I have both and I totally agree that they are different beasts that compliment each other very well. I was going back and forth about selling the MEK, but I don’t think I’m going to. I tend to think about it this way-
The MEK givesme sharp, metallic, weird and highly modulated sounds. It’s kind of like a little modular. The oscillators panned hard left/ right gives it a wide (and very unique) character that I have yet to hear from another synth. Feedback assigned to aftertouch is just freakin destructive. I have to say I really dislike using rotary encoders to program though.
The LP is just a tone machine. It is warm, round and phat in every way. Great sounding pretty much no matter what you do with it. The filter moves and dives unlike anything you can get out of the MEK. I do wish the CV routing was more flexible, but I actually love the limitations and simplicity of it. I cannot go back to software bass sounds after using the LP.
So, all of that said, I would take the LP over the MEK (sorry Dave). It is simply a much nicer (quality wise) instrument. When I play the LP, I feel like I am definitely connected in a way that I can’t seem to get out of new gear. It’s just got the mojo
“While the LP sounds super fat and warm, it lacks a lot of functionality which limits it’s overall potential. The MEK on the other hand can also sound very warm, has a high pass filter, delays, more modulation options, more oscs, different kinds of oscs, etc. In the end it’s just more versatile.”
But is it true? If so, that would be a valuable bit of information. What I do know is that my Prophet 08 has a very good sound - not quite as good as my Voyager Old School, but certainly comparable.
The next logical question would be: How do the MEK and LP compare to the P08? I’m trying to get a sense of their quality of tone without having heard either.
Additional question: Are the MEK encoders commonly a problem? Do they erractically jump at a touch?
All endless encoders exhibit problems eventually after a certain amount of use, no matter what manufacturer. Same problem with the Alesis Micron data knob, or the Yamaha DX-200 data knob, or _____ fill-in-the-blank.
The MEK’s analog section should sound very close to, if not exactly like the P08. It just adds the digital stuff (or rather, the P08 takes away the digital section). No other changes to it that affect the sound greatly.
I think MOOGs and DSI synths sound VERY different from one another and they can’t really be compared. Not saying either one is better, just different. Maybe better for a certain person playing a certain style, like for myself, I would never trade my Moog LP for a MEK. But if I had enough money, I’d buy an MEK in addition to the LP.
Bias has no truth, only more bias. The MEK does in fact offer far more features, however you have to decide if the LP sound is worth the trade-off.
A Roland V-Synth has alot more features than a LP too, for example.
MEK and P08 sound identical to me if you just use the analog stuff. The filter on the P08 supposedly sounds ‘‘warmer’’ and ‘‘rounder’’, but I haven’t really noticed all that big of a difference.
On the encoder front: I used a Evolver desktop version for like 7 years for live and studio use, not once did I have a problem. Pots are more reliable though. I don’t know that my Evo would have lasted say 30 years.
The MEK has been around for a few years now, and I’ve come across a considerable number of complaints about the encoders. I wonder if it gets that bad. I can tolerate a limited amount of jumping around.
I’ve found very few complaints about the LP.
Personally, I prefer the Moog sound. But only one LFO? That eliminates the possibility of some of my favorite sounds. I suppose you could add one more LFO with the CP-251, but that’s still two short of the MEK and a lot more money.
How can anyone buy just ONE Mooger Fooger? I bought the 251, MF-102 AND 103. Eventually, I know I’ll buy several of each. Moog is addictive like that. Perhaps that’s just me, but I’d rather have the Moog sound than a weaker sound that can be modulated again and again.
The fattest thickest richest and most useful musical sound I’ve ever produced on a synthesizer is from my Voyager Old School, aided by the CP-251. It’s a sound I use and need constantly. Only with the help of the module could I have three oscillators, vibrato, and pulse width modulation all at the same time. This means that the Voyager, by itself, doesn’t quite suffice for me. So, modulation is VERY important. I don’t use it as a means of disguising, or compensating for, a weak basic sound, but for adding to an already excellent sound.
The same is true for Dave Smith’s instruments. The DSI synthesizers are not “weak,” they’re just not quite as monstrous as the Moog sound. Yet, if you begin on a DSI with two stacked sounds and add PWM, what you end up with is a sound so fat, thick, and rich as to impress even a Moog fan.
I dare say that the sophistication of the DSI instruments means that they come - so to speak - with their Moogerfoogers built in. But if I could have it my way, we’d have in one instrument the Moog sound and the DSI capabilities. Oh well.
