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
Why Don't New VCOs Sound as Good as Old VCOs? Keyboard Synthesizers
Old 10th April 2018
  #61
Old 10th April 2018
  #62
Gear Guru
 
fiddlestickz's Avatar
I was wondering if the OP was ever going to come back to the eurorack is a bubble thread before starting another of 'these' types of discussions..?
Old 10th April 2018
  #63
Lives for gear
 
Klonfocius's Avatar
 

The music today is so bad no old or new VCO makes any difference!
Old 10th April 2018
  #64
Kja
Lives for gear
The oscillator on the o coast doesn't sound vintage, or like a moog? Why?...I hate these young kids!!
Old 11th April 2018
  #65
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by robot gigante View Post
Some sound as good, most (such as your examples) don't, if we are just talking raw VCO sound. Factor in everything else going on in the synth and that's a different story. Also, not every old synth has amazing VCO's.

As regards SMT, anyone with ears knows SMT doesn't suck unless the circuit design sucks, and has known it since SMT was a thing. Nothing needed to be proven. Come on man.

I think circuit design is the main factor.
I'm a little confused as to what people are saying in this thread regarding SMT. Are people saying that they think SMT really CAN get all the sound of old analog, or that it cannot, depending on circuit design and parts?

For example, the KARP Odyssey is widely regarded as one of the best of the new analog, and it's SMT. It sounds significantly more 'vintage' to my ears than all the DSI stuff. Both are SMT, the main diff I think is that the circuit topology of the Karp was supposedly the same as in the original Arp. I was deeply skeptical of SMT until I heard the Karp.

Then again, I have yet to hear ANY new analog that sounds as good as vintage, and it's always the vcos that are lacking. I did very careful a/b comparisons of several pairs of synths, new to vintage, SMT and thru hole. Karp to Arp Odyssey and Solus, orig SEM and new Tom Oberheim SEM. The filters sound just as good on the new ones, the oscillators sound every so slightly more drifty and ALIVE on the old ones. I love Dreadbox synths, but compared to vintage stuff, I compared a/b an Abyss with a Roland SH-2 (closest in sound I think), and the Sh-2 oscillators were still more alive. And the Abyss is discrete!

Don't get me wrong: I think the Karp, new SEM, and Dreadbox are the best new analog going these days, they nail 90% of it. They are doing everything right, and I'm hoping they get there! I also really appreciate the sheer effort to do the unique and gutsy things they do (like starting a new synth company at 80 years old, or coming up with strange new designs no-one else does, or using discrete circuits, or doing a circuit for circuit clone that doesn't compromise!).

But as soon as I play even the lesser of the old analog and compare to new, the diff is palpable. SMT seems able to get real close, as close as new discrete, so I'm thinking that while circuit topology is a huge factor (the diff between Karp and those that aren't even close), I think the issue might be newer parts, or power supply issues mentioned earlier.

I'm really curious what the new CEM 3440 sounds like. I'm also really curious to hear what repair techs say about this. After all, do they use all 'new old stock' parts?
Old 11th April 2018
  #66
Deleted User
Guest
If the SMD they have on a Monotribe is indicative of new vs old, gimme the new.
SMD capacitors have way lower equivalent induction and equivalent resistance compared to the old technology.
I am an old fart, but accept that everything can't be 1979.

And the #1 they sound different (smart-arse mode invoked) Is because they want to displease you,
so you have to post it online.....
Old 11th April 2018
  #67
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fromthepuggle View Post
I'm a little confused as to what people are saying in this thread regarding SMT. Are people saying that they think SMT really CAN get all the sound of old analog, or that it cannot, depending on circuit design and parts?

For example, the KARP Odyssey is widely regarded as one of the best of the new analog, and it's SMT. It sounds significantly more 'vintage' to my ears than all the DSI stuff. Both are SMT, the main diff I think is that the circuit topology of the Karp was supposedly the same as in the original Arp. I was deeply skeptical of SMT until I heard the Karp.

Then again, I have yet to hear ANY new analog that sounds as good as vintage, and it's always the vcos that are lacking. I did very careful a/b comparisons of several pairs of synths, new to vintage, SMT and thru hole. Karp to Arp Odyssey and Solus, orig SEM and new Tom Oberheim SEM. The filters sound just as good on the new ones, the oscillators sound every so slightly more drifty and ALIVE on the old ones. I love Dreadbox synths, but compared to vintage stuff, I compared a/b an Abyss with a Roland SH-2 (closest in sound I think), and the Sh-2 oscillators were still more alive. And the Abyss is discrete!

