Moog Music Forum

ikazlar wrote:I have cash waiting.

Where is my new memorymoog?

I second this.

with 8 voices please


+1

sunny pedaal wrote:with 8 voices please


+1

agreed. That is all.

Voltor07 wrote:

sunny pedaal wrote:with 8 voices please


+1

agreed. That is all.

aww, come on, how about an MF-105M without noise problems?

Veeger wrote:

Voltor07 wrote:

sunny pedaal wrote:with 8 voices please


+1

agreed. That is all.

aww, come on, how about an MF-105M without noise problems?

I'd rather have an 8 voice Little Phatty or Voyager, wouldn't you?

Voltor07 wrote:

Veeger wrote:

Voltor07 wrote:

sunny pedaal wrote:with 8 voices please


+1

agreed. That is all.

aww, come on, how about an MF-105M without noise problems?

I'd rather have an 8 voice Little Phatty or Voyager, wouldn't you?

Nah. A keytar with 8 voices....

Voltor07 wrote:

Veeger wrote:

Voltor07 wrote:

sunny pedaal wrote:with 8 voices please


+1

agreed. That is all.

aww, come on, how about an MF-105M without noise problems?

I'd rather have an 8 voice Little Phatty or Voyager, wouldn't you?

already stated that was my first choise too ,(with rudi's mod )

How about polyexpanders for the existing Moogs? Minimal controls on the units to keep costs down.

4 voices of little phatty in a box for $3500.

3 voices of voyager in a box for $4500.

Then sell a 5 octave keyboard with enough room for a little phatty or voyager to sit on top. With a keyboardstand designed to house the expander. I would have the keyboard with assignable 10 moogstyle knobs, 10 switches, 3 modwheels, and cp-25? built right into it. It would be bought up by modular users as well as moogists.

That would be pretty tight.

simple box with cards , just buying 1, 2, ...or 7 , max 8 voices. a bit like the nord engine or the omega.
no knobs needed as i control it all by one voyager. ( just the in+outputs )
wouldn't that box be big and exensive, regarding the voyager module ?
lovely idea, don't know how the marketing would work out, but i would buy me an 8 voice box , sign me up.

Voltor07 wrote:

sunny pedaal wrote:with 8 voices please


+1

agreed. That is all.

++1. Sold most of my gear in preparation

I also have money waiting. For a new poly moog.

I have saved up for a Voyager, but really kinda need a poly. So I am FORCED to look at vintage polys because nothing else sounds and feels right.

Please Moog, release a five voice poly. I'm ready with cash in hand. (for a few more months, anyways)

All good ideas. But the difficult part is trimming down the Analog board. Won't need multiples of the LFOs that are on the Analog board; 2-3 is an adequate #.

If you look at the architecture of placing additional Phatty's behind a master or RMEs behind a Voyager, they all have their own LFOs and Envelopes so it's up to you to tune them all in synch, envelopes, etc. in order to get what you would typically get on a Poly? I've never done this so assume that this is the way it works (or do you mix all of the different outputs with a wide open filter then pump it back into the audio INPUT to be acted upon by the 'master' filter.

It's all very confusing. I have an Oberheim Matrix 6 and a 6r and a Matrix 1000 and you can do some very cool things with "spillover" and the Group modes but the master either spills the n'th (where N = the # of # of polyphony) to the 2nd box, or in the latter case, every 'next' note is kicked to each of the y'th modules. Then there is the various split modes where you can bind a 4+2 or w 2+4 or maybe a 0+6 with the left hand going out Midi only.

Polys, (modern Polys like the DSI P'08) alternate the use of OSCs also which I assume is to keep they playing even in some way. Most of the Poly's around had/have 2 OSCs per voice; is the recommendation that Moog offers a 3 OSC per Voice architecture or that the 3rd OSC is kicked 'out' to join the first external Voice to form the 2nd. What about hard synching to the external boxes. I haven't played with the multi modes since I only have one Voyager and one Phatty; do they sync well between or do you need to hand tune and then adjust as temperature changes?