While I don’t currently have a Little Phatty (but yes I am thinking about getting one now) I do have a MEK. It’s an amazing synth with a step sequencer and an arp, and a boatload of options but for some reason I haven’t bonded with it like I have my Moog Old School, even though I have had the MEK longer. There is something about the Moog line that I have however bonded with and feel drawn to. Perhaps it is because my first synth was a Moog Prodigy that I bought new (I am old). I spent hours upon hours multi-tracking that Prodigy with two Akai Reel to Reel tape recorders, and while it was “limited” in what might be considered the latest feature set, it was a great synth for me to learn with and the sound was sooo Moog. When I hear the Little Phatty today it reminds me of the Prodigy I used to have, and it just seemed so logical and simple. With the MEK I tend to get lost with all the options and the encoders lose me. I like being able to look at the machine and see the settings. Now I admit that is probably a failing on my part, but the truth is a Moog like the OS just seems so much more intuitive to me, and from what I have seen of the Phatty I think it would be also. Purely subjective on my part, I like the sound of the MEK, I just can’t seem to tame it long enough to get close to it.
In spite of the complexity of the MEK, would you say it has a quality tone? Strip it down to two oscillators using a sawtooth waveform, a medium VCF setting, a little vibrato, and a moderate amount of reverb. Would you describe such a sound on the MEK as being of a high musical quality? Comparable to a Moog quality sound?
To my ears yes, I would say the MEK is very capable of generating tones that are of high musical quality, and while it is not the “Moog” sound it has its own character. Not better, not worse, just different but also bringing it’s own style and presence to the table. It certainly is capable of bringing emotion and musicality as part of that character.
A very good answer. Now we’re at the heart of true music - beauty. It’s refreshing to “hear” such language in a forum that is too often content to discuss the super-sophisticated capabilities of modern synthsizers, as if they weren’t - first and foremost - musical instruments.
I did finally buy a Mono Evolver Keyboard. I have to say that it’s quite a bit better than I had expected. No regrets whatsoever. The general tone is by no means thin, but fairly warm and musical on the analog side. It has tremendous potential for creating a wide palette of sound and looks as sharp as can be. I’m thrilled I picked this instrument. And it’s so small and lightweight that I laugh every time I look at it! The MEK is a pion compared to a Voyager.
I’ve had mine for less than six months and already two knobs failed on me
the workings one DO NOT feel that great either–actually they feel like utter crap. Definitely you wouldn’t be able to tweak it life with full confidence.
dunno about encoder quality, i had an evolver for like 6 years with no problems. sure they aren’t like really nice pots, but they shouldn’t be failing on you. at any rate I’d suggest highly getting the pot upgrade if it’s available for your model.. the Tetra’s knobs are fantastic.
I don’t own a LP, i own a voyager. I also have an MEK, and I love it. I don’t think it sounds weak; it is all a matter of what you are going for. If you want the classic sound of the moog filter then go for the LP. If you want something that sounds a bit different than everything else out there (including Sequential circuits synths), then go for the MEK.
The question you should ask yourself is: what type of a sound am i going for?
Then, go from there. I’d also suggest taking an afternoon and visiting your local Guitar Center.
I call the MEK my “Mean Bastard Synth”; cause it’s sonic qualities can be mean, piercing, and quite strange. (I love it.)
The sequencer is a ton of fun too
(BTW … this is MHO, i am still a newbie to tweaking)
I believe Dave Smith is going to re-examine each of his instruments and offer potentiometer editions. One day, the Mono Evolver Keyboard’s time will come, and those funny little nobs will be replaced with the higher quality ones from the new editions.
The MEK is a fine and versatile instrument. It’s not a Moog, but so what. It’s a remarkable synthesizer with a beauty all its own, and I’m very happy to have one - encoders and all.
I do think there’s been too much whining about those encoders. I gave mine the deoxit treatment, and they’re working fine again. Although they do require a little extra turning, they’re wonderful for smoothness and precision. Whereas, with the Potentiometer Edition, it’s very easy to miss your parameter mark, so that you have to go back and forth before you can hit the exact digit that you want. As a result, I find myself using the +/Yes/-/No Param buttons much more than I ever did with the Encoder Edition.
I bought the 251, MF-102 AND 103. Eventually, I know I’ll buy several of each. Moog is addictive like that. Perhaps that’s just me, but I’d rather have the Moog sound than a weaker sound that can be modulated again and again. 