Don't get me wrong: I think the Karp, new SEM, and Dreadbox are the best new analog going these days, they nail 90% of it. They are doing everything right, and I'm hoping they get there! I also really appreciate the sheer effort to do the unique and gutsy things they do (like starting a new synth company at 80 years old, or coming up with strange new designs no-one else does, or using discrete circuits, or doing a circuit for circuit clone that doesn't compromise!).

But as soon as I play even the lesser of the old analog and compare to new, the diff is palpable. SMT seems able to get real close, as close as new discrete, so I'm thinking that while circuit topology is a huge factor (the diff between Karp and those that aren't even close), I think the issue might be newer parts, or power supply issues mentioned earlier.

I'm really curious what the new CEM 3440 sounds like. I'm also really curious to hear what repair techs say about this. After all, do they use all 'new old stock' parts?
Have you heard the new Model D's from Moog and Behringer?
Old 11th April 2018
  #68
Lives for gear
 
seamonkey's Avatar
It's all in the solder and bell bottom pants where the "magic" lies.
Old 11th April 2018
  #69
Lives for gear
 
drockfresh's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by seamonkey View Post
It's all in the solder and bell bottom pants where the "magic" lies.
Everything was also built in a smoke FILLED studio

Nicotine is a secret ingredient
Old 11th April 2018
  #70
Gear Head
 
pre55ure's Avatar
 

The worst thing about this thread is the amount of time I spent writing a comprehensive, logical and well researched rebuttal to the OP's post.

Then I remembered this is GS and that no one cares about an actual answer.
Old 11th April 2018
  #71
Lives for gear
 
seamonkey's Avatar
I gave you a thumbs up, see, someone cares.
Old 11th April 2018
  #72
Lives for gear
 

Old VCO's sound better than new VCO's because new VCO's are still off-gassing VOC's. After a substantial amount of VOC off-gassing, VCO's tone is much more pleasing and organic.
Old 11th April 2018
  #73
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RJ.MacReady View Post
Old VCO's sound better than new VCO's because new VCO's are still off-gassing VOC's. After a substantial amount of VOC off-gassing, VCO's tone is much more pleasing and organic.
That explain those modular space fart sounds
Old 11th April 2018
  #74
Lives for gear
 
pppch's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RJ.MacReady View Post
Old VCO's sound better than new VCO's because new VCO's are still off-gassing VOC's. After a substantial amount of VOC off-gassing, VCO's tone is much more pleasing and organic.
ahh organic triangle and synthetic triangle.. what is the differene ?
the only difference is that the waveforms are more or less sloppy compared to the theoretical waveform
Old 11th April 2018
  #75
Lives for gear
 
j3rk's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pppch View Post
ahh organic triangle ond synthetic triangle.. what is the differene ?
the only difference is that the waveforms are more or less sloppy compared to the theoretical waveform
I only use free range oscillators for organic waveforms.
Old 11th April 2018
  #76
Lives for gear
 
pppch's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by j3rk View Post
I only use free range oscillators for organic waveforms.
i hope it's kobeOSC, geared towards feng shui of course ayurvedic

I've used tube oscillators from Brüel & kjaer that were probably used by a big East country for evil stuff, and that's what you hear ..: D
maybe it is the price of 30k for a sine .. but at least 20hz to 20khz can sweep through at once
Old 11th April 2018
  #77
Lives for gear
 
robot gigante's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by fromthepuggle View Post
I'm a little confused as to what people are saying in this thread regarding SMT. Are people saying that they think SMT really CAN get all the sound of old analog, or that it cannot, depending on circuit design and parts?

For example, the KARP Odyssey is widely regarded as one of the best of the new analog, and it's SMT. It sounds significantly more 'vintage' to my ears than all the DSI stuff. Both are SMT, the main diff I think is that the circuit topology of the Karp was supposedly the same as in the original Arp. I was deeply skeptical of SMT until I heard the Karp.

Then again, I have yet to hear ANY new analog that sounds as good as vintage, and it's always the vcos that are lacking. I did very careful a/b comparisons of several pairs of synths, new to vintage, SMT and thru hole. Karp to Arp Odyssey and Solus, orig SEM and new Tom Oberheim SEM. The filters sound just as good on the new ones, the oscillators sound every so slightly more drifty and ALIVE on the old ones. I love Dreadbox synths, but compared to vintage stuff, I compared a/b an Abyss with a Roland SH-2 (closest in sound I think), and the Sh-2 oscillators were still more alive. And the Abyss is discrete!

Don't get me wrong: I think the Karp, new SEM, and Dreadbox are the best new analog going these days, they nail 90% of it. They are doing everything right, and I'm hoping they get there! I also really appreciate the sheer effort to do the unique and gutsy things they do (like starting a new synth company at 80 years old, or coming up with strange new designs no-one else does, or using discrete circuits, or doing a circuit for circuit clone that doesn't compromise!).

But as soon as I play even the lesser of the old analog and compare to new, the diff is palpable. SMT seems able to get real close, as close as new discrete, so I'm thinking that while circuit topology is a huge factor (the diff between Karp and those that aren't even close), I think the issue might be newer parts, or power supply issues mentioned earlier.

I'm really curious what the new CEM 3440 sounds like. I'm also really curious to hear what repair techs say about this. After all, do they use all 'new old stock' parts?
I'm not sure what others are inferring, but I am saying that it's been clear for a long time that when done properly, SMT does not suck. It did not take Uli Behringer and the Boog to prove it. As close as new discrete, yes.
Old 11th April 2018
  #78
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by j3rk View Post
I only use free range oscillators for organic waveforms.
... and fair traded resistors and capacitors.
Old 11th April 2018
  #79
Lives for gear
 
pr0gr4m's Avatar
Please change the title of this thread from:
Why Don't New VCOs Sound as Good as Old VCOs?
to:
Why Don't New VCOs Sound the Same as Old VCOs?

...because the first version is subjective.

and while we are at it, let's go with:
Why is it that New VCOs don't Sound the Same as Old VCOs...
...and by New I mean VCOs that were created after (insert date here) and by Old I mean VCOs that were created before said date...
...and by Same I mean (insert some unquantifiable characteristics of sound such as, warm, smooth, full, glassy, colorful, sweet, vintage, etc.).

Burn-in. Old VCOs have had 30+ years of burn-in time. In 30 years, the new VCOs will sound amazing.
Old 11th April 2018
  #80
Kja
Lives for gear
I think the dsi stuff sounds great.. Give it twenty years and it will sound the same.. Right now there are many video's on you tube of how a prophet 6 sounds 98% close to a prophet 5, except its more buzzy.. So switch the prophet 6 to mono output instead of stereo and wait twenty years and it will sound identical. Right now it already sounds at least as good, I'm sorry if you don't agree but sadly most synths sound the same.. It takes the player to make them sound good.. And I don't think you know the difference between discreet and smt? The way you use it makes no sense.. Have a great day Mr. Blast from the past!
Old 11th April 2018
  #81
Kja
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by fromthepuggle View Post
I'm a little confused as to what people are saying in this thread regarding SMT. Are people saying that they think SMT really CAN get all the sound of old analog, or that it cannot, depending on circuit design and parts?

For example, the KARP Odyssey is widely regarded as one of the best of the new analog, and it's SMT. It sounds significantly more 'vintage' to my ears than all the DSI stuff. Both are SMT, the main diff I think is that the circuit topology of the Karp was supposedly the same as in the original Arp. I was deeply skeptical of SMT until I heard the Karp.

Then again, I have yet to hear ANY new analog that sounds as good as vintage, and it's always the vcos that are lacking. I did very careful a/b comparisons of several pairs of synths, new to vintage, SMT and thru hole. Karp to Arp Odyssey and Solus, orig SEM and new Tom Oberheim SEM. The filters sound just as good on the new ones, the oscillators sound every so slightly more drifty and ALIVE on the old ones. I love Dreadbox synths, but compared to vintage stuff, I compared a/b an Abyss with a Roland SH-2 (closest in sound I think), and the Sh-2 oscillators were still more alive. And the Abyss is discrete!

Don't get me wrong: I think the Karp, new SEM, and Dreadbox are the best new analog going these days, they nail 90% of it. They are doing everything right, and I'm hoping they get there! I also really appreciate the sheer effort to do the unique and gutsy things they do (like starting a new synth company at 80 years old, or coming up with strange new designs no-one else does, or using discrete circuits, or doing a circuit for circuit clone that doesn't compromise!).

But as soon as I play even the lesser of the old analog and compare to new, the diff is palpable. SMT seems able to get real close, as close as new discrete, so I'm thinking that while circuit topology is a huge factor (the diff between Karp and those that aren't even close), I think the issue might be newer parts, or power supply issues mentioned earlier.

I'm really curious what the new CEM 3440 sounds like. I'm also really curious to hear what repair techs say about this. After all, do they use all 'new old stock' parts?
You think a karp sounds more analog then a ob6? Ok then, you just showed that you must be severely biased or not been behind a ob6 much.. I had a karp but it didn't hold a candle to a ob6.
Old 11th April 2018
  #82
Lives for gear
 
pppch's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kja View Post
I think the dsi stuff sounds great.. Give it twenty years and it will sound the same.. Right now there are many video's on you tube of how a prophet 6 sounds 98% close to a prophet 5, except its more buzzy.. So switch the prophet 6 to mono output instead of stereo and wait twenty years and it will sound identical. Right now it already sounds at least as good, I'm sorry if you don't agree but sadly most synths sound the same.. It takes the player to make them sound good.. And I don't think you know the difference between discreet and smt? The way you use it makes no sense.. Have a great day Mr. Blast from the past!
you have to make such comparisons for yourself with real synths, youtube just is not good for it.
in most cases, the dangerous areas such as sub or extreme resonance are not shown at all, as they are difficult to record and there are also the differences which express themselves in level loss
Old 11th April 2018
  #83
Lives for gear
 
Moonwhistle's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kja View Post
You think a karp sounds more analog then a ob6? Ok then, you just showed that you must be severely biased or not been behind a ob6 much.. I had a karp but it didn't hold a candle to a ob6.
No, not more "analog."

He said more "vintage" as in closer to the synth it is a remake of.

& the KARP is very close to a vintage odyssey. They nailed the filter, it misses a little grit overall (but has a drive switch) and the square wave is a bit different.

It's an exceptional remake. Obviously wasted on you.
Old 11th April 2018
  #84
Lives for gear
 
genetic92's Avatar
 

I am better than you all
Old 11th April 2018
  #85
Lives for gear
 

I think it has to do with entropy. Things really were a lot more organized back then.
Old 11th April 2018
  #86
Lives for gear
 
j3rk's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by genetic92 View Post
I am better than you all
Nuh uh!
Old 11th April 2018
  #87
Lives for gear
 

I spent a ton of time comparing in person in my studio a karp, vintage odyssey mk3, and solus. then the same sort of comparison between new sem and vintage. then sh2 and dreadbox abyss. all the new ones here have filters just as good as the old ones, but the oscillators still sound like they are missing that little 'something' of aliveness that the vintage has, though they seem much closer than all other new analog.

I have spent a lot of time in music stores (sometimes hours) and my own headphones trying to get the prophet 6 or ob 6 to sound vintage (and listened to countless demos). to my ears, my prophet 600 gligli is miles more alive sounding. I have not done a/b comparisons of the dsi units with the karp, new sem, or dreadbox, but to my ears, these three monosynths are much closer to vintage sounding than the dsi polysynths. don't get me wrong, I've heard people get amazing sounds out of the dsi stuff (particularly the integration of the fx into being a 'part' of the patches. but they just don't sound vintage, which to my ears, has this warm and alive something that the newer stuff often lacks. and I do really like some dsi stuff, in particular, the evolver line I find really inspiring.

and yes, I know the diff between smt and thru-hole, just wasn't sure what the previous poster was trying to say.

no, I haven't heard the new moog or behringer moog in person.
Old 11th April 2018
  #88
Kja
Lives for gear
My point is the karp might sound like an arp, but it doesn't sound that great to me.. I mean it doesn't sound very "alive" to me, like a model D does. I just pretty much disagree with this whole thread I think. So I'm not gonna speak in it anymore.. I'm really sick of hearing stuff like this.. Its the same people spitting this nonsense that say a pro1 is just as fat as a model D, and the prophet 6 sounds weak.. But when they see hear a as-1 sound just like a pro1? Or a roland mono sound like a model D? I mean they nail the sound, just like a profit 6 will nail a prophet 5 or a ob6 will nail a sem... Its all relative.. They can all sound identical..the rest is a pissing match.
Old 12th April 2018
  #89
Lives for gear
 

I am bored of all the words in this thread, please post some audio examples of old vs new.
Old 12th April 2018
  #90
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pre55ure View Post
The worst thing about this thread is the amount of time I spent writing a comprehensive, logical and well researched rebuttal to the OP's post.

Then I remembered this is GS and that no one cares about an actual answer.
You've been here long enough to have known better. No stopping mental deficiencies.
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