that I have with the LP. Sure, one knob per function would be fantastic, but the LP is still head and shoulders over my DSI Evolver desktop or Matrix-6R, which not only do not sound Moog-ish but are not fun to tweak. I’m lucky enough to have seen LPs on display at several different stores and standing in front of one of them gave me more playing satisfaction than 5 years of the Evolver or 10 years of softsynths.
Rik
I think if someone asks: “what do you mean by making a sound stand out in a mix?” the reply should always be: “Create a song in your computer and record a synth line with your LP and listen” 1st thing I noticed when I got my LP.
I used to use the minimoog v a lot for putting down ideas then re-track the stuff with the LP. The best way to hear the difference is when you re-create a sound of the minimoog v with the LP, it becomes so obvious, except for the polyphony of course.
forget phatty, it is to expensive! you can buy filtratron, it has a same warm moog filter, and it is cheap 
Something that’s not mentioned a lot when comparing analog to digital sound is the quality of the high frequencies. We like to think of our hardware as sounding phat, but one of the things that strikes me most often when I do play the occasional digital or software synth is the highs are no-where near as musical or nice sounding.
I can’t provide any empirical proof of this per se, except that if you have any engineering background you’d be aware of the Nyquist theorum. There’s a limit to what frequencies can be made with a specific number of bits, before ‘aliasing’ occurs. Aliasing here means exactly what it sounds like: fake, incorrect frequencies.
If you were mostly interested in bass sounds for your synth then this wouldn’t be as much of a concern for you, although my ears still tell me no matter what software I’ve tried analog still sounds fatter, chunkier and more musical. I think we all recognise that these are subjective judgements, and there might be times when those aren’t the qualities you’re looking for.
