Moog Music Forum

It took a month or so to get it after so many years of soft synths, but this synth is glorious!

Would you say it sounds better or about the same as a softsynth? Having never used a softsynth, I have oddly never asked this question from a softsynth user before. What is your opinion?

I also have some glorious soft synths, like Reaktor for instance, but I'm finding for bass and those classic undulating dance riffs, the Moog is great. It has this depth and needs very little EQ to get it to sit in the mix. (Mostly I just use a bit of Low Cut). It's also so easy to use.

Interesting. I just never thought much about softsynths through a user's pespective. I've always been with the school of thought based on, "If digital is so great, why does it try so hard to be analog?" My ex-girlfriend liked softsynths...then someone let her borrow a Memorymoog. Analog, IMO, just has more depth and warmth than even a softsynth trying to be analog.

Yes, the Moog has a splendid analog sound, and for me, digital has it's own beauty. I like the mix of digital and analog - they compliment each other well, plus digital tends to use less of the sound stage, so stacking sounds is easier. Digital is great for crystalline sparkly sounds - I remember when the Roland JV1080 first came out my then vendor described the sound as 'sparkly.' I also use a lot of samples both in Logic's sampler EXS24 and Kontakt, eg for creating pads and textures out of unexpected sound sources. And I can set up some pretty wild routings using sends and fx when working 'in the box.'
BTW, Brian Eno's favourite synth was the Yamaha DX7, a totally digital machine..

Digital trying to be analog doesn't really interest me. Digital being digital though.. Like some interview asked one of the Stock Aitken Waterman team what he thought of the humanise feature on the new drum machines that were coming out in the 80s - he said 'Nah, doesn't sound like a drum machine then!'

Very cool! Thanks for that input!

I think besides the sound, it's a matter of interface. The Phatties (as well as the Voyager I guess) are very musician friendly where Reaktor is a true lab, not really usable on stage in the first place, i.e. without having programmed your own controller.

I tend to attach much importance to the feeling I have playing a synth rather than to its specs sheet. The poorly 4-knobbed Little Phatty was not serious to me at first, with its limited specifications. Back then I was using Kurzweil K2XXX and G2 and could not feel any noticeable difference between analog and digital instruments. BTW I had hardly tried an analog one... but my point is the specifications mattered then, more than the feeling.
A few years later I casually played a Lp in a shop. Found it really funny. Bang! Got one then.
Conversely I got an Evolver: great possibilities, great sound. Buuut... I just wasn't feeling like playing it... Sold it. You sometimes don't know that kind of things untill you have the synth at home.

I even ended buying a Nord Lead because the G2 was not hands-on enough anymore for me. I did not sell the G2 because it's a wonderful instrument for weird and flexible stuffs, for experimenting with the right balance between an overcomplicated Max/MSP and a simpler classic synth, and because it's really transportable and I'm laaaaazy sometimes
The Lead is infinitely much limited but the interface is so relaxing...

Interface matters since it builds the feeling.

Agreed, the Phatty is a joy to use.

Which Evolver? I was interested in the Mono Evolver - I really like the sound.
Can you say a bit more about why you sold it?

Kroy wrote:Agreed, the Phatty is a joy to use.

Which Evolver? I was interested in the Mono Evolver - I really like the sound.
Can you say a bit more about why you sold it?

Don't get me wrong: the Evolver is a very, very sexy synth.
I had the desktop version and I think that's why I ended not using it. I'm (lazy, ok...) a keyboardist at first and I love the feeling of a real instrument, an instrument that your hands like as much as your ears do. The matrix editor is well though but it was not engouh for me.
Maybe I should have waited to get a keyboard version. Fact is I ended not plugging it, though when I did it sounded great. I remember experimenting with delays feedback: I recorded 8' of internat larsen with epic moments
But that's how I told before: interface is as important as specs and sound to me now.

Plus I think I'm on the way to prefer simpler instruments. I need to put my creativity where things are more about smart usage and good melodies than complex patching. Not only that but I may feel pretty drowned in too much possibilities, which I was definitely not some years ago.

I would say: get an Evolver. You will certainly find someone to sell it to in the case you don't like -which I doubt.

Voltor07 wrote:Interesting. I just never thought much about softsynths through a user's pespective. I've always been with the school of thought based on, "If digital is so great, why does it try so hard to be analog?" My ex-girlfriend liked softsynths...then someone let her borrow a Memorymoog. Analog, IMO, just has more depth and warmth than even a softsynth trying to be analog.

You had an ex girlfriend that liked soft synths and could operate a Memorymoog?!?

matthieuxdetoux wrote:

Voltor07 wrote:blah blah blah Memorymoog blah blah

You had an ex girlfriend that liked soft synths and could operate a Memorymoog?!?

Yes. She left me. Not my choice. But that's ok, because she lived two states away, and visiting her was time consuming and expensive.