Considering a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute

In a Moog Mood? Here's a forum for discussion of general Moog topics.
Bryan T
Posts: 812
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:23 pm

Considering a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute

Post by Bryan T » Mon May 13, 2013 3:45 pm

I used to have a Little Phatty and really liked it, but my music took a different direction for the past few years. I'm thinking about getting another monosynth, either a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute. The Sub Phatty obviously does more, but the Mini Brute would leave some $ for other equipment, like a ring mod.

Which choice would you make?

kslight
Posts: 106
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 9:18 pm

Re: Considering a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute

Post by kslight » Mon May 13, 2013 7:58 pm

Minibrute has no patch memory but has an arpeggiator. Only one oscillator + sub, and filter is only 2 pole.


Sub Phatty has limited patch memory and no arp, but 2 osc + sub, and filter selectable between 1 and 4 pole.



I would say...arps are fun and if no patch memory is not an issue to you, then yeah save your money and get some effects with a Minibrute. But the Sub Phatty is a bit more versatile and can do more of a "Moog" type sound than the Minibrute, at a price.

Hell, if you like the Little Phatty then maybe pick up a used one and some effects?

User avatar
Box
Posts: 85
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 10:08 pm
Location: Springville, AL

Re: Considering a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute

Post by Box » Mon May 13, 2013 9:19 pm

If you're considering the MiniBrute, Novation is coming out with a BassStation II which is also analogue. Oh and Korg MS-20 Mini. Lots of choices these days. Though if it were me I'd go with the Sub Phatty with price being no issue.

User avatar
filtered
Posts: 268
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2012 12:42 am

Re: Considering a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute

Post by filtered » Mon May 13, 2013 11:07 pm

the arpeggiator is great on the minibrute, but if you're wanting classic TONE, go sub phatty, in my opinion, as an owner of a minbrute and Voyager OS

Bryan T
Posts: 812
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:23 pm

Re: Considering a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute

Post by Bryan T » Wed May 15, 2013 2:21 pm

I think I've decided on the Sub Phatty, though I do want to get my hands on one before purchasing.

User avatar
misterpete
Posts: 390
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:16 am

Re: Considering a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute

Post by misterpete » Wed May 15, 2013 4:47 pm

i can't figure out what the guy who sold me my MiniBrute for $300 didn't like about it!
...especially with close to $600 receipt inside from a few months before ... that said if you don't have a Moog, yet or actually, even if you do but you still don't have a Sub Phatty yet GET BOTH to quote a MuffWiggler .sig :lol:
Please Call Me, PETE
https://petedako.bandcamp.com/music
"Mr. Pete" at MuffWiggler |@petedako on Twitter

User avatar
Portamental
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 8:53 am

Re: Considering a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute

Post by Portamental » Wed May 15, 2013 6:48 pm

The SubPhatty turns me off. No keys would be better than not enough. First Moog ever about which I want to say : thanks but no thanks. CV inputs on it are 0 to 5v. That makes it impossible to modulate pitch or filter with an external LFO. No bus voltage : no transpose on the fly. From an old schooler's point of view : unacceptable. Same with the Minitaur, not sure I am going to keep it.

The MiniBrute has the same effect on me than the Mopho (and other DSIs) a few years back : been there, done that, move on!

My next synth will be MS-20 mini. Sounds vintage all right, fun with patch bay, no firmware, easy on the wallet. (Moog take a hint!!)

kslight
Posts: 106
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 9:18 pm

Re: Considering a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute

Post by kslight » Wed May 15, 2013 7:36 pm

Portamental wrote:The SubPhatty turns me off. No keys would be better than not enough. First Moog ever about which I want to say : thanks but no thanks. CV inputs on it are 0 to 5v. That makes it impossible to modulate pitch or filter with an external LFO. No bus voltage : no transpose on the fly. From an old schooler's point of view : unacceptable.
My thoughts on the Sub Phatty. Like...a lot of potential but IMHO cut too much to really be the must have instrument it could have been and was hyped up to be initially, and yet it seems the other new monos best or at least match the Sub Phatty in every category at a lower price point... At the top of the "new entry level monosynth" price point, they could have bested the competition and made it a no-brainer, but instead we get 16 patches (??? is this the 70s?), 25 keys (not acceptable in this price range, IMHO..I expect it on the $500 models...but really...how much would it have added to the cost to put another octave or at least a half on there?), and no FM or arp...

