Exactly. Most things that have come out of Moog over the years have been valuable instruments in some niche or other. I’m glad the new D suits your needs and I hope you have a real blast with it
I love the Sub 37 and the Voyager Old School, and having had a few classic Model Ds in the past, I don’t really hanker after the new D at the current price.
I’m sure the quality of components and manufacture will be second to none, and I think the designers have made some very sensible improvements over the original (e.g. dedicated LFO) but have kept the essential character of the D intact. It’s not a viable proposition for me at the moment purely from the cost point-of-view but good luck to all those who can afford it.
Yeah man that is for sure. I have not heard a Voyager in person yet but that is supposed to be quite a synth also. I love the Sub 37’s dark brown bass.
Not yet, wanted to let folks enjoy their holiday weekend before I unravel the very fabric of the space-time continuum. With that said, we have been messing around with a setting on the H9’s that repeats played notes from the Model D, when we kick it off, its starts with C, I then play E on the D and G on the XL and wam bam its ployman, in honor of Bowie and Gene Wilder … It’s …ALive!!!
Now bring in the three Mothers and the Minitaur and Stadiums Start To Fall …
I think the bass on the sub 37 is very powerful and rich. They have engineered that thing to be overdriven in different ways that are really interesting I think and unique. When you combine that with the sub 37’s filter which is just really muffled and dark sounding you have subterranean bass that is off the charts. The sub 37’s bass can be just really dark and spooky and opening the filter up it can sound very much like some kind of bass horn in a beautiful way. I think the overdriven sound of the oscillators interacting with the filters along with variable wave shape modulation make the sub 37 incredibly compelling in the upper octaves as well.
I dont know how to compare that to the Model D, you just get that modular sound out of the D. Let me put it this way. Until I got the MF drive pedal I was really missing the sub 37’s darker muffled and overdriven sound and it made me feel torn between the two. Now that I have the MF Drive I am very happy with only keeping the MiniMoog. I can get darker and spookier and more muffled now in the bass when I want to and I can get that overdriven upper octave sound now as well. I also have that modular sounding bass with the D and the really smooth and beautiful way the oscillators seem to blend with the D in the upper octaves. I chose the MiniMoog over the Sub so that says something but I would have never felt complete without the MF drive Pedal.
I haven’t quite yet made the final decision, but I am leaning very strongly toward keeping the reissue Model D.
I did some side-by-side comparisons, creating a simple-but-toneful bass patch on the Model D, then tried to reproduce it as exactly as I could on the Sub37. The patch: Two oscillators, 2nd one detuned to a harmonic interval, filter cutoff set to a warm-slightly-muffled pleasing tone, no filter resonance (just to reduce the variables somewhat), some LFO on the filter cutoff, simple envelopes. Bottom line, this was harder to do than I first anticipated. Not that the Sub37 was inadequate, but it proved tricky getting all the infinitely mutable settings to match up to the point that a near-identical tone was achieved. I was able to get a very close match with the Sub37. Not quite exact… there was always some very slight subtle difference with the way the envelopes or filter behaved that I could never quite dial out. But the difference was very slight, enough that I was confident that no one could ever likely hear the difference in a live mix. Both sounded superb and even with careful listening it would be hard to pick a favorite between the two.
So why keep the Model D? The Sub37 sounds great (very Moog-ish) and has some very useful and cool newer features. As I mentioned before, I don’t intend to get rid of it. If I could only keep one of the two, I’d probably choose the Sub37 since it can produce sounds very close to much of what I like on the Model D and has so many extra features that I like. But there are some pretty cool things about the reissue Model D that should make it worth keeping (for me, anyway):
it sounds and plays great
the 3rd Oscillator provides extra tonality and interesting modulation possibilities, especially when coupled with the new dedicated LFO. I really like setting up harmonic intervals on the three oscillators and then quickly switching them in and out as needed. It’s quick and easy to get some interesting FM stuff going on.
all the CV ins/outs allow it to work very well with the modular stuff I have
PROBABLY THE #1 REASON: it’s just so freakin’ easy to navigate the panel and do things on the Model D. It really seems to encourage quick experimentation.
So that’s my current thinking. Anyone who owns either of these synths should count themselves lucky…
I play live but always in my basement so no help on the tuning.
As far as the presets go I really haven’t missed them at all. In fact I quit using them on the sub long before I got the Mini. The Sub is so intuitive and well laidd out that I think it is easy to dial in any sounds you really like quickly.
I would assume (and hope) that the modern electronics in the new Model D would provide more tuning stability than the classic Ds.
I have a Voyager Old School and the tuning is very stable after a warm-up period of 10 minutes or so. It stays rock-solidly in tune whether in my little home studio or on stage. I assume Moog have pretty much figured out how to keep their analogue VCOs in tune. The original Ds varied widely - some were fairly stable but others were a nightmare to keep in tune.
Re. Patch memory. Of course you need patch memories in a live set. The Sub 37 beats the Model D hands down in that respect IMHO.
I just wish the Sub 37 had a bigger keyboard! 3 Octaves are a bit limiting. I’m hoping for a Sub-37 XL (Sub-48?) with a 4-octave keyboard. I will no doubt be disappointed
The Model D is a fairly primitive synthesiser by today’s standards. The Sub-37 has many advanced features that were simply not possible or practical to incorporate in the original D at the time.
However, the sound is the crucial factor and the D sounds rather better to my ears than the Sub-37. The Sub-37 does many things the D simply can’t, but where they overlap, the D wins hands down in my opinion.
I finally got my mitts on a reissue Model D in a London music store (dry with headphones only, so hard to get the full impact). It’s been a few years since I’ve played with a vintage D so I was relying on my memory for comparison. To me, the new D sounded warm and powerful and fully reproduced the character and feel of the original. The build quality is exactly what you would expect in this price range. Superb!
I’m not going to buy one at the current price. My Voyager Old School does a great job and although it doesn’t quite sound as bright as the D, it has a lot more tricks up its sleeve.
The biggie for me is patch memory. The Sub-37 has a very simple and easy-to-access patch memory system and that’s a big win in a performance synthesiser.
As a studio instrument the Model D shines of course, but in performance, not so much. I know the D was originally designed as a performance instrument, but the days of squinting at patch books in near dark stage lighting between songs is long gone - and thank God!
I Hear what you are saying and I am not arguing with you but just offering a different viewpoint. I think it is intuitive and creative to make and change sounds in a live setting on the Model D. I dont see any problems with not having presets for it. There just aren’t that many knobs and functions to deal with on this pretty limited synth.
I’m quite torn between going presets and going no-presets.
On one hand, I feel presets are quite convenient for live indeed: quick switch to the next song sound set, stability of your sounds along performances, etc. I’ve always used them because I started making music with digital keyboards. It kind of feels normal to me.
On the other hand, I’m excited by the idea of re-shaping your sound between songs when playing live. This is a good exercise for getting to master an instrument, you can have good surprises, this is “living”.
Having presets or not can determine how your build your set list and even how you sound: will you dare jumping from a sound to a completely different one or try to keep a certain consistency along your songs? Will you try to rearrange songs to minimize settings change risks?
I often have to change the programs on 2-3 electronic instruments plus as many pedals when I switch from song to song. That’s a grey zone right between having one button to press to change it all and working without net.
In one of my bands, I play a Little Phatty for bass parts. I remember that at some point I wanted to try playing with no presets. But my mate (even younger than me, cannot imagine no presets ) wanted bass sounds too different amongst songs and even verses and chorus. I ended thinking: I won’t be able to do it.
The fact it is “easy and comfortable” sometimes frustrates me. But I enjoy a lot having the LFO frequency synchronized when it needs to be and free when it needs to be…
Two years ago, I was hired in another band where I had to propose some keyboards/synth arrangements ideas. I took the opportunity to bring a preset-free synth. I liked shaping the sound in real time with no guarantee it would sound the same the time after. As long as you don’t want to keep absolutely the same sounds but only draw the ambiances or energy, it’s a cool exercise… and being able to do it all the time is like an old fantasm
In this regard, having simpler instruments helps; sometimes the satisfaction of doing it dangerously is as satisfying as having many complex sounds in presets slots.
Your last paragraph is IT for me. I just like the alive feeling and sound of doing it that way and if its a good night you get tons of happy accidents. Also for me the synth sounds so different when Im with the band playing. At first I thought it WAS making different sounds but its the mix with the other instrument that holds a lot of magic.
I was just pointing out the pros and cons. Having gotten my mitts on one to try out, I think the reissue D is a fantastic instrument - and you’re right - there aren’t that many knobs and switches to memorise. Once you’ve learned the instrument, it should be possible to set up whatever patch you need in short order and tweak it during performance.
I won’t be buying one though. For once in my life I seem to be happy with the gear I have. Must be getting old
I have both. I consider both to be integral to my studio. I would replace either in a heartbeat. If they were being discontinued, I’d consider buying backups without hesitation.
As far as which to buy, they have different sounds. The sound of the 2016 D is thicker, fatter, punchier, more raw and ballsy. The sub 37 is more controlled, but it’s capable of much more complex sounds. Which I play for certain things depends on what sounds I want to make from it.
Do I need the arpeggiator? Do I need to midi sync my LFO’s? do I need the looping EG’s?
As far as patch memory goes, the D doesn’t need it. There are no hidden features or mod destinations. In reality, I can transition the D from one extreme to another faster than I can try and remember what patch number a specific sound is on the Sub 37.
Bottom line. If it’s your first “real” synth? Get the D. You will learn almost everything there is to know about subtractive synthesis on it. The sub37 will confuse you with it’s badass witchcraft.
