The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Synths for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
anyone else underwhelmed with modern poly synths? Keyboard Synthesizers
Old 24th December 2016
  #301
Lives for gear
 
drockfresh's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by wMACKY View Post
Wow what a gear snob!

How about owners of modern analog synths are happy their gear don't require floppy disks, or parallel printer ports? I'm not paying $5000 for anything that uses those. I don't care what it sounds like.
Yes.. But in 10 years will USB be like parallel printer ports and desktops be like floppy disks?
Old 24th December 2016
  #302
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by robot gigante View Post
Regardless, there is something about vintage analog polys that most modern analog polys do not have. It's not magic dust or aging components. They were designed and built to different specs.

I think you will find that most fans of the vintage sound have plenty of digital in their setup and unless they are collectors it's condescending to say that vintage fans don't know how to program them. We do.

You can make whatever compelling arguments you want about how good modern stuff is and that's fine, it is good. Yes, and it also sounds different.

As regards boutique reissue amps not sounding the same, well that is my opinion too. It's based on having both reissues and the real deal in the studio. Not magic dust there either, but it's not my fault that many reissues don't sound the same, not even close to the same. Maybe the companies aren't being completely honest about how closely they followed the original spec. Some sound close - but I would argue that reissue synths like the new Mini and MS-20 get closer to the sounds of the originals than many of these amps do.

Anyone who is A/Bing day in and day out and not with the bias that one sound is better is qualified to an opinion. The more one knows one's tools, the easier it is to spot differences. This means programming and arranging differently, hence a different result.

That they are different means that you use them for different tasks. My main recording amp is a vintage Fender that is insta-Clapton, which is nice but will not cover a more modern sound - plenty of modern boutiques (that won't do insta-Clapton) for that. For those of us with both vintage and modern synths, getting the modern ones to sound vintage is a waste of time, its better to play to the strengths of any given synth.
"As regards boutique reissue amps not sounding the same, well that is my opinion too."


And there are many audiophiles that have paid in excess of $1000 for special power cords, and wall outlets. These people are 100% sure they hear a difference! But, do they really?


http://www.jpslabs.com/powercord.shtml
Old 24th December 2016
  #303
Lives for gear
 
Soothing Sound's Avatar
Roland wants to milk costumers forever. They been doing it for a long time now. Of course they won't give us 1:1 replicas, that would destroy part of their business.
Old 24th December 2016
  #304
Lives for gear
 
robot gigante's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by wMACKY View Post
"As regards boutique reissue amps not sounding the same, well that is my opinion too."


And there are many audiophiles that have paid in excess of $1000 for special power cords, and wall outlets. These people are 100% sure they hear a difference! But, do they really?


JPS Labs worlds finest AC power cords cables and accessories
Does the livelihood of these audiophiles depend on their ability to distinguish minute differences in sound, and how those minute differences can affect other sounds in a mix? Do they have trained ears? Are they spending all day every day analyzing sound? Are most of them even musicians? Of course not, so it's easy to pull the wool over their eyes. Kinda like with expensive modern reissue gear come to think of it - anyone who hasn't logged in the time with the original gear and doesn't have a method to A/B them properly is just as easily fooled. Come on, you're just muddying the waters to make your point.

You'll almost always see both modern and vintage gear in any working studio's collection, and there is a reason for that.
Old 24th December 2016
  #305
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by robot gigante View Post
Does the livelihood of these audiophiles depend on their ability to distinguish minute differences in sound, and how those minute differences can affect other sounds in a mix? Do they have trained ears? Are they spending all day every day analyzing sound? Are most of them even musicians? Of course not, so it's easy to pull the wool over their eyes. Kinda like with expensive modern reissue gear come to think of it - anyone who hasn't logged in the time with the original gear and doesn't have a method to A/B them properly is just as easily fooled. Come on, you're just muddying the waters to make your point.

