Re: New Model D ?
Posted: Sat May 21, 2016 9:40 pm
THe NY company that introduced the products that defined the brand is totally separate from the NC company.
Totally separate entity from the company which had its assets liquidated in the 90s. They aren't reintroducing anything as much as they are making near-exact clones. A lot of people don't understand this is all I'm saying.Stevie Ray wrote:Yes. But Bob was still in charge when the move was made. Not sure what point you're making.
I have plenty of room, unfortunately not plenty of moneySteveW wrote:If only I had the room! Instant buy.
Not because I'm chasing the past, or tired of my Voyager, but simply because Moog Music builds lovely, high quality instruments with wonderful tone that are pure pleasure to play.
You can never have enough of that, period.
I'm sorry but I fail to see how the Model D has a "has a more expensive design/signal path for a fuller and bigger sound". It has exactly the opposite - a cheaper set of components (the only one's available back in the day) with absurd tolerances that would make any contemporary engineer cringe and flip the page on the component catalogue. Perhaps the original Minimoog is the sum of its imperfections and that's why it sounds as good as it does. It is widely acknowledged that the over-driven mixer was a design mistake but it sounded so good, Bob decided to keep it.Mike37 wrote:Well, taste is subjective. I don't agree with Voyager having a superior basic tone to the Model D. IMO powerful sound with lots of freq content, and natural drifting/motion is preferable. Voyager simply can't compete with the Model D in these aspects. Which is also reflected in the price, as the Model D has a more expensive design/signal path for a fuller and bigger sound. Of course Voyager has more features, but I've come to the realisation, if I have to choose between a more simple instrument with truly inspiring and GREAT sound, and a very complex instrument with "almost great" sound - I'll choose the first one.Stevie Ray wrote: I've owned and restored four model Ds of various vintages and yes, they sound very good, but not outstanding to my ears. The VOS is more advanced and can sound just as good or better (subjectively). There's a huge amount of myth and legacy surrounding the Model D and a lot of it quite unjustified in my opinion.
I don't have any Model Ds any more but I still have a VOS.
I remember back in the very early '00's, in 'Audities' (great old) site had an article from Jim Scott about the creation of the minimoog, so there was were I read first about that Bob Moog was opposed the mini initially.thealien666 wrote:People seem to forget that the Minimoog D is the brainchild of Bill Hemsath, Jim Scott (renowned for his calculation mistake that overdrove the filter input by some 20 db), and Chad Hunt.
Bob Moog joined the team later on. In fact, at first he was dead set against a "limited portable synth without patch cords" and Bill had to "borrow" some parts from the Modular system for the prototypes. Bob later embraced it wholeheartedly when he saw that the Minimoog D had the potential to be a success.
My hats off to Bill Hemsath and his team for sticking to the their idea.
Honorable mention goes to former R.A. Moog engineer Gene Zumcheck who had left the company before the birth of the Minimoog, but firmly believed in a portable synth also.
(Sources: Gordon Reid (Sound On Sound Magazine), Bob Moog (article by him and Connor Freff Cochran in Mark Vail's Vintage Synthesizers book))
Bob and Gene didn't get along well. After leaving RA Moog, Gene went on to work for Musonics where he designed a portable synth - the Sonic Five. Musonics eventually acquired RA Moog, the Sonic Five became the Moog Sonic Six, and Gene found himself out of a job againthealien666 wrote:Honorable mention goes to former R.A. Moog engineer Gene Zumcheck who had left the company before the birth of the Minimoog, but firmly believed in a portable synth also.
I was helping Audities back in 2000 getting all these cool vintage synths set up for the NAMM show. While I was there, Bob took Dave Kean of Audities in a room for a private conversation. When the meeting was over, Dave told us that Bob was not happy with some items in Jim Scott's article.space_nerd wrote:I remember back in the very early '00's, in 'Audities' (great old) site had an article from Jim Scott about the creation of the minimoog, so there was were I read first about that Bob Moog was opposed the mini initially.
So I read that article and I went the next day to save the webpage on my disc .... and the "opposition" part had being edited to "then Bob authored the team to continue to build prototypes"!!!
(I believe they did the editing, because Bob Moog had just by then regained back his rights to "Moog/Minimoog" trademarks, and he was about to produce the Voyager )
Not really. The justification was avoiding $$$$ UL approval. Any new device introduced to consumers that contains any voltage source greater than 40V (AC or DC) must go through a UL approval process, which takes some time and $$$$. This process ensures that there are no fire or electric shock hazards in the design. This expense would had driven up the cost of the new Model D and the process would had delayed its release.The thing that concerns me more, is the new, exterior wall-wart power supply:
so there's a question to all of you minimoog owners and technicians:
does the internal power supply on the model D exiting so much heat, to justify the new engineering solution of an external power supply?
Moog got an eye (or ear?) opener when they recreated the Taurus pedals. That's when they realized that you can get that vintage sound with new parts if you know what you're doing. The proper definition of "know what you're doing" is recreating the architecture of the original circuits, recreating the non-linearities at key points (which makes it sound "warm"), and knowing how to replicate out-of-production components with new components without sacrificing the sound or function.I see Moog Music went for a part-to-part, exact as possible, recreation of the modulars.
I believe the reason why there are minor changes on the Mini recreation, is that Moog Music hopes the new Mini's will go onstage (or that's what I hope).
I'm an EE and I approve of this point.Another point: I don't understand why people compare between newer instruments with instruments having aged and out of adjustment electronics, and then say "it's not the same" - of course it's not the same!!!!
I agree Rob. Without the imperfections the Model D would not be the legendary instrument it is. I like the Voyagers a hell of a lot, but you could say they are a little bit 'too perfect', and they lose some of the aggressive sonic character of the original 'D' because of that. They are more 'perfect' instruments, whereas what we really want to hear are subtle imperfections.Rob Smith wrote:Some of the best things in life happen by accident.......... It's imperfections make it almost perfect.......IMHO