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 30th December 2016
  #511
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steam Shield View Post
Eurorack poly.
tell me more.
Old 30th December 2016
  #512
Lives for gear
 
BTByrd's Avatar
Eurorack poly is a lie. Or an expensive folly. Either way, it's not really an option.
Old 30th December 2016
  #513
Gear Addict
 
Steam Shield's Avatar
With eurorack it is possible to piece together a totally unique poly synth. You get control over choosing all the individual elements of the voices (oscs, filters, envelopes, lfo) which theoretically you could spend a lot of time and money on. Also the no. of voices would be somewhat limited I think. But it is possible.
Old 30th December 2016
  #514
Gear Addict
8 x SEM euro modules + some others and a controller to tie it all in... nom nom nom
Old 30th December 2016
  #515
Gear Addict
 
Steam Shield's Avatar
It would be fun to hear and play a system like that. But all the time to change patches is the big disadvantage that I see. You'd really have to be on your programming game (vs playing).
Old 30th December 2016
  #516
Haven't bothered to read the whole thread.


There is obviously something wrong with you if your underwhelmed by the OB6.


.
Old 30th December 2016
  #517
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by msl View Post
Haven't bothered to read the whole thread.


There is obviously something wrong with you if your underwhelmed by the OB6.


.
My thoughts exactly. I got a bunch of vintage gear and the OB6 with its sound and easy to use step sequencer is stellar, right up there with all of them. I got 99 problems but the "OB6" ain't one.
Old 30th December 2016
  #518
I got 99 problems and one of them is not having enough for an OB6

Your a lucky man!


Quote:
Originally Posted by frankenstino View Post
My thoughts exactly. I got a bunch of vintage gear and the OB6 with its sound and easy to use step sequencer is stellar, right up there with all of them. I got 99 problems but the "OB6" ain't one.
Old 30th December 2016
  #519
Deleted User
Guest
That's what I was alluding to, in my circumlocution way!


Quote:
Originally Posted by synthguy View Post
There's a truism I've been refraining from using, but I'll turn it inward.

If I can't make a good sound with a synth, it's almost never the synth's fault.
Old 30th December 2016
  #520
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by robot gigante View Post
I use modern gear every day. Including synths. I guess that would make me a... fan of them! Yesssss! 'Cause I am. Including a few you don't like.

Vintage synths too! I like that they don't sound exactly the same.

As for amps... I just plug straight in to my amps. Maybe once I master all the tonal options there I can graduate to loopers and a big pedalboard. But seriously, with a big pedalboard and all that crap mushing up pure tone, why bother with vintage, I get it, I wouldn't either, not nearly as big of a difference. BTW, G&L's are fantastic guitars, it's not just nostalgia and you know it.

My MO is generally minimalist - so small differences in tone pop out more. No chains of 6-8 plugins here either. Same applies as what I said about amps.
We should start a new thread about guitar rigs (I go between set ups like you described (mine used to be the G&L straight into an old tube ampeg reverbrocket) and ones that would befit Adrian Belen) but that's a good point about a minimal setup making small differences pop. My opinion is also tempered with the pure fact that I've never owned a vintage analog beyond a Juno 106. I added a few other synths over the years, but nothing classic. From there I went full digital on a TS-10 and I got really used to the performance aspects of it. I think it would be hard to give that up. I remember finding a Jupiter 8 in a store a few years ago and realizing it didn't even do velocity. That's not for me.
Old 30th December 2016
  #521
Lives for gear
 
synthguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaphod Betamax View Post
That's what I was alluding to, in my circumlocution way!
Just harmonizing in my own verbose way.

Although I should amend that: it's never the synth's fault. Even on keyboards I don't care for, which all I can remember is the M Audio Venom and CS-50, I can always make a patch that pleases me. Every synth obviously can't make every sound, but they can all do something sweet. And the synths made for the last couple of decades from romplers on up... man, are they cool. Old Ensoniqs, Emus, Roland and KORG and Yamaha romplers, Kurzweils... are they ever truly obsolete? Not really. And the tech they employed paved the way for everything from the Nord Lead, Virus and Radias to the OASYS, Montage, JD-XA and Solaris, very whelming synths.

I should share a little one man jam I've been listening to for almost an hour, a guy playing solo on an OB-6. It's long, but give it a listen while you surf or something. It's not underwhelming and he does some fascinating things along the way.



