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 15th April 2018
  #211
Gear Maniac
 

you guys are kidding yourselves if you think industrial design in synths fully determines people's opinions about how they sound. let's be honest: it's a convenient way for you to think you're smarter than people. they must be pretty dumb to be fooled that easily. maybe they don't have ears at all--but you do, right?

the fact is that non-musicians think the ob's all look the same, and they can't tell the p6 from the p5 from the p600, etcetera. to them ALL these synths are more or less the same, they ALL look like they're from the 70s, 80s, etc. they all look "vintage" or "classic".

my ob-8 and ob-xa are 100% indistinguishable to the untrained eye--but even kids (maybe especially kids) can immediately comment on how different they sound after about ten seconds. is anyone who notices this difference fooling themselves? are they just dumb? is that really how you think about the world?

according to your logic, you assume "older is better" to people. but the synth they're most visually impressed by is the andromeda--yet it's also the one they're usually most consistently sonically underwhelmed by. they will almost never play with it twice, whereas i can't tear them away from the classics.

so if you want to find rationalizations, by all means go for it. if you want to pretend that no one notices these differences, do the test yourself, classic versus modern--but really do it, with non-musicians, and don't introduce your own biases into it, which by now i think i've clearly proven.

the larger facts that support my point. vintage prices are still rising to scorching heights, not falling--more and more every year. meanwhile, used prices of new VCO synths are falling. the market agrees that there are real differences between these. can sentimentality really explain why a P5 costs 3x a P6? you insult people's intelligence that way a little, i think.

so let me cross post what i did in the prologue thread.

none of the new VCO synths seem to have genuine, real, authentic, uncontrolled oscillator instability. something is going between dsp and voltage control that sucks the musicality out of these oscillators. it's true that if all you've played is soft synths then new VCO synths sound alive. but if you put them next to their grandparents, it's immediately apparent that something is very, very wrong with the approach of constant DSP pitch/phase correction versus primitive autotune.

no matter what you do, new VCO synths sound like frozen statues compared to living things. and it is still a little unclear exactly why.

the prologue has it a little less than the DSI synths, but it is still very much there. you don't get the smush for lack of a better word. you get many hard-edged oscillators kind of attacking each other with sonic knives, just the same as with the OB-6 or P-6.

now, all this is a very weird thing, because that means new VCO synths have nice tone, which is what we used to say we were looking for. but they are missing something beyond tone--let us simply call it character or aliveness or musicality.

if i play one note on a prologue, ob-6, p-6, it's OK--maybe it even stands the test. but if play two, three, a chord, two chords, three chords, on those, versus a classic VCO synth--there's no mistaking new for old. one is nasty, aggressive, biting, sharp, shrill--and the other is warm, it sings, it roars, it pulses.

this is apparent to anyone who listens, not just me, and i've tried this test many, many times, new versus old VCOs. the difference is so stark and apparent that when i do the test with non-musicians, after a few minutes, their ears "tire" of the raw sound of new VCO synths--they even clutch their ears, many times, they themselves walk away, turn off the keyboard, etcetera--but this never happens with the old ones. they always want to play on the old ones endlessly. they cannot get enough of the sound, the purity, the motion, the aliveness.

the new ones just do not have that magic, and it is something to do with pitch/phase being controlled far too tightly, beyond the threshold of musicality. just like a guitar always in absolute perfect tune will end up sounding like it's attacking your ears, not pleasingly soothing them.

this is especially true of the 0B-6 and P-6. something in there is like an artificial reproduction of VCO drift, when "slop" is applied, and without it, just like that perfectly tuned guitar, the result is shrill, biting, harsh, and unpleasant.

i want to say that in a nice way. it's far, far better than software. it's a beautiful thing to have new analogues again. but this generation of computer control over voltage needs improvement. these algorithms are not working very well.

the question that needs to be asked is this:

why try to "improve" on primitive autotune at all? what need is there for super-tight always-on control, anyways? doesn't that defeat the point of an analogue synth?
Old 15th April 2018
  #212
Lives for gear
 
Praxisaxis's Avatar
 

Ok, maybe there is a general difference between new synths and old synths.

(as an aside: this statement has plenty of issues: are you sure that you're talking about a general difference between old and new instruments or are you actually only comparing specific instruments? what is the cutoff date for the "goodness"? why are you sure it is the oscillators when oscillators are actually pretty basic and so much else in the chain affects the tone more strongly? which particular vintage synths are you talking about - they're not all good? is conviction the same as evidence. . . are you not contributing to the price rise of vintage instruments in threads like this? etc, etc, etc, etc.)

But even if I grant you this (and I am not sure I would - most of the vintage synths I've used I have not personally found remarkable), then we're only talking about a difference. Whether it is better or worse is a matter of taste. The synth I use most regularly (in just about every tune) is a Voyager. A lot of people dislike it. I have had it for 7 years or so, and I adore it more every day. Worrying about it eventually dying (maybe in another decade) keeps me up at night. I can assure you I genuinely, honestly, 100% prefer its tone to any other synth I've tried, inasmuch as how it works for my music. Sure, it's different. But not worse, for my purposes. In the end I'm making music, not worrying about how my instrument measures up or what it's dollar value is.
Old 15th April 2018
  #213
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by neonrider View Post
there's no mistaking new for old. one is nasty, aggressive, biting, sharp, shrill--and the other is warm, it sings, it roars, it pulses.
Oscillators are nasty if they are completely without filtering and amp envelope. The unrelenting high harmonics are worse than a jet engine. Except the Moog Voyager - looking at you but not in a good way. They are doing exactly what they are supposed to. But no one designed the old ones that way, it was the best they could do. Modern analog electronics fixed those faults and now you lot are unhappy. No one intentionally meant to hurt you. You are hearing the synths as the old engineers wanted to make them but couldn't.

They wanted them to be in tune all the time. They wanted them to have very sharp edges for high harmonics. You are the lucky generation who got it.
Old 15th April 2018
  #214
Here for the gear
 

the "musicality" of an instrument is found in the tension between perfect temper returning to entropy (noise).

IMO the rising and falling and swelling and pulsing of a dying sound is where the beauty lives. It's why the Rev 2 has that slop knob.
Old 15th April 2018
  #215
Deleted User
Guest
You can't bring logic to a moan zone, and to people who have already made up there minds
using "words" in absolute terms, rather than relative terms.
I am relatively absolute and absolutely relative about this....
(thank goodness circumlocution is one of my side hobbies!)
Old 15th April 2018
  #216
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxisaxis View Post
The synth I use most regularly (in just about every tune) is a Voyager. A lot of people dislike it. I have had it for 7 years or so, and I adore it more every day. Worrying about it eventually dying (maybe in another decade) keeps me up at night. I can assure you I genuinely, honestly, 100% prefer its tone to any other synth I've tried, inasmuch as how it works for my music. Sure, it's different. But not worse, for my purposes. In the end I'm making music, not worrying about how my instrument measures up or what it's dollar value is.
Heh, I didn't see your post and slammed the Voyager The edges are softened no doubt to remove the bleed of digital signals. External modulation of the oscillators is also filtered out at audio frequencies I think the whole thing has caps everywhere to shut the digital whine up. The end result is its too mellow. Yes, I use a stump pedal exciter in the mix in all the time and this compensate very nicely. But I can see why Moog reissued the Model D.
Old 15th April 2018
  #217
Lives for gear
 
Praxisaxis's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HaveItAll View Post
Heh, I didn't see your post and slammed the Voyager The edges are softened no doubt to remove the bleed of digital signals. External modulation of the oscillators is also filtered out at audio frequencies I think the whole thing has caps everywhere to shut the digital whine up. The end result is its too mellow. Yes, I use a stump pedal exciter in the mix in all the time and this compensate very nicely. But I can see why Moog reissued the Model D.
All good, I am well aware that many people don't dig it. Honestly, I don't get this - it is my most used instrument. I have no problem getting high end or whatever. But not to derail . . . the point being that, basically, this is all about preference.
Old 15th April 2018
  #218
Lives for gear
 
NEXUS-6's Avatar
 

Moan Zone this $hit.
Old 15th April 2018
  #219
Lives for gear
 
markodarko's Avatar
 

As Mr. Firechild mentioned over in the UB-Xa thread... My money’s on the EGs, not the oscillators. Whether the oscillator is VCO, DCO or digital, doesn’t matter - the EGs these days are all software, AFAIK. I think that’s where the “precision” issues lie in a poly. Of course in a mono there’s no such issue, but in a modern analog poly, if you press more than one key down at the same time, the EGs will fire identically as they’re all driven by software.

The “slop” features of modern synths also need to apply to the EGs if you ask me so that they mimic the tolerances and subtle differences of different capacitors and resistors building and releasing a charge when more than one key is pressed. I think that’s a bigger part of the vintage analog “charm” than the oscillators IMO...
Old 16th April 2018
  #220
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by neonrider View Post
you guys are kidding yourselves if you think industrial design in synths fully determines people's opinions about how they sound. let's be honest: it's a convenient way for you to think you're smarter than people. they must be pretty dumb to be fooled that easily. maybe they don't have ears at all--but you do, right?

the fact is that non-musicians think the ob's all look the same, and they can't tell the p6 from the p5 from the p600, etcetera. to them ALL these synths are more or less the same, they ALL look like they're from the 70s, 80s, etc. they all look "vintage" or "classic".

my ob-8 and ob-xa are 100% indistinguishable to the untrained eye--but even kids (maybe especially kids) can immediately comment on how different they sound after about ten seconds. is anyone who notices this difference fooling themselves? are they just dumb? is that really how you think about the world?

according to your logic, you assume "older is better" to people. but the synth they're most visually impressed by is the andromeda--yet it's also the one they're usually most consistently sonically underwhelmed by. they will almost never play with it twice, whereas i can't tear them away from the classics.

so if you want to find rationalizations, by all means go for it. if you want to pretend that no one notices these differences, do the test yourself, classic versus modern--but really do it, with non-musicians, and don't introduce your own biases into it, which by now i think i've clearly proven.

the larger facts that support my point. vintage prices are still rising to scorching heights, not falling--more and more every year. meanwhile, used prices of new VCO synths are falling. the market agrees that there are real differences between these. can sentimentality really explain why a P5 costs 3x a P6? you insult people's intelligence that way a little, i think.

so let me cross post what i did in the prologue thread.

none of the new VCO synths seem to have genuine, real, authentic, uncontrolled oscillator instability. something is going between dsp and voltage control that sucks the musicality out of these oscillators. it's true that if all you've played is soft synths then new VCO synths sound alive. but if you put them next to their grandparents, it's immediately apparent that something is very, very wrong with the approach of constant DSP pitch/phase correction versus primitive autotune.

no matter what you do, new VCO synths sound like frozen statues compared to living things. and it is still a little unclear exactly why.

the prologue has it a little less than the DSI synths, but it is still very much there. you don't get the smush for lack of a better word. you get many hard-edged oscillators kind of attacking each other with sonic knives, just the same as with the OB-6 or P-6.

now, all this is a very weird thing, because that means new VCO synths have nice tone, which is what we used to say we were looking for. but they are missing something beyond tone--let us simply call it character or aliveness or musicality.

if i play one note on a prologue, ob-6, p-6, it's OK--maybe it even stands the test. but if play two, three, a chord, two chords, three chords, on those, versus a classic VCO synth--there's no mistaking new for old. one is nasty, aggressive, biting, sharp, shrill--and the other is warm, it sings, it roars, it pulses.

this is apparent to anyone who listens, not just me, and i've tried this test many, many times, new versus old VCOs. the difference is so stark and apparent that when i do the test with non-musicians, after a few minutes, their ears "tire" of the raw sound of new VCO synths--they even clutch their ears, many times, they themselves walk away, turn off the keyboard, etcetera--but this never happens with the old ones. they always want to play on the old ones endlessly. they cannot get enough of the sound, the purity, the motion, the aliveness.

the new ones just do not have that magic, and it is something to do with pitch/phase being controlled far too tightly, beyond the threshold of musicality. just like a guitar always in absolute perfect tune will end up sounding like it's attacking your ears, not pleasingly soothing them.

this is especially true of the 0B-6 and P-6. something in there is like an artificial reproduction of VCO drift, when "slop" is applied, and without it, just like that perfectly tuned guitar, the result is shrill, biting, harsh, and unpleasant.

i want to say that in a nice way. it's far, far better than software. it's a beautiful thing to have new analogues again. but this generation of computer control over voltage needs improvement. these algorithms are not working very well.

the question that needs to be asked is this:

why try to "improve" on primitive autotune at all? what need is there for super-tight always-on control, anyways? doesn't that defeat the point of an analogue synth?
Pure, hyperbolic BS.

Then again, I can remember when Marc Doty was all like this about The Original Minimoog.

So maybe, welcome to your new career. I look forward to your YouTube videos, may they be as good as Marc's.
Old 16th April 2018
  #221
Quote:
Originally Posted by neonrider View Post
if i play one note on a prologue, ob-6, p-6, it's OK--maybe it even stands the test. but if play two, three, a chord, two chords, three chords, on those, versus a classic VCO synth--there's no mistaking new for old. one is nasty, aggressive, biting, sharp, shrill--and the other is warm, it sings, it roars, it pulses.
I kind of doubt anything will change your mind, but might I suggest a multi-timbral VCO-based synth such as the Vermona PERfourMER mkII? You can slightly detune each of the voices, set the envelopes slightly different, etc and get all the singing, roaring, and pulsing you could want when you play chords.
Old 16th April 2018
  #222
Deleted User
Guest
I agree, and the same reason I never mentioned the Vermona '14.
This synth was dismissed outright by most, which made it a must-buy
for me.
Compared to the perFOURmer, it is a few notches up with more bells and
whistles IMO.

This is a case of you go get what you pay for.
And no autotune, or pesky midi quantization, etc.



Quote:
Originally Posted by stopthesignal View Post
I kind of doubt anything will change your mind, but might I suggest a multi-timbral VCO-based synth such as the Vermona PERfourMER mkII? You can slightly detune each of the voices, set the envelopes slightly different, etc and get all the singing, roaring, and pulsing you could want when you play chords.
Old 16th April 2018
  #223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaphod Betamax View Post
I agree, and the same reason I never mentioned the Vermona '14.
This synth was dismissed outright by most, which made it a must-buy
for me.
Compared to the perFOURmer, it is a few notches up with more bells and
whistles IMO.

This is a case of you go get what you pay for.
And no autotune, or pesky midi quantization, etc.
I'm still GASing for a '14. I'm just in love with the Vermona sound. I have the money at this point, but it would be a total extravagance and, most significantly, would require me to completely reorganize the physical organization of my gear that is working really well for me now.
Old 16th April 2018
  #224
Deleted User
Guest
Best prices in the world AFAIK would be Noisebug or Kraft.
Noisebug still lists the old price of $2140 U.S.



Quote:
Originally Posted by stopthesignal View Post
I'm still GASing for a '14. I'm just in love with the Vermona sound. I have the money at this point, but it would be a total extravagance and, most significantly, would require me to completely reorganize the physical organization of my gear that is working really well for me now.
Old 16th April 2018
  #225
Lives for gear
 
three86's Avatar
I can make anything sound good. Old, new, analog, digital, hardwired, modular my secret is that I turn knobs and press buttons until I like what I hear.
Old 16th April 2018
  #226
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by markodarko View Post
As Mr. Firechild mentioned over in the UB-Xa thread... My money’s on the EGs, not the oscillators. Whether the oscillator is VCO, DCO or digital, doesn’t matter - the EGs these days are all software, AFAIK. I think that’s where the “precision” issues lie in a poly. Of course in a mono there’s no such issue, but in a modern analog poly, if you press more than one key down at the same time, the EGs will fire identically as they’re all driven by software.

The “slop” features of modern synths also need to apply to the EGs if you ask me so that they mimic the tolerances and subtle differences of different capacitors and resistors building and releasing a charge when more than one key is pressed. I think that’s a bigger part of the vintage analog “charm” than the oscillators IMO...
Yet people praise the Gligli-upgraded Prophet 600 which has basic software envelopes with zero attempt at any kind of "slop".
Old 16th April 2018
  #227
Lives for gear
 
markodarko's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Low Life View Post
Yet people praise the Gligli-upgraded Prophet 600 which has basic software envelopes with zero attempt at any kind of "slop".
Could all of this thread perhaps be a case of... people hear what they want to hear?
Old 16th April 2018
  #228
Lives for gear
 
Acid Mitch's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by markodarko View Post

The “slop” features of modern synths .
Other than the DSI stuff, what modern analogues have a slop parameter?
Old 16th April 2018
  #229
Lives for gear
 
markodarko's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acid Mitch View Post
Other than the DSI stuff, what modern analogues have a slop parameter?
Novation PEAK, Roland System-8. I don’t know about others but I know those do as I own them. They’re not called “slop” in those synths though.
Old 16th April 2018
  #230
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by neonrider View Post
I don't want to debate *if* they do. That much is obvious. Every non musician I have over to my house I do a little test with. Play a key on a new VCO synth (P6, OB6, "D" etc). Then play a key on a classic.

There's never any contest. Jaws drop. Eyes widen. Goosebumps appear. Panties drop, sometimes.

The question is why. Why do old VCOs sound so much better that even to amateurs it's never any contest? Or even old DCOs? The Deepmind has no emotional effect on people whatsoever. The Juno makes them swoon. Etcetera.

Sure--you can put a soft synth or anything quite frankly--through $10k of high end processing. But that defeats the purpose.

I appreciate the analogue renaissance. I love it. But. The only new poly that gets close to the old ones in tone is the Dreadbox Abyss. The Mini or modular reissues nail it, but that is exactly the old design.

Is it clocking, pitch control, amps, signal chains? All the above?

For example, in the P6/OB6, it seems like the autotune, or algorithmic cv control of pitch, is sampling and holding, somehow forcing, the start phase of voice--there's a weird kind of artificial forced phasing that sounds very unnatural, very weak, it's very noticeable. The voices don't smush into each other. I have no idea, though, I'm not an engineer. I just know it sounds...off. Nice, but not AS nice.

Is it even fair to call something that has total locked control of pitch or phase etc a "VCO"? Again, I have no idea. I just know I'd rather have a real autotune I press now and then than...this constant, ever-present DSP control of the oscillator that appears to be basically what these new VCOs do. Do we need a whole new word for them? Oscillator fascism?

Hold forth.
The new dsi vco synths aren't the only example.

The vco's on Dreadbox, Vermona, GRP, Studio Electronics, Macbeth and so on, to name a few, are just as good as old vco's and certainly have that "vibe". Dsi isn't the whole world of synths out there.
Old 16th April 2018
  #231
Lives for gear
 
GeorgeHayduke's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HaveItAll View Post
..But no one designed the old ones that way, it was the best they could do.
..
I think you're both right and wrong. I think you're mostly right, but I'm pretty sure that for instance the MiniMoog continued being produced with certain 'faults' that happened to be euphonically pleasing. For that to happen, you need an engineer with ears who knows his job is to please the ears, not the oscilloscope.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HaveItAll View Post
..
Modern analog electronics fixed those faults and now you lot are unhappy. No one intentionally meant to hurt you. You are hearing the synths as the old engineers wanted to make them but couldn't.
They wanted them to be in tune all the time. They wanted them to have very sharp edges for high harmonics. You are the lucky generation who got it.
Yea, well, the purpose obviously needs to be to please musicians (and customers) not nerdy engineering ideals.

Having said that, I use a mix of new/old analog. New is more predictable and easier to work with and is much cheaper, and sounds gobs better than VA, but it lacks the mysterious character that I get in the old ones. They clearly sound like instruments from different eras.
Old 16th April 2018
  #232
Lives for gear
 
GeorgeHayduke's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance View Post
Pure, hyperbolic BS.

Then again, I can remember when Marc Doty was all like this about The Original Minimoog.

So maybe, welcome to your new career. I look forward to your YouTube videos, may they be as good as Marc's.
Is it pure BS or just hyperbolic, make up your mind.

PS: You don't need to quote the whole long post just to drop a pointless dismissal.
Old 16th April 2018
  #233
Lives for gear
 
GeorgeHayduke's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by markodarko View Post
Novation PEAK, Roland System-8. I don’t know about others but I know those do as I own them. They’re not called “slop” in those synths though.
Analog?

The paradox is if a company makes a VCO which isn't DCO and yet still needs artificial movement.
Old 16th April 2018
  #234
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by neonrider View Post
none of the new VCO synths seem to have genuine, real, authentic, uncontrolled oscillator instability. something is going between dsp and voltage control that sucks the musicality out of these oscillators. it's true that if all you've played is soft synths then new VCO synths sound alive. but if you put them next to their grandparents, it's immediately apparent that something is very, very wrong with the approach of constant DSP pitch/phase correction versus primitive Autotune.
I I remember correctly (I think from the OB-6 thread) the bolded bit is not what is happening inside the OB-6 and P6.

These synths still have a regular Autotune. On an old synth you would simply press Autotune when you feel it's getting too much out of tune and you would need to do that every time that happens.

On the OB-6 you do the exact same thing, except that the OB-6 stores the required calibration values not just in a single memory location but keeps a table of such values for each different temperature at which the Autotune button was pressed. If the temperate changes it will choose from memory the values that correspond to the closest temperature for which such values were stored, or something like that. It is not constantly re-autotuning itself.

I also think it was said or confirmed in the OB-6 thread by a DSI staff member that the oscillators turned out to be very stable so they didn't need any constant correction in the first place. Apparently the totally analog VCOs are just very stable and have really good pitch tracking built into them, without requiring any assistance from the CPU/Autotune. It is quite possible to prefer the sound of more unstable oscillators of course, up to a point of course.

It is mostly because of this inherent stability in the analog circuitry that they had to add the Slop parameter to make it sound more 'vintage' (more crappy from a strictly engineering point of view).
Old 16th April 2018
  #235
Lives for gear
 
GeorgeHayduke's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TOYZ View Post
..Apparently the totally analog VCOs are just very stable and have really good pitch tracking built into them, without requiring any assistance from the CPU/Autotune. It is quite possible to prefer the sound of more unstable oscillators of course, up to a point of course.

It is mostly because of this inherent stability in the analog circuitry that they had to add the Slop parameter to make it sound more 'vintage' (more crappy from a strictly engineering point of view).
Alright, thx for the tip.
Old 16th April 2018
  #236
Lives for gear
 
Acid Mitch's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by markodarko View Post
Novation PEAK, Roland System-8. I don’t know about others but I know those do as I own them. They’re not called “slop” in those synths though.
System 8 is fully digital and Peak is hybrid with digital Oscs.
The thread is supposed to he about modern VCO's, which is why I asked about analogue synths. .
Old 16th April 2018
  #237
Lives for gear
 
markodarko's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acid Mitch View Post
System 8 is fully digital and Peak is hybrid with digital Oscs.
The thread is supposed to he about modern VCO's, which is why I asked about analogue synths. .
Ah! Sorry, I misread your question.

Nothing to see here. Move along now.
Old 16th April 2018
  #238
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by neonrider View Post
the larger facts that support my point. vintage prices are still rising to scorching heights, not falling--more and more every year. meanwhile, used prices of new VCO synths are falling. the market agrees that there are real differences between these. can sentimentality really explain why a P5 costs 3x a P6? you insult people's intelligence that way a little, i think.
All other arguments aside, this argument about the market is plain wrong.
It is in fact you who is insulting the market by thinking you know what motivates other people to pay these prices.
This is typical market arogance, but the market has shown time and again that it is not rational.

I mean, how rational is it for the human race to collectively dump all these precious instruments in the 70's and 80's for newer synths?
How rational is it for most electronic music from the past 3 decades to be made with non-VCO equipment?

There were threads on GS by people who buy up vintage gear for the sole reason of selling it for a higher price.
There are market forces at work that have absolutely nothing to do with the actual sound.

How can you claim it's all about how the VCO's sound?
It's ridiculously short sighted in the face of our economy and the markets it harbors.

Last edited by monomer; 16th April 2018 at 07:23 PM..
Old 16th April 2018
  #239
Lives for gear
 
enossified's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by neonrider View Post
ythe larger facts that support my point. vintage prices are still rising to scorching heights, not falling--more and more every year. meanwhile, used prices of new VCO synths are falling. the market agrees that there are real differences between these.
You need to take Economics 101 again....

Vintage prices are only rising because the supply is constantly decreasing.

There was a period when those vintage synths were worthless. Someone actually gave me an Odyssey with factory Anvil case for free around 1990 or so. I also bought an SH-101 a year or so later for $25. I remember a Mellotron in the local wantads for $400 and it sat there for months. So how did my ARP go from $0 to $2000? Low supply, rising demand.

Used prices typically fall steadily until it goes out of production and then they often rise again. In some cases that takes decades. I recall when people bitched about Junos being overpriced. Riiiiight...a $1500 synth falls to about $200 used, then slowly climbs to where it sells used today for about what it sold brand new. Calculating inflation, it's still cheaper.

Why is demand up? Way more people are interested in synths. Moog sold only about 15,000 Minis over 11 years. Yamaha sold over 200,000 DX7s in less than half that time. I'd love to know how many miniKorgs have been sold.
Old 16th April 2018
  #240
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by markodarko View Post
Novation PEAK, Roland System-8. I don’t know about others but I know those do as I own them. They’re not called “slop” in those synths though.
The Deepmind's "slop" setting is called Oscillator Drift.
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