User avatar
Portamental
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 8:53 am

Re: Considering a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute

Post by Portamental » Wed May 15, 2013 8:03 pm

kslight wrote: ...a lot of potential but IMHO cut too much to really be the must have instrument it could have been and was hyped up to be initially
Well put.

Actually, I like the 16 patches, good amount for me. I like no LCD. I like the knobs. But it's all dowhill from there. The sounds bits on MM site I can only describe as : painful. Under the hood features : nice in principle for a few, but the extent is getting ridiculous.

To operate (notice I did not use the word "play") the SubP, you need an open manual on your knees, a USB cable and an opened DAW. This is not a musical instrument, it's a CPU with analog sound output. Forget modular fun with it. That ain't for me. Maybe it's in sync with the younger generation. Presto, make a VST app for Ipad. :lol:

User avatar
misterpete
Posts: 390
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:16 am

Re: Considering a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute

Post by misterpete » Wed May 15, 2013 8:32 pm

kslight wrote:CV inputs on it are 0 to 5v. That makes it impossible to modulate pitch or filter with an external LFO.
what? that is absolutely not true i just did exactly that (modulating with external LFO) you can also modulate it with whatever you want via CV in
kslight wrote:To operate (notice I did not use the word "play") the SubP, you need an open manual on your knees, a USB cable and an opened DAW. This is not a musical instrument, it's a CPU with analog sound output. Forget modular fun with it. That ain't for me. Maybe it's in sync with the younger generation. Presto, make a VST app for Ipad
??? :roll:
i don't play it like that! ... and i didn't see Bernie Worrell or Stevie Wonder playing SubPhatty like that (with computer/manual/iPad vst etc) at NAMM either :lol:
Please Call Me, PETE
https://petedako.bandcamp.com/music
"Mr. Pete" at MuffWiggler |@petedako on Twitter

User avatar
Portamental
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 8:53 am

Re: Considering a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute

Post by Portamental » Wed May 15, 2013 8:46 pm

misterpete wrote:what? that is absolutely not true i just did exactly that (modulating with external LFO)
I am afraid it is... A triangle or sine LFO wave ranges from -2.5v to 2.5v (full strength CP-251 LFO). What you think you are modulating with an external LFO is an half wave LFO... the negative part of the wave is equalled to zero. That applies to both pitch and filter CV inputs.

On a Voyager or LP, you can feed in negative voltage as pitch and reach way down into sub-audio. Not the case on the Minitaur, and from reading the SubPhatty manual as carefully as I could, same with Sub-Phatty. The manual by the way is rather terse on these kind of technical details.

unfiltered37
Posts: 645
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 1:28 pm

Re: Considering a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute

Post by unfiltered37 » Thu May 16, 2013 3:04 am

Portamental wrote:
I am afraid it is....

Even with a dc offset?

User avatar
Portamental
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 8:53 am

Re: Considering a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute

Post by Portamental » Thu May 16, 2013 3:19 am

If you introduce a DC offset (with a CP-251), then you get full range but then it does not sound exactly the same for filter as you are not modulating the same frequencies. You have to adjust cutoff accordingly and your preset does not sound the same. Different story for pitch : you don't go below and above the note you play... above only... then you must adjust your playing 2.5 octaves higher (full range), or an undefined amount of semitones if you attenuate the lfo. Center of one volt range is half an octave, center or 2 volts is an octave etc...

It's just not the same as analog always was... if you like wacky then you're good, but performance wise, not good at all.

By the way, the DC offset range is not 5 volts on the CP-251... 5 volts is a number that is rounded up. The voltage supply for the rings is more like 5.7 or 5.8 volts (actually close to 6 on mine). So you can not just set the dial at 2.5 and expect 2.5 volts... you get 3.

unfiltered37
Posts: 645
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 1:28 pm

Re: Considering a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute

Post by unfiltered37 » Thu May 16, 2013 3:07 pm

Is this the same on the model d's cv inputs?

User avatar
Portamental
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 8:53 am

Re: Considering a Sub Phatty or a Mini Brute

Post by Portamental » Thu May 16, 2013 5:36 pm

Voyager, LP, Model D,other early moogs, Roland's early units, Korg's early, countless others are -5v to 5v both on pitch and filter CV input

It's an old standard from Moog's early days, adopted (created ?) by Bob Moog and the rest of the industry at large, call it Moog compliant.

It's odd that MoogMusic's new synths (Taurus 3 omitted) introduced since the departure of Bob Moog (RIP) are not Moog compliant.

Post Reply