Now to go to bed so I can maybe synthesize tomorrow.
Old 30th December 2016
  #522
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by msl View Post
There is obviously something wrong with you if your underwhelmed by the OB6.
Well...
I am underwhelmed by it for few very good reasons.

1. All 6 voices behave exactly the same except the pitch which you can make go in random directions with the detune/slop knob.
This makes it sound "modern" when compared to for example OB-X where you have audible differences on parameters like filter frequency tracking, envelope times etc. in addition to the usual VCO drift.
It obviously doesn't matter for single voice sounds, but a poly is meant to be played polyphonicaly.
Basically: If the OB-X sounds like a choir of 8, the OB-6 sounds like a single singer recorded 6 times while desperately trying to sing the same way each time and then mixed together to make a "choir".

2. Just 6 voices instead of 8 like on so many legendary poly vintages.
Makes for some ugly voice stealing on all sounds with longer than few hundred miliseconds release, especially if you are used to playing synths with 8 or more voices.

3. Just 1 global LFO when i need at least 2 per voice.
Yes i know that the 2nd VCO can double as a per voice LFO if you want to gimp the synth to just 1 audio range VCO.
Most old polys had 1 LFO too, but in 2016 there is no excuse to not have at least 2 when for example the 28 years old ESQ-80 had 4.

And sure OB-6 can sound great, just not the legendary kind of great it could with just few improvements.
Old 30th December 2016
  #523
Deleted User
Guest
Ahh, the CS-50, just looked it up...My CS-40m actually has the same amount of oscillators, however, only half as many notes. A word about the CS-40m.

My lab, which is really an ugly unfinished garage room 8' x 14', holds my synths.
My 3 Blofelds, my 4 monotribes, and my 2 MS-20kits...as well as a special 18" wide shelf for the CS-40m with super-reinforced shelf brackets to hold the 50 pound monster...the Sledge lives inside in the house, in a case. (kicked out to make room for that interloper MS-20K)

Wow.... to make a long story even longer, I no longer use 2 Roland KC-150s for L-R monitoring, but either some 1990s headphones, so my neighbours don't have to hear my programming or jams, or I use a Center Point Stereo Monitor, which is M-S stereo, but in reverse...anyhow...any of the others are fairly underwhelming for room filling 3D sounds (as long as you stereotize the CS-40m with a bit of HOF or Deco)...But not the CS-40m...even without the SUB on, the bass is kickass, and it fills the room even with it set to panel (2 detuned 8' sawtooths, filter open, etc ((than what)) )

So from the Center Point Stereo "point of view" I award these points

1979 CS-40m 5 points
2 modern MS-20Ks with 2 monotribes via cv/trig 2.5 points
polychained Blofelds (keys and mod) 1.5 point
single Blofeld keys 1 point

so a 4 oscillator yammy trumps a 6 oscillator korgzilla (modern)

totally aribitrary...just liked this message!


Quote:
Originally Posted by synthguy View Post
Even on keyboards I don't care for, which all I can remember is the M Audio Venom and CS-50,
Old 30th December 2016
  #524
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by coffee View Post
Well, it's everywhere today. Things were better when people were young (no, it's not delusional) so let's make things like they used to be. I want more transistors and tubes and tape! Let's kick those computer nerds out of Silicon Valley and start a new Radio Tube factory instead!
I am wary of the "get off my lawn" perspective, but I do in fact feel that the quality of things made in general these days is rapidly deteriorating, from iPhone on downwards.

The more money drives the decision making in terms of optimal product, obviously, the less quality is allowed. Just as businesses have as their primary goal the reduction or actually complete elimination of the cost of labor (through automation; if it can be outsourced, it can be automated, keep that in mind), they also have as their primary goal (and this isn't a moral issue; it's one of business dynamics necessity) driving the cost of materials, assembly, inventory and distribution down.

This is an across the board phenomenon.

How does it apply to synths? The evidence is obvious: smaller, lighter, fewer components, more automated assembly. Fewer features. "Good enough" quality. Address to the largest market possible.

The one thing bucking this trend so far has been Eurorack modular, which allows selective focus per module, and local production and distribution with increasingly inexpensive pick-and-pack machines and such (Darkplace Industries, for example), but even there, modules are getting more comprehensive, bigger, more multiple-featured. The new ones released are less and less "modular" in that sense. Fortunately, there is such a plethora of simpler modules that the latest thing is unlikely to overtake the market there.

