If Moog re-released the 960 Step Sequence Controller, would you buy one?
- Yes
- No
0
voters
Just curious to know how many of you would purchase a re-release of the 960 step sequencer. Call it… market research! 
Synthesizers.com already made one and it sells for about 800 dollars. I don’t know why Moog would want to build the exact same thing and put their name on it. Since the Dotcom also has a reset feature the Moog version would lack this.
Precisely because the Moog name would be on it, not someone else’s name!
Just curious.
You can get one from Modusonics. It will be an authentic reproduction left over from original Moog parts. It will cost 4000 plus a power supply and plus a few more thousand for the 961 and 962.
And it will have the Moog name on it lolol.
But Ill go ahead and vote yes.
Eric
I’ll just get out my wallet…
I’m just curious, that’s all. I have been looking at the synthesizers.com sequencers, and am actually pondering if the Q119 would be a sound investment. I would love to have the Q960, but many, many dollars would have to be sacrificed. I’m not so sure I would want to spend that much just to have an “authentic” reproduction of the 960, warts and all. However, the Q119 has many more features, allows up, down, and random sequence patterns, has more stages (3X8 or 1X24), and it uses LEDs for the stage active lights rather than incandescent lamps like the 960 (a small, but still important consideration if you don’t want to be constantly replacing bulbs).
No, I’d like to think that I’m a bit more practical than that. Plus $560 vs $800, and more flexibility and performance? It’s a no brainer! However, $560 is still big bucks, so for now, I ponder.
Now, if someone were to make me an offer I couldn’t refuse on a 960… Well, I guess I could be swayed! 
mayidunk, I MUST put my two cents here. While it would be awesome for Moog to re-release the 960, it wouldn’t be practical in this day in age. First of all, it would cost as much as a Delorean and be as obsolete as well. As a fan of Deloreans, this isn’t an insult. I can’t afford a Delorean, nor would I be able to afford a Moog 960.
Synthesizers.com’s 960 is much more suited to todays market, even today’s economy. As far as the incandescent lamps, they can be switched out with LED’s fairly easily. The LED’s are about three bucks apiece at Radio Shack, but they are compatible with up to 12V. 
I don’t see the point of these massively expensive step sequencers (as a new product - of course I understand the collector bit); what can they do compared to Numerology2 running on a Mac?
Computer rigs don’t even need to take up that much space; I’ve got a little PC thing called a “FlipStart” which is literally pocket-sized but runs anything you can get onto an XP PC. You could rackmount it and shove it into a module…
Yes, especially if it has extra features and it can be rack-mounted.
Well the pots and wiring is what makes those modules expensive. THe more knobs it has the more it costs.
The dotcom sequencer would definately be worth it, but then you have to house it and then have a power supply for it. So unless you already have a way to mount it and a power supply you are looking at at least 200 more dollars.
With the associated modules thats even more.
Really Ive been anti-computer for the longest time as far as a conputer based studio goes. You never have a hard copy of anything unless you burn it on a DAT or a reel-to-reel. You can burn a cd rom and then look at it and it will corrupt. Look at it again and its scratched. Harddrives crash.
So real genuine hardware will ALWAYS beat out for software in my opinion any day of the week.
Eric
I own a Dot Com. Q119. I absolutely love it.
I Used it in this demo, sequencing the Voyager. (demo originally done to show the sound of the FreqBox in the effects loop of the Voyager)
I use the Q119 quite often.
First of all, they don’t freeze when you don’t need them to. A hardware sequencer will not add digital artifacts to the sound, either. Hardware is always the better way to go if you can A) afford it, B) have the space for it and C) have the patience to learn how to use it.
I’d rather not have this whole software vs. hardware discussion, because the next thing you’ll try is “What is the point in having a synth when Arturia works just as well?”
Uh, whut? Digital artefacts to the sound?
It’s a sequencer. It tells it to switch a note on or off. You could make a device that does it on a handful of PICs or possibly a Propellor chip with appropriate I/O.
What do these beasts do that this sort of solution does? Not “why don’t you use Cubase”. I used Numerology as an example because it’s cheap, low-overhead and basically exists to step-sequence MIDI devices.
Aha, alas the hardwave versus software debate.
Well Ill interject…
Why get a MiniMoog when they have software Minimoogs out there that do the same thing?
heheh!
EricK
Don’t start, EricK! I’d think that you of all people would be with me on this one. I’ve had some bad experiences with software sequencers. They have a tendency to be glitchy. Like after one cycle, you’ll hear a click then it cycles back. Or it’ll freeze up and get stuck on one note. Just my experience. I don’t even like GarageBand, but it works great for what I use it for. So does my Revere reel to reel tape recorder. Just my opinion.
It never ceases to amaze me how many different ways we incorperate our gear and software. There’s no wrong answer, just a bunch of right ones.
I really can’t see why anyone would buy a Q960 at $800.00? There is not much you can do with one of these,…so I bought 3 of them!
I have been sequencing since the early days, and have tried and used most. Hardware/software, they all have thier strengths and weeknesses. It’s up to us musicians to decide how best to apply these tools.
Let me tell you there is much fun configuring three of these, and the possibilities are as limited as your imagination. One thing the 960 can do that is tough to do in software is clock the sequencer so fast it turns into a waveform generator. Just can’t get MIDI to run that fast with note on/offs. And while sequencers might not have a sound, they do have a style.
The biggest difference in any sequencer is the user interface. The 960 is a great interface and has many usefull features like the skip/norm/stop switches and gate in/out on each step. Hey, Bob designed it!
But to answer the question, I might buy a Moog one to go in that 1969 Moog 1P
And, it’s CZ Rider taking over the thread and blowing us mortals out of the water once again!
How did you house and power it? Did “synths.com” help you with that, or was it a DIY effort?
mayidunk, if you purchase the Q119, or Q960 for that matter, though IMHO a standalone Q960 requires a few other modules for full functionality, it’s real easy to also order the power supply of your choosing and put it in either a homemade enclosure or some other box of your choosing.
Thanks Voltor, that’s encouraging!
Personally, I would like as a long-term project, to order the portable cabinet, and fill it with Q119’s, Q161’s and Q162’s, and Q960’s as well as an oscillator for each Q960. Talk about quadrisequential chaos! 