Moog Music Forum

I know it sounds logical that more Moogerfoogers other than the Murf may be implemented with Midi in the future, but is there any official word regarding what may be next and/or within what timeframe? Any hints Amos?

Thanks,
Jeff

+1, i'm really interested in this. MIDIfied foogers would be intensely awesome.

I don't see that happening soon, nor do I see the reason why really.

The Murf 105 is different than other foogers in that it has 22 8x64 patterns to program, that warranted midi. Foogers are primarily audio processors. There is not much that can be set with midi, all you need to control is available through CV's, which is I believe is the best way to go (not going into CV-midi arguments).

Still want midified foogers? Moog just saw to it with it's external midi-CV controller, it's called the MP-201.

I think this is almost reminicent of an argument about 25 years ago...probably one that happened in the back boardrooms of Moog....should we embrace this (then new) MIDI technology or should we stick with the good olf fashioned CV's.

Dave Smith came around then (right?) and answered that question. Its been the standard ever since.


Eric

I'm not sure what all might be planned for next year. I have an idea or two for some non-midi 'foogers, and at least one idea for a midi 'fooger. But... nobody's asked me for any 'fooger ideas yet. So, we'll have to see.

please submit my cp255 gate processor!

Portamental wrote:I don't see that happening soon, nor do I see the reason why really.

The Murf 105 is different than other foogers in that it has 22 8x64 patterns to program, that warranted midi. Foogers are primarily audio processors. There is not much that can be set with midi, all you need to control is available through CV's, which is I believe is the best way to go (not going into CV-midi arguments).

Still want midified foogers? Moog just saw to it with it's external midi-CV controller, it's called the MP-201.

The reason why (one of many) midi'd foogers would be cool is that with the complexity of DAWs you can automate a lot of parameters in ways that lfos and envelopes don't quite accomplish. In regards to the CV-Midi argument... well yeah we can midi-cv stuff. That's not new. I was automating my 101 that way 5 years ago. But it wasn't an optimal way to do it. With MIDI one can potentially automate/manipulate every input on the unit with ONE cable.

I realize that there are diehard CV people, and trust me, I love CV. But CV has a limitation in the fact that you need everything hooked in to everything else (ie CV patchbay, which i use right now) before you really approach that MIDI description of having all that control easily available to you. There's a lot more legwork involved for instance in trying to control the cutoff via midi automation on a 101 with a Kenton Pro Solo. You've got a midi hookup, a 1/8" to 1/4" convertion, and a patch cable between all that and if you want to control something else, you'll need to repatch.

Being able to select any parameter from CC data in my DAW would great increase the power and functionality of moogerfooger line. It wouldn't replace the MP-201, that's not the same thing.

CTRLSHFT wrote:

Portamental wrote:I don't see that happening soon, nor do I see the reason why really.

The Murf 105 is different than other foogers in that it has 22 8x64 patterns to program, that warranted midi. Foogers are primarily audio processors. There is not much that can be set with midi, all you need to control is available through CV's, which is I believe is the best way to go (not going into CV-midi arguments).

Still want midified foogers? Moog just saw to it with it's external midi-CV controller, it's called the MP-201.

The reason why (one of many) midi'd foogers would be cool is that with the complexity of DAWs you can automate a lot of parameters in ways that lfos and envelopes don't quite accomplish. In regards to the CV-Midi argument... well yeah we can midi-cv stuff. That's not new. I was automating my 101 that way 5 years ago. But it wasn't an optimal way to do it. With MIDI one can potentially automate/manipulate every input on the unit with ONE cable.

I realize that there are diehard CV people, and trust me, I love CV. But CV has a limitation in the fact that you need everything hooked in to everything else (ie CV patchbay, which i use right now) before you really approach that MIDI description of having all that control easily available to you. There's a lot more legwork involved for instance in trying to control the cutoff via midi automation on a 101 with a Kenton Pro Solo. You've got a midi hookup, a 1/8" to 1/4" convertion, and a patch cable between all that and if you want to control something else, you'll need to repatch.

Being able to select any parameter from CC data in my DAW would great increase the power and functionality of moogerfooger line. It wouldn't replace the MP-201, that's not the same thing.

Give volta a chance

k-tk wrote:

CTRLSHFT wrote:

Portamental wrote:I don't see that happening soon, nor do I see the reason why really.

The Murf 105 is different than other foogers in that it has 22 8x64 patterns to program, that warranted midi. Foogers are primarily audio processors. There is not much that can be set with midi, all you need to control is available through CV's, which is I believe is the best way to go (not going into CV-midi arguments).

Still want midified foogers? Moog just saw to it with it's external midi-CV controller, it's called the MP-201.

The reason why (one of many) midi'd foogers would be cool is that with the complexity of DAWs you can automate a lot of parameters in ways that lfos and envelopes don't quite accomplish. In regards to the CV-Midi argument... well yeah we can midi-cv stuff. That's not new. I was automating my 101 that way 5 years ago. But it wasn't an optimal way to do it. With MIDI one can potentially automate/manipulate every input on the unit with ONE cable.

I realize that there are diehard CV people, and trust me, I love CV. But CV has a limitation in the fact that you need everything hooked in to everything else (ie CV patchbay, which i use right now) before you really approach that MIDI description of having all that control easily available to you. There's a lot more legwork involved for instance in trying to control the cutoff via midi automation on a 101 with a Kenton Pro Solo. You've got a midi hookup, a 1/8" to 1/4" convertion, and a patch cable between all that and if you want to control something else, you'll need to repatch.

Being able to select any parameter from CC data in my DAW would great increase the power and functionality of moogerfooger line. It wouldn't replace the MP-201, that's not the same thing.

Give volta a chance

Volta is way too limited right now (need dc coupled audio interface and have to use a mac), but I have and it's awesome.

MIDI would still be better though.

CTRLSHFT wrote:as said above

All valid points I approve of, as I do agree with a potential increase of power and functionality of midified foogers.

I am not CV die hard and I live well into a mixed cv-midi world. Yet, when things move from keyboards to synths then to Moog's, I'd rather stand closer to a CP-251 than to a Behringer controller.

The more I think about it, I kind of like the midify-foogers-with-a-CP251 approach, at the cost of a few patch cables and splitters over the solution of managing a midi hub, network, or long chains.

From my perspective, that allows foogers to remain simpler devices at a lesser cost (bad example I know since the Midi-Murf sells for less than either of its non-midi earlier versions), well simpler at the very least, which is good. But mainly, that would allow for M's R&D time and money to be spent on other items such as Taurus 3 or other wishful products I won't mention here, instead of being too busy serving souped-up recipes. Yep.. that's what I think. I'd rather have them spend time on what makes them stand apart from others as opposed to what makes them compatible or compliant to some other standard. Then if bonified versions come along the way , that's fine too.

MIDI is really an outdated standard or at least one badly in need of an increase in bandwidth and resolution. I am hoping that "Open Sound Control" will eventually be implemented on a lot of commerical products:

http://opensoundcontrol.org/introduction-osc

I like CVs because you can't overload a system with CVs. MIDI can easily be overloaded with CCs. I depends on how complex a setup you want but I can tell you that right now I have about 10 patch cords hooking up my Voyager, expander and foogers. I am not sure MIDI CCs would handle this let alone the ability to mix and attenutate CVs which has to be programmed for MICI CCs.

The MP 201 will time LFOs to MIDI so for timiing, its possible to sync LFOs.

I like MIDI but both MIDI and control voltages have their advantages.

While it would be useful to have total automation control over moogerfoogers, I think that that would take all of the fun out of patching things and being surprised. I think OSC is a little to wide ranging to be a new standard, but MIDI definitely needs a modern spec overhaul.

I thought that the whole point was that they weren't midi in the first place.


I mean perhaps someone can better clarify than myself....Where was analog synthesis at when Big Briar was formed? I mean when Moog first started making Foogers, what was the state of synthesis? Were there all these modular companies out there like doctom and MOTM and others?

What was really going on in Moogs head when he formed big briar? Was it to get back to basics or start anew from what was once the glory days of the long since sold Original Moog music (and license issues, etc)?

Would it be a fair assessment that this transition to Big Briar helped usher in a new age of a resurgence towards CV based analogue synthesis and a deviation from the everyday Midi?

Id like to think so but I don't know the history when it was Big Briar.

Eric

EricK wrote:I thought that the whole point was that they weren't midi in the first place.

Yeah! that makes sense... something like that.

I have pretty much decided my Etherwave needs his own dedicated MF-101, so I'd better run up grab one of the MF-101 CV version while they last where I plan to use the Etherwave's own volume CV on MF-101-filter, and find some creative use for the Gate and pitch, with the help of a CP 251's lfo and other features and maybe an expression pedal. That should make an interesting affordable yet all included CV based instrument combo. There I go again plugging things in my mind.

I have never been a true believer of either digital or analogue, CCs or CVs. I use musical instruments and effects as tools to create sounds that I want. I do beleive that analogue is a different animal. I create a patch of foogers recently that produced sounds that in no way would ever come out of a digital synth. However, there are sounds that come of of my digital synths that an analogue can't produce. Both are just tools. Music is the goal.

A few more limitations of MIDI CVs is that you can't mix them, attenuate them or split them without additional hardware or programming and even then you can't see what you are doing. There is something appealing visually to me of just being able to pick up a patch cord and make a new connections as well which is why I think the Minimoog and it's incarnation in the Voyager works. You can turn knobs to change all aspects of the sound. I have also been creating fooger patches using the Voyager's XYA pad as controller. It becomes something likened to an instrument in itself but on I create. With the MP 201 pedal or the CP-251, that universe can expand.

MIDI does not do this. It's deffined by the programing of the synth that uses it, the MIDI implementation that you find in the back of the manual. That's it. With CVs, whatever you can plug it is what you can do with them. The patch I just used makes my foogers look like a modular with a spaghetti of patch cords going from the Voyager to the expander to the foogers.

MIDI has its place and I love hybrids of digital and analogue but I would rather see Moog involved in working on new standards rather than MIDIfying foogers and continuing the tradition of CV controlled pedals which makes foogers in a class by themselves.