Lots of questions, I know but much more to consider as 'we' design how this sort of modular Poly is to function. Despite the various changes to Voyager code since release, to me, it seems to be a locked-in architecture, very much the same as the Analog board; it's a brilliant piece of work but is purpose built. May be cheaper just to scrap it (dare I say!!), keep it as the best Mono synth out there, and start fresh with a new software stack that certainly can be based on some of the IP used within the Phatty/Taurus line.

With people dumping upwards of $4G on Motifs and Virus kbds, I don't think that something from the 3k to 4k price range is too much to ask for in a Poly but it must be kicking... not 'just' a Voyager with 8 Voices. People have come to expect much more such as the various modes and extras that Dave Smith has built into all of his modern devices and that's quite a bit of work to get there. Personally, I think that Moog is up to the task, just don't know enough about how resources are assigned to each product line, what sort of Marketing research they've done, etc. A failed project of this caliber could cause a company as big/small as Moog to go belly up and nobody wants that.

No issues in having both a DSI P'08 and whatever Moog makes but again, it's gotta be a real category leader. Most of the guys I know play a Motif something and a Nord something and that's it. Drag 2 kbds with you and be done. Home studio rats (like me), I want a few of everything.

Just some thoughts...

EMwhite wrote:All good ideas. But the difficult part is trimming down the Analog board. Won't need multiples of the LFOs that are on the Analog board; 2-3 is an adequate #.

If you look at the architecture of placing additional Phatty's behind a master or RMEs behind a Voyager, they all have their own LFOs and Envelopes so it's up to you to tune them all in synch, envelopes, etc. in order to get what you would typically get on a Poly? I've never done this so assume that this is the way it works (or do you mix all of the different outputs with a wide open filter then pump it back into the audio INPUT to be acted upon by the 'master' filter.

It's all very confusing. I have an Oberheim Matrix 6 and a 6r and a Matrix 1000 and you can do some very cool things with "spillover" and the Group modes but the master either spills the n'th (where N = the # of # of polyphony) to the 2nd box, or in the latter case, every 'next' note is kicked to each of the y'th modules. Then there is the various split modes where you can bind a 4+2 or w 2+4 or maybe a 0+6 with the left hand going out Midi only.

Polys, (modern Polys like the DSI P'08) alternate the use of OSCs also which I assume is to keep they playing even in some way. Most of the Poly's around had/have 2 OSCs per voice; is the recommendation that Moog offers a 3 OSC per Voice architecture or that the 3rd OSC is kicked 'out' to join the first external Voice to form the 2nd. What about hard synching to the external boxes. I haven't played with the multi modes since I only have one Voyager and one Phatty; do they sync well between or do you need to hand tune and then adjust as temperature changes?

Lots of questions, I know but much more to consider as 'we' design how this sort of modular Poly is to function. Despite the various changes to Voyager code since release, to me, it seems to be a locked-in architecture, very much the same as the Analog board; it's a brilliant piece of work but is purpose built. May be cheaper just to scrap it (dare I say!!), keep it as the best Mono synth out there, and start fresh with a new software stack that certainly can be based on some of the IP used within the Phatty/Taurus line.

With people dumping upwards of $4G on Motifs and Virus kbds, I don't think that something from the 3k to 4k price range is too much to ask for in a Poly but it must be kicking... not 'just' a Voyager with 8 Voices. People have come to expect much more such as the various modes and extras that Dave Smith has built into all of his modern devices and that's quite a bit of work to get there. Personally, I think that Moog is up to the task, just don't know enough about how resources are assigned to each product line, what sort of Marketing research they've done, etc. A failed project of this caliber could cause a company as big/small as Moog to go belly up and nobody wants that.

No issues in having both a DSI P'08 and whatever Moog makes but again, it's gotta be a real category leader. Most of the guys I know play a Motif something and a Nord something and that's it. Drag 2 kbds with you and be done. Home studio rats (like me), I want a few of everything.

Just some thoughts...

I totally agree with you - it had better be innovative in a big way, something everyone is going to want, or else the choice to build a poly might hurt Moog Music. They could pull a Taurus and get away with re-releasing an old poly limited run, only with digital control and arpeggiator... and dedicated Moog enthusiasts would go for it.... but does Moog really want to do that? No one ever went wacko over poly synths - it was their mono synths and the Taurus and the Moogerfooger line that put them on the map.

I'm so excited to see what they make next, it would almost be disappointing to see them re-create a poly and slap new era stuff on it. It's almost predictable at this point to create a polysynth - and that's not their style at Moog. If they make it, it had better be something new - beyond anything out there, totally forward thinking. But then, most people get so much bang for their buck with the Nord and the Motif. 3 to 4 K for polyphony and digital patch memory, digital connectivity... and that's it??? Do you get where I'm going with that question? It doesn't impress me at all when I can use a Nord Lead 2X for pads and sweeps, etc without chomping on the price of a Moog poly that MAY??? be able to compare. I know the sound would be killer - but could they compare with the functionality? Anyone see what I'm getting at? I for one, LOVE my Roland SH-201 for polyphonic patches... hell, the GAIA looks pretty attractive for the price.

Perhaps what Moog needs to do is create something to attract drummers and DJ's and programming enthusiasts. And the DJ looking for analog but sync-able beat making.... it's worth a try, but there are problems with most DJ's. It is something they haven't tried yet it seems. Korg and Yamaha tried it big time and created some classics with modules back in the late 90's early 00'. The problem though is that the enterprise went belly up after a few years as I recall - because in DJ land, the turntable and the records are the bread and butter and most drummers are more into playing with targets, not with their fingers. But I'd bet lots of producers and Moog lovers especially would love a drum machine/drum brain/finger slash CV slash drum trigger triggerable thingy. Something with multiple oscillators, CV control in and out and a sequencer.....something that could stand alone and also work in connection with Phatty and Voyager and Taurus?

moog has a lot of boxes already for the dj's ( rm , lpf etc)
the syncing of the lfo's a problem? just take one ( always synced ) or 8 at will
envelop sync ? tried it, no problem when using more voyagers
possibilities: i guess the p8, korgs new "vintage keyboards" they all sell well, don't have extensive posibilities, but sound good.
when moog would make a p8 (m8) it would , i'm sure, have decent pots and sliders and a better sound.

They tried the DJ hook up (via multipedal) but I'm not sure it took off. It's too complicated for DJ's as are Foogers unfortunately.

DJs want something that interfaces w/USB to their PC based Laptop and integrates with software THEY use and that's it. Certainly, there is a whole middle of the road crew that leverage Ableton and the like with Launchpads, etc. but again, they are the 'digital/loop crowd'.

If the packaging of the MidiMurf (which I would think would go a long way with the live playing crowd) was more DJ friendly, had an auto-sync interface that perhaps 'listened' and quantized to a pounding bass drum on 4/4 and adjusted filter stepping automatically, that might be appealing. I could see a cross fader control that adjusts the clock granularity that once sync'ed would let them push the clock by groups of 4/8/16 ticks as they performed, etc.

If I had to guess, of the 10% of top DJs do things OTHER than just spin record (discs), an even smaller percentage of them are willing to delve into this world. I'm in New York all the time and see these guys in pro audio departments of various stores, asking questions (there are usually 2 or 3 of them ahead of me when I'm trying to pay for a cable).

I'm always on the lookout for my next Fooger or rack device, etc. They are looking to buy some more lights, speakers, etc. It's a matter of cost and comfort/familiarity.

I agree there is untapped potential out there in the market, cracking it as always is the hard part.

(just my opinion)