
(right click on a word, under Spelling and Grammar => Check spelling while typing)

But you probably knew that...
Me, I have to force new words down its throat all the time by clicking "Add to dictionary" !

If you use very inexpensive components on a synth, it doesn't matter if it's analog or digital. Either way it still sounds like crap.unfiltered37 wrote:But other than that, I am not impressed with the sound of any DSI synths (other than the tempest, if you call that a synth). His synths are pretty cool for hardware digital, but not for analog. He might as well go full digital, the analog part is just for gimmick IMO.
Yes, most of what you are telling is true. As for the MM you have to get one that isn't been fixed to death by an unskilled tech. There are some special chips inside but as it seems they don't get broken that often. And it MUST be upgraded for reliability and stable tuning. That's it.Electrong wrote:Other great analog synths include the Oberheim ObXa, Xpander and matrix 12, Jupiter 8, Jupiter 6, etc.. I like the Moog Voyager and love the old Minimoog model D. In my mind an analog oscillator blows away a digital oscillator. Which is why I'd go for a Prophet 08 or even a Poly Evolver (with both digital and analog oscillators) The Memorymoog is an awesome synth but they have been known to be a headache in terms of upkeep, same as the Polymoog.. Sequential and DSI and Oberheim and Roland were much better at the polyphonic synth building, probably.
I wouldn't say its weird. With the recent resurgence in analog synths everyone wants a piece of it and they will push the analog side of their products any way they can.unfiltered37 wrote:It's weird how analog has just been used as a marketing technique, like with DSI and Arturia, but make products that don't sound particularly analog. Or at least no more than the better plug ins or virtual analog synths.
That's absolutely the point, mate !!!!! As it seems, most people don't realize this.........thealien666 wrote:Sometimes there's a huge difference between modern analog, and vintage analog. I prefer the ladder...uh, latter.
To a certain degree thats's the point. Many, especially young people never had an old vintage so they're not able only from this to compare.thealien666 wrote:To be honest, and not to put anybody down or anything, when comparing vintage analog to modern analog, or even VA, you need to be really able to.
Meaning that not everyone can tell the sonic difference between a Stradivari or Il Canone and a $2K violin.![]()
(don't worry, I can't either. I don't know much about violins. I know vintage synths and drums.)