How long that will last, given that Eurorack companies, small and slightly larger, also have to survive, too, and so are inevitably driven by the same business imperatives that drive slightly larger companies, is an open question, though.

Without some kind of dramatic, heretofore incomprehensible transformation of the economics of production, that doesn't require profit and expansion as the engine to drive everything else that is done..... this trend will only continue.

I suspect the nostalgia for older, vintage synths is thus in part a reflection of the idea that yes, in the past, the quality of an instrument was far less "optimized" than it is now. More care, time, materials included; convenience, weight, a side effect, not a factor.

On the other hand, the advances in software and hardware technologies in the intervening years does mean, as with other things, that indeed both quality can go up and cost go down, and convenience can be increased.

The technological "edge" there has been in play for twenty years, at least; hardware instrument makers and softsynth makers both, have had the ability to offer higher quality, lower cost, and increased convenience all at the same time.

I suspect that kind of advance is over, however; we're clearly at a point where cost means sacrificing quality. Convenience and market size drive optimization and shave quality.

And people, consciously or unconsciously, feel this, or at the very least suspect it. We approach the new with some cynicism as a result.

So it's not just Old Man Phenomenon, much as some would wish it were so. We're at the end stages of cheap, large-scale mass production, where the distinctiveness and uniqueness of all things are sacrificed for lowest-common-denominator "good enough." Walmart, not Nieman Marcus. Our entertainment -- video games, movies, music -- is mostly generic crap. Pockets outside the mainstream of these industries remain, and seize the opportunity when the crappiness of the mainstream becomes so apparent everyone flees in droves to something, anything else. If there's any kind of cycle, those pockets can become foundations of interesting, fresh, high-quality new things.

But the pockets of actual innovation are small and shrinking; we're at the late stage of a cycle of culture, where all possibilities seem exhausted, claims of the exciting and new are massively overhyped, and supposedly significant decisions are announced in Tweets by Twits. The necessary and sufficient knowledge and mastery and deep discipline of science, exemplified for example by Tony Rolando's collaborations with Tom Erbe (a relic genius from the '80's), or Olivier Gillet and Yves Bonnefoy, is increasingly rare. The context people have in terms of saturation in the knowledge of past accomplishments is increasingly thin, and seems to be disappearing. Martin Garrix takes over from Benny Worrell.

It will require large-scale collapse, or hopefully, just transformation and unanticipated discovery of entirely new possibilities, the hints of which we can't even see yet, for all this to change. So far, all I see is people building out More of the Same, at cheaper price, across the board.

The market's exhaustion with things made carelessly, the exhaustion of a civilization seemingly condemned to being incapable of doing anything new, as we are seeing now, is usually the prelude to such a large-scale change. Unfortunately, wars also often precede such changes. The current moment of change is really unprecedented in human history, and may lead to a glorious future, or an utter and final catastrophe, we can't really say (though predictions of catastrophe are historically also signs of the End of an Era, too, and so far, at least, it's only been catastrophe for the winners of that Ending Era).

At least, in electronic synthesis technology, where the full science is basically known, the hardware capacities are defined and likely to grow only incrementally, the peak we've reached is high-quality enough that things like both the JD-XA and System 8, the Prophet 6 and OB6, the Matrixbrute and Deepmind 12, the Minilogue and Monologue and Odyssey Arp, can be made, at phenomenally good prices. And the instrument industry is young enough that it's still possible to restore and maintain older synths from 20-30 years ago.

It's going to be difficult to see where things might go from here. NAMM 2017 will be an interesting test; a lot of it is populated by Eurorack, which is either a good sign (growth of an industry) or a bad sign (mainstreaming of an industry), depending on your perspective.

In the end, it's oscillators, modulators, filters and amplifiers, in various combinations; that won't change. We have incredible variety at this moment, and it's worth enjoying that moment, because it will change, one way or another, and unpredictably.
Old 30th December 2016
  #525
Lives for gear
 
OurDarkness's Avatar
 

^^ Excellent post
Old 30th December 2016
  #526
Lives for gear
 
Derp's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty.west View Post
tell me more.
The most feasible option (and the one I use) I've found is to sample your modular, but you're going to have to either very carefully plan out what sort of modulation you want for the context of your song and sample accordingly, or rely on your sampler for at least some of the modulation. Making the modular itself polyphonic is usually expensive and very tedious. The only other reasonable alternative is to get an oscillator module that is itself polyphonic (Flame 4Vox comes to mind), and then use the same filter for all voices like a Poly 800's voice architecture.
Old 30th December 2016
  #527
Lives for gear
 
synthguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance View Post
At least, in electronic synthesis technology, where the full science is basically known, the hardware capacities are defined and likely to grow only incrementally, the peak we've reached is high-quality enough that things like both the JD-XA and System 8, the Prophet 6 and OB6, the Matrixbrute and Deepmind 12, the Minilogue and Monologue and Odyssey Arp, can be made, at phenomenally good prices. And the instrument industry is young enough that it's still possible to restore and maintain older synths from 20-30 years ago.

It's going to be difficult to see where things might go from here. NAMM 2017 will be an interesting test; a lot of it is populated by Eurorack, which is either a good sign (growth of an industry) or a bad sign (mainstreaming of an industry), depending on your perspective.
I was glad you put a bow on your post like this, as I was going to respond the same way from your rather dire sounding start. I would add any number of romplers and workstations to your list: KORG Kronos (which suffered itself from some iffy build choices at the start), Kurzweil PC3 and others, Yamaha Motif and Montage. Roland fed the workstation market, an uncertain market these days, with the FAs, which in some ways rather cheap, in some others not. But the latest crop of electronic instruments are overall pretty darn good. And while a $3000 US OB-6 four octave slab polysynth and $4000 88 key Montage aren't quite phenomenally good prices, they're good enough. You get what you pay for.

This makes me hopeful for the future. Outside of some earthshaking calamity, the economic forecast of the planet is looking favorable. We're aging, we have more disposable income, and as you say, we'll only put up with so much cheapness before we take our money elsewhere. Volcas aren't going to define the quality of music instruments in general, we wouldn't tolerate it. And as I stated a number of times in this thread, the quality of sound we can make with these tools is incredible. Vintageness or the lack thereof aside, you could make an entire album using just one of these instruments, especially the JD-XA with its two synths in one approach. And any rompler, that's a no brainer. They all sound great and are very programmable. Plus as we've both said, modulars are more powerful and flexible than ever.

If the Minilogue or Odyssey were as flimsy and cheezy sounding as a Volca, I'd be worried. The synthetic future looks promising to me.
Old 30th December 2016
  #528
Lives for gear
 

Agreed.

I think the industry has pretty much explored the current bottom of the market; it's time for a new round of high end, high quality, fully featured, well constructed instruments from the bigger companies. This cycle tends to go on in 5-10 year increments, market and economic conditions depending.

With the prices to match, and the inevitable 30-page mudslinging parties here, with a contingent thinking if they hurl enough sustained insults at the instrument, it will magically bring the price down to the $300 they can actually afford.
Old 31st December 2016
  #529
Lives for gear
 
synthguy's Avatar
I'm going to make some (perhaps hopeful) predictions.
  • $3000 is going to stop being the glass ceiling it has been for years. It will still be a distinct marker, but more of a roadsign than a ceiling. We'll see more synths priced above $3K with appropriate sex appeal. Eventually, $4K will be the new $3K.
  • The capacity of everything at all levels will progress as processors and ram continue to cheapen. More custom chips will be made for all kinds of instruments without affecting cost much, but increase capability much more.
  • The sound quality will improve as companies like KORG polish features like tube emulation in instruments, and chips made to mimic closely those legendary ICs of yore used in Prophets, Jupiters, Obies and keyboards like the venerable Synthex and CS-80. New analogs will come along which won't be as easy to complain about.
  • Music won't change, save for the true electronic virtuosos which will continue to be very rare. I'm hoping to play a small role in that somehow.
Old 31st December 2016
  #530
Lives for gear
 
Mefistophelees's Avatar
Some of the problems mentioned with modern synths are the same things people said about the Prophet 08.
The default sound of that synth is bright and precise, but it's quite possible to change that with a bit of programming. In fact, it can sound quite radically different once you understand it properly.

The Prophet 06 and OB-6 are a lot closer to the vintage machines than the 08 so it should be pretty easy to make them more vintage sounding.

Back in the 80s synths were at times put through guitar pedals and amps. Guitar amps roll off the high end so this may be one reason the vintage synths weren't so bright. So rolling off the top end will reduce the brightness, as will (of course) lowering the cut-off and turning off VCF keyboard scaling.

Another synth mentioned here is the Modal 008. It's a completely new synth so I don't think it was ever intended to sound like a vintage synth. A major part of its sound is a heavily overdriven signal path. It gives it a particular sound that is rather heaver than most vintage synths.

However, even with the 008 you can get it sounding like older synths. Turn the oscillators down half way, switch off drive, and you have what sounds like a very different synth. Select the 2LP or 4LP filter modes, turn the resonance up, turn the cut off down and you're well on the way to a vintage sound. I got something that sounds like it came directly off a 1983 Genesis album today.

Synth programming like any skill takes time, but if you put in the hours, you can get vintage-like sounds without having to fork the hefty sum you need to buy (and maintain) a vintage synth.

Last edited by Mefistophelees; 31st December 2016 at 03:47 AM..
Old 31st December 2016
  #531
Lives for gear
 
Mefistophelees's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance View Post
but even there, modules are getting more comprehensive, bigger, more multiple-featured. The new ones released are less and less "modular" in that sense. Fortunately, there is such a plethora of simpler modules that the latest thing is unlikely to overtake the market there.
This is more of a philosophical choice than an economic thing.
Don Buchla did very functional modules like this with multiple functions per module.

Serge on the other hand did the opposite, his modules did one function, as simple as you could get.

You see the same in Eurorack. Some module are relatively simple but others are complex.

The Make noise DPO is a complex module but this is no bad thing. Trying to replicate its functionality with individual modules would cost you a lot more money.
Old 31st December 2016
  #532
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mefistophelees View Post
This is more of a philosophical choice than an economic thing.
Don Buchla did very functional modules like this with multiple functions per module.

Serge on the other hand did the opposite, his modules did one function, as simple as you could get.

You see the same in Eurorack. Some module are relatively simple but others are complex.

The Make noise DPO is a complex module but this is no bad thing. Trying to replicate its functionality with individual modules would cost you a lot more money.
True, ditto Maths; I've seen multiple conversations looking for ways to pack as much as Maths can do into the same space, and..... turns out it's a pretty amazing and unique design that way.

On a slightly different tack, Mark Verbos' Composition System (if you don't want to roll your own with Verbos' stuff) is an interesting mix of the complex and the simple, all with a close eye to the design concepts Buchla worked with.

I'm just thinking that the most recent tendencies for those who've been making modules for a long time has been to head towards more complex functionality. At the simpler level, there's not a lot of "update" needed on a VCA, for example.

Where people aren't going for increased complexity, they're going for interesting aesthetic design -- say, Folktek -- or radical spacesaving -- Erica's Pico series -- or integration capabilities -- Expert Sleepers.

At least, that's what it's seemed like to me on Muffwiggler.
Old 2nd January 2017
  #533
Lives for gear
 
kurzweil's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty.west View Post
I owned an OB-8 for a while, which I only realized the greatness of once it was gone. Ever since it parted I've been chasing after a great analog poly, but have been vastly underwhelmed with the modern poly's out there.
I would wait a bit longer as the vintage designs are being revisited, and improved. 2017 will see some major new releases that might just kill-off the vintage synth market once and for all.

While the OB6 comes close, seems like an improvement over the P6 and is a good Matrix 6 stand-in (if you're happy to live without the matrix mod), but it's not quite close enough in terms of matching the subtle instabilities that make the OBX/Xa/8 sound so exciting. And it's too expensive for a 6-voice poly IMO.

An OB8 is great if you are a collector, but I would never gig with it or take it out of a controlled environment as the components will need replacing before long. It's also physically huge, has a non-sensitive keyboard, and limited synthesis potential compared to a modern instrument.
Old 2nd January 2017
  #534
Lives for gear
 
ionian's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by kurzweil View Post
It's also physically huge, has a non-sensitive keyboard, and limited synthesis potential compared to a modern instrument.
I'll go with huge size, non-sensitive keyboard, but really, limited synthesis potential compared to a modern instrument?

Either you've never used an OB-8 or you never bothered to explore the instrument because it's still capable of doing things that modern ones can't. As far as a fully analog polysynth, and for the time it existed, it's impressive what it was able to do.

Some things that come immediately to mind are:

Individual panning for each voice, accessible instantly from physical knobs. This is something most modern polysynths still can't pull off.

Able to shut each analog voice off specifically. You can limit how many poly notes to accurately imitate a 4 or 6 voice or you can create a unison and then choose how many voices you want the unison to be so you can sculpt the thickness of the unison. Also, that means you can create a unison, disable 7 of the voices and get the OB-8 to accurately pull off the sound of a monosynth.

You can invert the phase of the LFO by 90 or 180 degrees.

You can invert the modulation to Oscillator 1 for both the frequency and the pulse width separately. I mentioned this before when I said that you can make amazing strings on the OB-8 by inverting the modulation of the pulse width to osc 1 and so the pulse widths for both oscillators will go in opposite directions.

Not only can you detune oscillator 1 from 2, but you can also detune each voice from each other.

The portamento can be either linear or exponential

You can set the portamento for each voice to drift so that the glide is sloppy and more organic, or you can match them all so it's a perfect glide with all voices in strict time with each other.

You can also quantize the portamento to half steps instead of letting it change pitch freely.

You can quantize or invert ANY of the modulation destinations for the LFO.

You can select the trigger point for where you want the LFO to start.


And that's just off the top of my head - I'm not near mine at the moment. I'm sure I'm forgetting stuff.

I'm sure modern polys might have some of these, but remember, all of these features are available in an analog synth that was first made in 1983.

Not only can you create crazy sounding patches, you can layer two and make a four voice patch and have two crazy patches going at once.

I guess you're a better man than me but I've used mine for years and have yet to find it limiting.

I got mine for $2200. It's a late model, with the page 2 graphics and midi. At that price, it comes in at least $800 cheaper than the OB-6 keyboard model. It has 5 octaves (really Dave Smith...you know better. This was just embarrassing.) and has two more voices.

It's also a ridiculously easy machine to service. Through hole circuit boards, tons of room inside, everything is easily accessable to work on. That being said, aside from minor maintenance on mine (calibrating, repainting the silver contacts on the keybed), mine has worked pretty reliably since I've gotten it so I'm not that worried. Besides, the OB8 has a reputation for being the most stable of the huge Obie polys. It's a well built machine.

There are many things an OB8 is. Limited isn't one of them.

Last edited by ionian; 2nd January 2017 at 07:24 PM..
Old 2nd January 2017
  #535
Lives for gear
 
drockfresh's Avatar
You all had me convinced and then I (made the mistake of) watching a CS-80 demo video
Old 2nd January 2017
  #536
Lives for gear
 
NEXUS-6's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by msl View Post
I got 99 problems and one of them is not having enough for an OB6

Your a lucky man!
DM 12
Old 2nd January 2017
  #537
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drockfresh View Post
You all had me convinced and then I (made the mistake of) watching a CS-80 demo video
The one made with a smartphone in an untreated room and through some crappy speakers ?
Thats not how a CS-80 really sounds.
Old 2nd January 2017
  #538
Lives for gear
 
Quantum7's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by synthguy View Post
I'm going to make some (perhaps hopeful) predictions.
  • $3000 is going to stop being the glass ceiling it has been for years. It will still be a distinct marker, but more of a roadsign than a ceiling. We'll see more synths priced above $3K with appropriate sex appeal. Eventually, $4K will be the new $3K.
  • The capacity of everything at all levels will progress as processors and ram continue to cheapen. More custom chips will be made for all kinds of instruments without affecting cost much, but increase capability much more.
  • The sound quality will improve as companies like KORG polish features like tube emulation in instruments, and chips made to mimic closely those legendary ICs of yore used in Prophets, Jupiters, Obies and keyboards like the venerable Synthex and CS-80. New analogs will come along which won't be as easy to complain about.
  • Music won't change, save for the true electronic virtuosos which will continue to be very rare. I'm hoping to play a small role in that somehow.
I miss the days of the expensive Fairlights and Synclaviers that in the 80's I would drool over.....knowing I probably would never be able to afford one. Seriously though, it was something to aspire to purchase. I am truly blessed now as a middle-class late 40's musician who can afford 95% of any new synth available.....that I know of at least. I would love to see a few more "Dream-synths" that have all the bells and whistles, hand-crafted, in the $5k to $7k range that I can lust over, save for a couple years and buy.
Old 2nd January 2017
  #539
Lives for gear
 
Quantum7's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by NEXUS-6 View Post
DM 12

As I'm starting to learn, I'm sure the DM12 is going to be a great synth, but as an OB6 owner I must say that it is worth EVERY penny. OB6 DM12 combo would even better!
Old 2nd January 2017
  #540
Lives for gear
 
drockfresh's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutantt View Post
The one made with a smartphone in an untreated room and through some crappy speakers ?
Thats not how a CS-80 really sounds.
Dude in 20 years iPhones will go for $5k on EBay to capture the 2016 sound
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