Hi guys i have just got one of these off of e-bay but i’m worried i have been conned.When i open up the case there is only one pcb in it,and i can only see the underside of the pcb is this usual?The reason i ask this is because i thought there were supposed to be pictures of mushrooms and a budah soldered into the pcb can anyone tell me if i have got the real deal? or have i just got a carbon copy?
well, mine has the buddah… I don’t remember any mushrooms. Did you check both sides of the PCB? (yes, there’s only supposed to be one). Anyway, I really think you’ll be pleased with it - I got mine as a high school graduation present to myself (back in 1981…)
-andrew bunny
Yeah, the mushroom is on the other side of the PCB.
I was too shocked at the lack of parts in the Pro-One, compared to the Voyager and Prophet-5. I guess the only way to tell if its working, is to play it! 
No i didn’t look on the otherside of the pcb (i couldn’t figure out how to get it off the top board and i didn’t want to mess about with it considering the age etc)phew well it sounds like everything is in order then thanks for the replys guys much appreciated[/quote]
Also could i route a vst plugin in to the audio input on the pro one via my soundcard and process it’s signal with the pro one’s filters etc?
Y’know, it’s funny that this should come up, right now. I just watched the Theremin Electronic Odyssey movie a couple of times. In it, Bob Moog offered up some commentary on how old Theremins don’t include that many internal components, vs. most other synthesizers and samplers. When I heard that, I was interested as to whether any designer since the 60’s tried to construct a synth or Theremin using as little electronic guts as needed.
I mean, do all the SSM / CEM chips and the processor in the Prophets need that much space? The synthesis circuits in the old Moogs don’t take up that much room.
stick with the pro one man, i don’t think you have been conned,does it sound ok?
The Prophet-5 is quite crowded inside, so is the Voyager, but there is less room in the latter. Pro One has one board, the keyboard mechanism contributes to most of the weight of the unit.
Pro-One is not programmable.
Prophet-5 and Voyager are programmable. It requires extra parts to get that feature and every synth component has to be voltage controlled. Things like filter resonance and EG times are not easy to interface to voltage control and you need demux ICs for modulation busses.
That’s why the Pro-One has way less parts.
To Boeing,
Is that the reason why modeling instruments and processors have so much ruddy empty space? That situation is almost identical. As if the weight of a Nord Lead 2 is attributed to the front panel / keyboard and its 16-voice innards all fit into a single chip. Am I right or wrong?
I’ve never looked inside a modern synth, but I suppose its the same thing.
To MC.
Does the Model D Minimoog have considerably less parts than the Voyager? I’m curious because I’ve never looked inside one.
Does the Model D Minimoog have considerably less parts than the Voyager? I’m curious because I’ve never looked inside one.
Yes. I have both.
Weird. Who would’ve known that the mere addition of a dedicated LFO and a microprocessor would wind up compactly stuffing the innards of the Voyager moreso than the Model D.
Of course, there’s the release time knob added to both envelope generators, but how much space does that take up? Am I missing anything?
The touchpad!
But as MC said…
Prophet-5 and Voyager are programmable. It requires extra parts to get that feature and every synth component has to be voltage controlled. Things like filter resonance and EG times are not easy to interface to voltage control and you need demux ICs for modulation busses.