You'll almost always see both modern and vintage gear in any working studio's collection, and there is a reason for that.
I'll just close with this. If it takes double blind AB tests and well trained studio engineers to hear these minute differences, then what does it matter? Who is this music being produced for? The general untrained public or some other group musically trained studio personnel? You do know that original Marshall's were made with whatever parts were cheap that week, and the specs / tone changed from month to month. The Marshall reissues are far more consistent than the mixed bag vintage pieces.
Old 24th December 2016
  #306
Gear Nut
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufuss Sewell View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
To me Dave has two, radically different sounds. One, an organic, lively world of wonder and beauty
Sure, the Prophet 5 rev 2. Then by rev 3 he was getting closer to...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
and another, a stiff and slightly acidic and plasticky thing. Love one more than any other synths, can't do much with the other.
Which he really perfected with the P600 and has stuck with to this day.
Another way of saying this is that many people dislike the sound of later CEM chips. Prophet 5 rev 3 and OB-8 used CEM3320 filters which have unique internal implementation. Later CEM chips from CEM3372 onwards (the ones that combine VCF and VCAs and possibly more) use a modified OTA core filter.

So to summarize it:

SSM2040: simplified OTA core causing unique distortion, Prophet 5 rev 1&2, considered "the holy grail" of filters.

SSM2044: "folded" ladder core, E-Mu samplers / Polysix / PPG Wave, considered good.

CEM3320: unique current input core, used in early CEM based synths (P5 rev 3, Synthex, OB-8), considered pretty good and the reason people think "CEM" chips are good for sound.

"Pure" OTA: Roland synths (Jupiter 6 & 8, Junos etc), Roland custom ICs were basically 4 OTA cores & expo converter on a single chip / module, considered pretty good afaik.

CEM3372 & later: Tweaked OTA core requiring fewer transistors within an IC, may not allow easily overdriving the filter / vca, used by most later polysynths, cleaner and more "bland" sound than the earlier choices.

Basically, people are moaning that modern polysynths do not provide enough character due to using too clean filter / vca and not allowing smooth internal overdrive. The reason Minimoog has such characterful sound is the multiple internal stages of smooth but pretty significant overdrive - the filter inherently distorts more than other filter designs and is then followed by three OTA based VCAs driven to significant nonlinearity. The reason it works is that 1) you're playing only a single note and 2) geometric waveforms don't easily sound audibly distorted even at significant measured distortion and in fact the overdrive can subjectively increase the amount of bass and reduce audible beating.
Old 24th December 2016
  #307
Lives for gear
 
robot gigante's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by wMACKY View Post
I'll just close with this. If it takes double blind AB tests and well trained studio engineers to hear these minute differences, then what does it matter? Who is this music being produced for? The general untrained public or some other group?
Because any good engineer or arranger knows that minute differences in a mix and arrangement are cumulative. Maybe you haven't experienced that magic moment where you do a sliiight EQ notch on one instrument in a dense mix and the entire mix opens up dramatically - top engineers do that all the time.

If a VA that pretends to sound vintage is causing mud, for example (cough Arturia cough) it may sound OK on its own but wreak havoc on the mix.

The other thing is, many people (hobbyists generally) are listening for the wrong things when trying to spot differences, missing on things that are super obvious to J. Average Listener. Partially trained ears causing missed focus I guess. This has never been a popular truth to express on audio forums though! Knowing WHAT to listen for, however subtle, how that affects the listener and how slight differences can affect the overall picture is what experience and training are for.

Last edited by robot gigante; 24th December 2016 at 10:04 PM..
Old 24th December 2016
  #308
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by wMACKY
Wow what a gear snob!

How about owners of modern analog synths are happy their gear don't require floppy disks, or parallel printer ports? I'm not paying $5000 for anything that uses those. I don't care what it sounds like.
How many of the classic analogue poly synths require floppy disks, or parallel printer ports?

This is about the sound, nothing else, and the classic analogue synths simply sound better.

Nothing to do with MIDI control capabilities, price, reliability, or anything else, they often just sound better than the modern alternatives. They are just reasons that someone might prefer a modern analogue over a vintage classic, but they do not change the fact that the classic just sound better.

Last edited by SimonInAustralia; 24th December 2016 at 10:31 PM..
Old 24th December 2016
  #309
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bach666 View Post
If these sound "sonically behind" to you, you'd most likely only be pleased with a "vintage" poly synth. I believe the Roland Juno 106 and Yamaha DX7 are undoubtedly considered vintage poly synths. Since they are considered to be vintage poly synths, they will please you more than anything that can ever be created today or in the future.
This is a discussion about the classic vintage analogue poly synths, not any vintage analogue poly synth, and certainly not a DX7.

LOL, so a Code and a Sunsyn are what is required to sound as good as the vintage classics?

Is the Sunsyn even available any more, and what prices are they selling for?

That sort of invalidates your argument that seems to be saying that you have to pay so much $ for one of those classic vintage analogue poly synths, when these modern options you use as alternatives probably cost more.

Last edited by SimonInAustralia; 24th December 2016 at 10:50 PM..
Old 24th December 2016
  #310
Lives for gear
 
Bach666's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonInAustralia View Post
This is a discussion about the classic vintage analogue poly synths, not any vintage analogue poly synth, and certainly not a DX7.

LOL, so a Code and a Sunsyn are what is required to sound as good as the vintage classics?

Is the Sunsyn even available any more, and what prices are they selling for?

That sort of invalidates your argument that seems to be saying that you have to pay so much $ for one of those classic vintage analogue poly synths, then these modern options you use as alternatives probably cost more.
"Modern poly synths are underwhelming.. "

False
Old 24th December 2016
  #311
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by minime123 View Post
every modern analog or virtual analog we've tried in the studio has been easily defeated by the vintage synths in our studio.
the only advantage to us, since we meticulously service all our gear to work like new or better (so reliability isn't the issue it might be with an unserviced or improperly serviced instrument), is the fact that the parameters are usually all midi controllable. however, the better vintage sound combined with the feel and inspiration you get when you're sitting in front of a beautiful 30-40 year old instrument are the reasons we havent replaced anything vintage with anything new.
mini
This is how it is, from someone who has had probably nearly every desirable vintage analogue poly synth through their studio.

Better sound and feel, greater inspiration.
Old 24th December 2016
  #312
Lives for gear
 
Bach666's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonInAustralia View Post
This is a discussion about the classic vintage analogue poly synths..
Roland Juno 106?
Old 24th December 2016
  #313
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bach666 View Post
"Modern poly synths are underwhelming.. "

False
For someone who's requirement is the best possible sound..

True.


For the OP, they find that the sound of modern poly synths is underwhelming, that is their opinion, not sure how you can say that their opinion is 'false', unless you can get inside their head and know exactly what their thoughts are, you really have to take that as their own true opinion.

You can validly say that you don't agree, that in your own opinion, the sound of modern poly synths are not underwhelming, that is your opinion, and maybe his opinion would be false if it were your opinion, but it isn't your opinion.

But if you are going to base your opinion on other aspects, such as MIDI controllablity, or reliability, then that is not basing your opinion on the same thing, which is totally about sound quality and tone.
Old 24th December 2016
  #314
Lives for gear
 
Bach666's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonInAustralia View Post
For someone who's requirement is the best possible sound..

True.


For the OP, they find that the sound of modern poly synths is underwhelming, that is their opinion, not sure how you can say that their opinion is 'false', unless you can get inside their head and know exactly what their thoughts are, you really have to take that as their own true opinion.

You can validly say that you don't agree, that in your own opinion, the sound of modern poly synths are not underwhelming, that is your opinion, and maybe his opinion would be false if it were your opinion, but it isn't your opinion.

But if you are going to base your opinion on other aspects, such as MIDI controllablity, or reliability, then that is not basing your opinion on the same thing, which is totally about sound quality and tone.
How about the sound quality and tone of the Studio Electronics Omega 8 and Jomox Sunsyn?
Old 24th December 2016
  #315
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bach666 View Post
Roland Juno 106?
No, in the case of the OP, the OB8. That is what the OP is discussing.

You are the only one fixated on the Juno 106 being the standard vintage poly synth that has to be used for comparisons.

Each person has different classic synths that they might use as a comparison.

Look at minime123's post above, they have had access to nearly every vintage and modern synth there is, and they agree.
Old 24th December 2016
  #316
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bach666 View Post
How about the sound quality and tone of the Studio Electronics Omega 8 and Jomox Sunsyn?
Is the Synsun even available new anymore?

What price would one cost? Which sort of invalidates your argument about the cost of the vintage classics.

They are high end boutique synths, made in small numbers, and even then, those with experience with the Studio Electronics synths feel they don't quite get there.
Old 24th December 2016
  #317
Lives for gear
 
Bach666's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonInAustralia View Post
No, in the case of the OP, the OB8. That is what the OP is discussing.

You are the only one fixated on the Juno 106 being the standard vintage poly synth that has to be used for comparisons.

Each person has different classic synths that they might use as a comparison.

Look at minime123's post above, they have had access to nearly every vintage and modern synth there is, and they agree.
I see. Modern poly synths are underwhelming when what you want is an OB8. Modern poly synths that aren't the OB8 are underwhelming.
Old 24th December 2016
  #318
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by wMACKY View Post
Who is this music being produced for? The general untrained public or some other group musically trained studio personnel?
It doesn't matter who the music is being produced for, they are not the person producing it.

It doesn't matter what it sounds like in a mix.

It matters what it sounds like to the musician playing and interacting directly with the instrument, if that sound is an important aspect of the synth to them personally.
Old 24th December 2016
  #319
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bach666 View Post
I see. Modern poly synths are underwhelming when what you want is an OB8. Modern poly synths that aren't the OB8 are underwhelming.
To the OP, specifically to the OP, yes.

To others, such as minime123, then it is a wide range of modern synths they find underwhelming, and a wide range of vintage synths that they prefer the sound of, as they have had extensive experience with both, and with evaluating the sound quality against each other.

But you don't believe that.
Old 24th December 2016
  #320
Lives for gear
 
Bach666's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonInAustralia View Post
To the OP, specifically to the OP, yes.
Wait, are you trying to tell me this is all subjective?
Old 24th December 2016
  #321
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bach666 View Post
Wait, are you trying to tell me this is all subjective?
Of course it is subjective.

An opinion about whether one thing sounds 'better' than another, and whether or not that makes it underwhelming, is always going to be subjective.

This is about people's opinions. People's opinions are subjective.
Old 24th December 2016
  #322
Lives for gear
 
drockfresh's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonInAustralia View Post
It doesn't matter who the music is being produced for, they are not the person producing it.
actually i would bet that 99% of the music produced on this board is listened to only by the person who produced it (and maybe like 3 others, if you include the dude's cat)
Old 24th December 2016
  #323
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drockfresh View Post
actually i would bet that 99% of the music produced on this board is listened to only by the person who produced it (and maybe like 3 others, if you include the dude's cat)
lol
Old 24th December 2016
  #324
Lives for gear
 
Bach666's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonInAustralia View Post
This is about the sound, nothing else, and the classic analogue synths simply sound better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonInAustralia View Post
Of course it is subjective.
Ok, I think I understand your point now.
Old 25th December 2016
  #325
Lives for gear
 
isham's Avatar
To digress a bit: I believe mono /Duophonique analogue synths have succeeded to sound as "good" if not better than their old relatives when applicable (MFB, TVS, Model D, Korg ms-20, Arp, McBeth, Avalon, Vermona and many many many examples ...).

So it's a question of time for poly analogues I believe (yes the ob-6 being one if not the "best" sounding one being currently available at a reasonable price). Main issue being most people expect now a 12 voices for 999 $, so it's not realistic to get something as good as the old guys which were 5 to 10 more expensive (comparing money value as well)
Repeating again: MFB dominion 6 might be the missing link which may put down vintage poly synth market. If it ever happens
Old 25th December 2016
  #326
Lives for gear
 
Rufuss Sewell's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antti H View Post
Another way of saying this is that many people dislike the sound of later CEM chips. Prophet 5 rev 3 and OB-8 used CEM3320 filters which have unique internal implementation. Later CEM chips from CEM3372 onwards (the ones that combine VCF and VCAs and possibly more) use a modified OTA core filter.

So to summarize it:

SSM2040: simplified OTA core causing unique distortion, Prophet 5 rev 1&2, considered "the holy grail" of filters.

SSM2044: "folded" ladder core, E-Mu samplers / Polysix / PPG Wave, considered good.

CEM3320: unique current input core, used in early CEM based synths (P5 rev 3, Synthex, OB-8), considered pretty good and the reason people think "CEM" chips are good for sound.

"Pure" OTA: Roland synths (Jupiter 6 & 8, Junos etc), Roland custom ICs were basically 4 OTA cores & expo converter on a single chip / module, considered pretty good afaik.

CEM3372 & later: Tweaked OTA core requiring fewer transistors within an IC, may not allow easily overdriving the filter / vca, used by most later polysynths, cleaner and more "bland" sound than the earlier choices.

Basically, people are moaning that modern polysynths do not provide enough character due to using too clean filter / vca and not allowing smooth internal overdrive. The reason Minimoog has such characterful sound is the multiple internal stages of smooth but pretty significant overdrive - the filter inherently distorts more than other filter designs and is then followed by three OTA based VCAs driven to significant nonlinearity. The reason it works is that 1) you're playing only a single note and 2) geometric waveforms don't easily sound audibly distorted even at significant measured distortion and in fact the overdrive can subjectively increase the amount of bass and reduce audible beating.
Hey, now I know why!

I do adore my JP8 filter most of all. As well as the System 100m. The resonance just makes each harmonic feed back and sing as opposed to some other filters that just kind of buzz. I also adore my OB8 but I think it's less to do with the filter and more to do with the oscillators. I often use my OB8 with the filter wide open to let through the full fuzzy, furry sawtooths.
Old 25th December 2016
  #327
First and most important is a good song. Then a good arrangement. Then appropriate instrumentation. Just because a synths sounds great and/or vintage does not make it appropriate for a song. The song dictates what is best. The mood of the song is what is paramount and each instrument can evoke different moods in the right hands. The mood pallet of each keyboard has its straights and weaknesses.

To sit around listening to cool sounding synths for their own sake can simply be a form of masterbation which is what some electronic music sounds like to me. Not saying its not fun to talk about this stuff and compare - just a lot of great songs have been recorded with less the stellar instruments which adds to the songs message and vibe.

Last edited by AudioSoundzz; 25th December 2016 at 01:53 AM.. Reason: added some thoughts
Old 25th December 2016
  #328
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AudioSoundzz View Post
First and most important is a good song.

...

Not saying its not fun to talk about this stuff and compare - just a lot of great songs have been recorded with less the stellar instruments which adds to the songs message and vibe.
Isn't that a discussion for Songslutz?

Are you sure you are on the right forum?
Old 25th December 2016
  #329
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonInAustralia View Post
Isn't that a discussion for Songslutz?

Are you sure you are on the right forum?
Probably not but still you made me laugh
Old 25th December 2016
  #330
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonInAustralia View Post
To the OP, specifically to the OP, yes.

To others, such as minime123, then it is a wide range of modern synths they find underwhelming, and a wide range of vintage synths that they prefer the sound of, as they have had extensive experience with both, and with evaluating the sound quality against each other.

But you don't believe that.
You do know that mimime123 is in the business of selling the old ones?!

For balance, Tony from Oakley has said that he has sold all his real synths and uses soft ones!
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump