Moog Music Forum

Share Ideas and Pass the word

Support

System 55 • System 35 • Model 15

Support

Postby Midiguy4u » Thu Feb 23, 2017 2:05 pm

In a 9-month period, I bought a Voyager XL, (9) foogers, (4) 500-series modules, a System 55 ( #39) and the 953 controller. My nearest estimation I spent over $47,000 on Moog products.
On 3 different occasions I properly contacted Moog tech support for problems I was having with the 55, and they never replied.
I contacted them regarding a flaw that makes the Voyager XL crash, and they were very attentive and helpful.
Since then, I have sold my 55 to a collector in London. While the 55 WAS a romantic purchase, ( I think I can speak for most of us when I say, the 55 was always a coveted item extending back to my childhood), I purchased it to be a functional instrument in my composing studio. At the same time, I also purchased a large system from a wonderful company (horribly named) Synthesizers.com.
I'm not any type hater or flaw-detective, so please don't take this as an opportunity for me to bash Moog. I am grateful and elated that Moog is HERE and seemingly doing well. One only has to closely examine the 55 inside and out to fully appreciate the immense attention to detail and craftsmanship; its remarkable.
There seems to a bit of irony or even a contradiction in the modular re-issues; Bob's modulars stretched the technological limit to what was reasonably available at that time in the 60s. But now we know how to make analog more stable both in pitch and in scale. We also have MIDI which allows for easier and faster triggering, yet alone the integration into a computer, or keyboard or sequencer.(even the new Minimoog D re-issue has MIDI) My point is, Moog could have easily made a unit that still had all of the glory of their vintage/classic analog, while implementing some subtle things that made it more functional in a modern sense, but they abandoned that technological advantage, despite that being the very foundation of which the originals were built upon. Why they opted to clone past limitations and flaws was an unnecessary ( and expensive) allegiance to the original is an enigma. The unit is not really a full modular, as its largely hard-wired and uses a proprietary power supply; so not only other 3rd party modules wont work, but Moog itself did not offer any "newer" designed modules. Remember, the 55 was not originally designed like this, it evolved from other models, as did Emerson's system. Flexibility/adaptability was part of Moog's mantra. I'm sure Bob would have opted for something that made his instrument for usable rather than something collectable.
Moog System 55 with controller.Synthesizers Studio System 110 with controller, Voyager XL, (9) Moogerfoogers,(3) Mothers, (2)500-series Ladder filters, (2) 500-series analog delays. [img]fullmodular.jpg[/img]
Midiguy4u
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:07 am

Re: Support

Postby AlecK » Sat Feb 25, 2017 6:58 am

What specific problems did you have with your 55?
AlecK
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2015 3:07 am

Re: Support

Postby EricK » Sat Feb 25, 2017 2:14 pm

I sense a little bit of Roger Arrick's "Modularity" philospphy in what you are posting regarding it being hard-wired. My response is: So?

The CP row is great. I have found that when trying to design a system for cabinets that lack the CP row, the CP row is dearly missed. Having to devote 1u to a multiple or to an attenuator really throws off how I want to align things if I chose to stay in traditional 22u widths.

I think Roger's modularity complaints are unjustified. He still has normalization modules and other things hard-wired in his system too so, I fail to see what his complaint is other than just a means to distinguish himself.

But the idea of using the bus board to drive the B oscillator banks is a great idea.

But going from a Moog to a dotcom synth is a serious reduction in both sound and build quality.

If you bought a system 55, you should have known exactly what you were getting. What problems did it exhibit?

I do agree with you that Moog should have done something with that blank panel in there. I am also rather disappointed that Moog bypassed the majority of the 5u community by not offering individual modules such as their filters or that Ring Modulator that you can only get if you buy their Emerson Modular. Or not even offering their beautifully bound operation manual or panels with the Brain Salad Surgery artwork or the 901 oscillators.
Support the Bob Moog Foundation:
https://npo.networkforgood.org/Donate/Donate.aspx?npoSubscriptionId=4043

I think I hear the mothership coming.
EricK
 
Posts: 5968
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 2:09 pm

Re: Support

Postby AlakaLazlo » Thu Mar 02, 2017 8:37 pm

Among other studio instruments, I have a large (110sp) 5U system (inc: DotCom, STG, FSFX, Moon...), a new MiniMoog and - my pride and joy - an old Moog Model IIP. Yes, the new modulars are more romantic (or dare I say emotional) purchases, but denigrating DotCom is a mistake. Their modules are well built, affordable and their customer service is the best I've ever encountered. I started with a 66sp in 2009 and I've never had a module fail. One of my 22sp cabs arrived late one Friday afternoon with some minor shipping damage. I sent an e-mail on Saturday morning asking for help (and including that I didn't expect a response over the weekend) but I got an e-mail back from Roger within a few hours and the matter was immediately resolved. Then again, I've been begging Moog to build individual modules for 20 years. In person at shows (NAMM, AES), and via e-mails... No luck... After one of their own people at AES suggested I have someone build me a clone (!) I sent Mike Adams (Moog's new CEO) a letter offering to pay - stupid money /in advance - for a pair of modules to complete my IIP (a 904B and C). No response whatsoever. My concern with the OP's post is the lack of customer service. I had a slight blip with my Mini and got a call back from a Moog tech within a few hours. I'm a bit stunned that after buying a 55, you couldn't get a return call. That should be unacceptable. I'd write a letter to Mike Adams if I were you.... oh wait....
User avatar
AlakaLazlo
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Support

Postby EricK » Fri Mar 03, 2017 12:44 am

Alaka,
I think "denigrating" is a slight overstatement.
Support the Bob Moog Foundation:
https://npo.networkforgood.org/Donate/Donate.aspx?npoSubscriptionId=4043

I think I hear the mothership coming.
EricK
 
Posts: 5968
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 2:09 pm

Re: Support

Postby Midiguy4u » Mon Mar 06, 2017 2:17 pm

EricK wrote:I sense a little bit of Roger Arrick's "Modularity" philospphy in what you are posting regarding it being hard-wired. My response is: So?

The CP row is great. I have found that when trying to design a system for cabinets that lack the CP row, the CP row is dearly missed. Having to devote 1u to a multiple or to an attenuator really throws off how I want to align things if I chose to stay in traditional 22u widths.

I think Roger's modularity complaints are unjustified. He still has normalization modules and other things hard-wired in his system too so, I fail to see what his complaint is other than just a means to distinguish himself.

But the idea of using the bus board to drive the B oscillator banks is a great idea.

But going from a Moog to a dotcom synth is a serious reduction in both sound and build quality.

If you bought a system 55, you should have known exactly what you were getting. What problems did it exhibit?

I do agree with you that Moog should have done something with that blank panel in there. I am also rather disappointed that Moog bypassed the majority of the 5u community by not offering individual modules such as their filters or that Ring Modulator that you can only get if you buy their Emerson Modular. Or not even offering their beautifully bound operation manual or panels with the Brain Salad Surgery artwork or the 901 oscillators.


Im not offering anything about Roger's philosophy. As far as I know, what little that is, that Roger and Bob were friends, and Roger held Bob in the highest regard.

I have not idea what your paragraph on control processors is about or why you volunteered that.

I am not aware of Roger's "modularity complaints." Maybe that's something you should discuss with him?

Reduction in sound quality? That's entirely subjective.

This wasn't an invitation to be scolded on my purchasing process.

We can agree on Moog offering single units to market.
Moog System 55 with controller.Synthesizers Studio System 110 with controller, Voyager XL, (9) Moogerfoogers,(3) Mothers, (2)500-series Ladder filters, (2) 500-series analog delays. [img]fullmodular.jpg[/img]
Midiguy4u
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:07 am


Return to Modular Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests