Moog Music Forum

Exactly. Going the old school route isnt for everyone. Like i said when you look at the Voyager is bad ass!!! And it doesnt sound too shabby either!!! Yea, The MIDI thing is a biggie, just being able to interface with a computer and various things is awesome, along with CV even more awesome!!! The Stable oscillators are another. It all comes down to taste. Not everyone wants to live in a shack like the Unabomber!! I personally love electricity and indoor plumbing. Though some might say the Model D's sound slightly "fatter", so thats the only (other) reason I could think of wanting to go that route.

When i was a young'en I wanted a Mini or a Micro soooooo bad, but little kids are always broke and a parent is a hard sell for aging analogs. So as soon as I had the money and I was doing my reasearch I personallly seriously considered getting a vintage one, up until I found out about the Voyagers. It was a little more expensive, but had so much more going for it. It was like everything from the past with much of what the future had to offer.

Remember Im not saying i want to go the old skool route, i was just defending it for those who do. The oldest pieces of kit i own are a Space Echo, a Stylophone, and Casio Sk-1, Oh and a SCI Drumtracks. Thats it. Everything else came out of the last 12 years or so. Im totally all for the new technology. I use it. I love it, and will love the stuff of the future too. (Have you seen the Evolver Keyboard yet?) There are some old things i still want, like a TR 808, for one. But the future looks good.

Who ever said that he should sell his car instead. I agree. Cars as we know them, are on the way out, i think. But even when there's some new transportation thats better, faster, more efficient, there'll always be someone who'll cling to it for the simplicity and nostalgia of it. Even if its expensive and breaks down and all that jazz.
-pat

As an aside and kind of OT for this particular thread, but with all this talk of NAMM. I would love to see a new Micromoog, more than anything. Maybe a brand new synth design, not based on anything from the past, that would be cool.

Concerning patch storage: I never do it. I've been in the habit of working on analog's with no patch storage for so long that I automatically "start over" everytime I make a new patch. There's nothing that helps you learn a synth better than making new sounds rather than editing existing ones. I don't feel it should be something that's considered a drawback, though. Many of the old and classic analog's had patch storage, but it's obviously your own choice whether you use it or not. Also, the Voyager does retain the sound you've been working on after you turn it off and then on again, so it's completely useful for someone such as myself who doesn't store anything.

Concerning complexity: Again, there's nothing on the Voyager that NEEDS to be more complicated than on the original Mini. Personally, I never go into any of the "edit" or "menu" parameters because I'm just using the synth to program new sounds. I know people have different applications, but I also know that a lot of synthesizer users tend to be a little too "feature" oriented. The point it that just because the Voyager has certain features doesn't mean they have to be utilized.

The Voyager is the Rolls Royce of synthesizers. My motto: "Stop buying synths and start making music".

I was mentioning the patch storage for the sake of comparison. I do agree with all that you said, though.

And thats a really good motto too.

I always start over too. I completely disassemble the Voyager into little tiny pieces and put them into a box. When I am ready to create a patch, I put it all back together again. Hours of fun. Unless the cat gets into the box of pieces; then I have to look under the sofa and the fridge for missing parts. I wish el feline would stick to chasing mice.

MC wrote:I always start over too.

Hello,

I do something similar. When I'm done practicing the Voyager every evening, I pack it into the carton it ships in and return it to the store
for a refund, only to buy another the next day when I'm ready to
play again.


Regards,


LWG

northern hope wrote:Concerning patch storage: I never do it.

But suppose you produce a fantastic sound? Are you seriously saying, you'd just let it go, without making any kind of record of it, and then create something new the following day, or am I misunderstanding where you coming from?

When I'm programming a new patch, it's always during the making of a new song, so it gets immediately put down to the multitrack, so in that way it's actually getting "saved". If I find later that I'm unhappy with that particular sound, I simply come up with something new. If you really get to know a synth, it's not hard to come up with something similar to what you already had. There's two benefits to this:

1. You always come up with something fresh instead of just editing something that you've determined is not quite right in the first place.

2. The process of always building from scratch means that you're giving yourself an opportunity to learn and understand your synth that much better.

Like I said before, everybody has different applications. I use a synth to create and most importantly, complete music with, so the Voyager is a means to an end for me.

I see where you are coming from and agree with the points you make. I myself, always initialise a preset sound and start experimenting from scratch, rather than augmenting what is already there. However, if I create that killer patch, I still want to save it, as it will probably get used on a number of arrangements, especially if it sits well in a mix.

As you say, each to their own, really!