yeah, that totally makes sense. i am from the other school of thought where i just want the sounds and not all of the extra stuff. i figured there were more people like me 
Somedayā¦Iāll have one. Even if I have to get it on E-Bay at three times current price, I WILL have one before I die. 
Iāve always felt that if it has audio outputs, you can integrate it into a system.
Not everyone thinks like that though. Some people think that MIDI is required to create sounds. They donāt have the concept of doing things the hard way. Or they donāt have the funds. Letās face itā¦gear is expensive, and analog gear is even MORE expensive. If someone has ten grand invested in a digital setup, the OS probably isnāt going to help them out much. My 2 resistors. 
Some people like to play live. Some people like to sequence with MIDI.
I now have both OS and midi voyager. I donāt want to start a fire storm here. And, since I owned the OS first, that has something to do with my opinion. But I feel the old school is a different and > or = synth as the voyager. Not < at all. Maybe itās microseconds of speed in the triggers, I donāt know. But there is something very instantly gratifying about the OS, even if you have to dial in your sounds. I donāt think I hear a difference per se, but I feel different. I do know that I have tried to dial in some of my sounds from a patch sheet that donāt quite translate to the voyager. Donāt get me wrong, being able to sequence from midi and store patches is invaluable to me. But when I did not have those ācrutchesā, I learned a lot about synthesis that I wouldnāt have otherwise. And I have been playing with analog synths for almost 20 years.
The old school is extremely awesome.
I learned synthesis on a Mocro and I believe that it really forces you to understand WHY some patches are the way they are as opposed to just accidentally discovering them.
Is there any engineering proof, or nanosecond stopwatch or oscilloscope proof that the Old School sounds better? Isnt there a way to figure it out scientifically?
lol
You want scientific proof that it sounds better?
Well you might can get proof that the envelopes fire a microsecond faster or something along those lines.
Boy if my opinion was verified by scientific proof My word would literally be gospel. (Can i cite myself as a source?)
Im sure that someone can have the info that you are requiring.
Respectfully,
Eric
No because what āsounds betterā is subjective. I think the OS sounds better than the ānormalā Voyager but thereās no way to prove it because what sounds good to my ears may not sound good to someone elseās.
I was half joking, but since we are on the subject - I didnt mean - what sounds better, I agree, thatās subjective. I meant measurement of speed, quality of wave forms, over all richness of sound (name of those metrics escape me), but of course it could be figured-out.
I think there are differences, and some really smart person out there would know exactly how to measure those differences: an OS patch vs. an identical midi Voyager patch.
It must be measurable. Not that anyone will do it, however I did post it over at the mythbuster idea forum.
search āphatnessā
But yeah, what is ābetterā would only lead us to bitterly kill each other. see muslims, christians, hindus, etc.
Something like that could probably be done to show differences but would have to be done by the same person running the Voyagers through the same equipment.
Anyone have an OS, a MIDI Voyager and some free time? 
I second.
How about test equipment. .. Iām gonna say an oscilloscope is needed. This test sounds good to me. Someone out there 
The first annual phat-off.
Iāve got a Signature with 3.3 operating system and 2 dual trace O-scopes.
Anyone want to come over with an OS, RME or Phatty and we can chain 'em all up!
(The weather is great in Phoenix right now!)
hmmm, you guys donāt have daylight savings time, this is going to be complicated.
If you were in sunny florida, Iād be there in a second brougham!! In fact, Iām already here.
Iād be happy to know if there really is a difference in the analog signal from an OS vs. the Voyager but I my life is still complete without knowing. If the analog circuitry really is different, wouldnāt Moog mention it? And donāt forget the OS is still not true analog because the knobs are digital. You havenāt got the analog signal actually passing through the resonance knob as it controls feedback in the VCF for example. You also donāt have the hum. noise and radio reception from the proximity of your hand, but I digressā¦
Bring on the comparisons, Iām all for that. My point is that the finest tweak of a knob is a subjecive difference between great and OMG great. I tweaked 5 basses from the factory presets to make them sound perfect, but of course someone programmed them the way they are because that sounded perfect to them. I think the tiny tweaks are the real difference, not the hardware itself.
Pleae contradict me, I canāt stand it when everyone agrees with me 
B
Youāre right, we need to find someone with a Model D before we start.
But seriously, I knew the OS keyboard was digital controlled, though I thought the knobs were analog.
Just like the Alesis Andromeda 100% analog, except for the all-digital controlsā¦ 
Iām not being sarcastic here: What is keeping companies from making synths exactly as they were in the 70s?
Is it too labor intensive?
Parts too expensive ?
Or the fact that analog is actually inferior as it relates to stability?
From looking at pics of naked OS and Voyager, they seem to have the same boards for the front panel - which implies digital knobs but with better resolution than the 128 steps that VA synths deal with. I believe that the front panel is fully digital and outputs midi for everything knob. If I am wrong, someone please let me know. IMO this is a vast improvement over knobs being part of the analog circuitry. The Voyager will last much longer than the model D because of this design. And again IMO, the OS or Voyager is superior to fully analog modules emulating moog modulars because of this hybrid design. And Iām speaking from an electrical engineering point of view.
Real analog struggles with temperature stability, matching components for reliable manufacture and noise elimination. The boutique analogs are out there for sure (Macbeth as a suggestion), but youāre talking about custom production runs, high prices and the satisfaction that only you and few others in the world have one Iād be very interested in any opinions on real world reliability, patch repeatability and how much back to factory calibration and tuning is required for a boutique analog.
Because the Voyager is closest to my macbook pro, I am using its keyboard for sequencing other gear and finding it is a great midi controller. Millisecond delays because its evil digital? Have you ever played a serious pipe organ? Then tell me about delays
B
Iād be happy to know if there really is a difference in the analog signal from an OS vs. the Voyager but I my life is still complete without knowing. If the analog circuitry really is different, wouldnāt Moog mention it?
According to KnobTweak:
āThe Voyager Old School has the same analog circuitry as the other Voyagers (EB, Select, Performer, RME) minus the digital control, so it will basically sound the same as the other editions.ā
http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/KnobTweak/
I think that no two Voyagers are alike. That would include an OS in comparison to a Performer as well as one OS compared to another OS. Some may have that undefinable difference that can only be discerned by playing. For example: perhaps the envelope circuitry has some component that is more to spec than another, or maybe one keyboard is more responsive than another. Itās like that with guitars. Some Martin D-28s sound or play better than other Martin D-28s. There are so many components that make up a Voyager, it would only be likely that there would be differences.
the OS knobs are connected to real analog pots. theyāre not digital. the front panel PCBs are different http://www.moogmusic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6156
the only digital component in the old school is on the keyscan PCB under the keyboard