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
Is vintage gear still worth the high prices ..? Keyboard Synthesizers
Old 1 week ago
  #151
Quote:
Originally Posted by usedtohaveajuno View Post
I only buy vintage instruments so that I can look good at the Annual Dentistry Convention - when everyone turns up in their Porsche 911s you have to work harder to differentiate your own level of wealth, and for me that means strapping my 808 to my chest, my 909 to my back and wearing my Jupiter 6 on the diagonal like some sort of VCO-based sawn-off shotgun. I wear my 303 in true Scotsman style - as the sporran on my kilt



It's got nothing at all to do with their tone, industrial design or build quality.
huh? should be upside down. orrrr someone else play it.
Old 1 week ago
  #152
Gear Guru
 
fiddlestickz's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Looneytune View Post
Interesting you say this. I took my Jupiter 6 in for a service, a very well known Tech here in Sydney Australia.
He made a comment about Prophet 6, said it’s lovely but I couldn’t fix it service that for you, but bring me your vintage gear anytime.
This guy owns 3 Prophet 5”s
Mr Jones..?
Old 1 week ago
  #153
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddlestickz View Post
Is vintage gear still worth the high prices ..?

Never was.

Never will be.
Old 1 week ago
  #154
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by felis View Post
Never was.

Never will be.
i agree

but the price drop went to far, as 'we' were fooled by the digital revolution.


not that i didnt exploit the crazy bargins that were available between 88 and 2002..
Old 1 week ago
  #155
Lives for gear
 
Looneytune's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddlestickz View Post
Mr Jones..?
Indeed, Steve. Awesome tech and what a collection he has.
Old 1 week ago
  #156
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diametro View Post
Pretty sure angels don't have anuses ...
yes they do,

only gawds dont poop..
Old 1 week ago
  #157
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by usedtohaveajuno View Post
Ah, but to the driver of an American car, for example, then they will really like how their car drives, seeing no need for another car.

Then one day they try a 911
Ah, but that’s not what we’re talking about, eh? Your analogy falls apart in this context, because we’re not talking about high end sports cars vs. budget sedans. I’m not saying that I like my Bass Station 2 more than a Model D. But I’d take a modern 911 over a 60s 911 any day of the week. More importantly, I smoke any Porsche on the highways here, in my Ford Focus Electric. While they’re stuck in traffic, I cruise right by in the HOV lane.
Old 1 week ago
  #158
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnalvl View Post
That's a big assumption. Don't get me wrong, some emulations absolutely nail the originals as advertised, and others don't at all. Beyond blindly trusting word of mouth, you'll never know for sure if the emulation in question truly gives the character of that synth unless you actually try both.

And that uncertainty is the whole problem IMO. You can buy an emulation and still have the nagging question in the back of your mind. That uncertainty will drive some people to waste a ton of time trying to EQ an emulation to match the imagined character of their dream synth, or buy a bunch of different cheap synths hoping it will get them in the ballpark. It can turn into a costly wild goose chase.

If you can afford the synth in question I think it's better to just buy it and compare it yourself to the alternatives and sell whichever you like the least. If you can't afford the synth in question, just accept the fact that you can't have it and move on. If you're going to use an emulation you haven't a/b tested, do it because you actually like the character of that emulation on its own merits.

For example, I'd tested Dexed and PG8X against the hardware alternatives and concluded I was fine with the emulation. I haven't A/B tested SQ-8L or Largo against a real Ensoniq or Blofeld but I like them enough on their own merits that I don't care. These are all admittedly cheap hardwares to test; I've resolved not to bother chasing sounds that are out of my price range. Many emulations of more expensive stuff (particularly Arturia's) didn't sound intriguing to me when I demoed it, and I'm not going to lose sleep over how else I'm going to get those sounds.
Arturia are responsible for a lot of the animus towards emulations, IMO. Back when they first came out, they relied very heavily on licensing name brands and heavy handed marketing. I remember clearly demoing Minimoog V (Now Mini V) vs Minimonsta and thinking that regardless of accuracy, the GForce software smoked Artuira’s. Then, they lost their best engineer, who formed his own company XILS. XILS struck out and upped their game, while Arturia languished and let their software rot until recently, and they’ve only recently made minor upgrades in their old analog emulations, but to be honest, there older emulations still lag far behind developers like XILS, U-He, Synapse, Roland and Native Instruments.

However, they’ve recently stepped up their game. It hasn’t really touched their old software much, but recent new releases are very good. DX7 V, Synclavier V and Easel V are really good. I’d put those emulations up there with the best. I hope they take a break from developing new plugins and focus their energy on overhauling their old stuff, as I think they could surprise people and become one of the leaders in the field. We’ll see.

In the mean time, I encourage anyone who doesn’t mind using software to try the latest from U-He, Synapse and Native Instruments. I can’t speak to their accuracy as emulations, but they sound very good to me and provide functions that are not found on the originals that make them very desirable. For instance, Legend has a four voice poly mode that blows me away and hints at what four Model Ds running in unison or as a polyphonic synth might sound like. While I’m sure that it’s not 100% accurate to a Model D, or even say a Boog, that fact alone makes it worth owning. RePro also sounds amazing and had 8 voices and can do a per voice distortion that sounds glorious.
Old 1 week ago
  #159
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by babylonpanic View Post
ah but dexed doesn't have the extent of bottom end that
hardware FM does
That is what EQ is for.
Old 1 week ago
  #160
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutantt View Post
That is what EQ is for.
I’d be curious as to whether the original premise is actually true. My guess is, no. I’m not saying that Dexed is 100% accurate, but I have a hard time imagining it not being able to generate a full range of audible frequencies. No matter, just don’t be such a cheapskate and buy DX7 V, which I think is a better sounding plugin and has a better UI and feature set.

One thing I think, about emulations of digital synths, as opposed to of analog synths, is that people have some sort of rosy idea about how “good” those beasts sounded. I think a big part of that is nostalgia. We’re prone to thinking that what ever we fell in love with when our hormones were firing at 110% can’t be bested. In truth, many corners were cut to meet a price point, or the tech just wasn’t that well developed. A good example is the Synclavier. There’s a good a/b demo of Synclavier V vs the O.G. They don’t sound the same, it’s true, but that’s because the original hardware had some really gnarly artifacts going on, where the software is a cleaner (but not pristine). Maybe your preference is for the uglier sounding original hardware, but it’s definitely not because it’s better sounding in some technical way. Considering the software was developed by the same person who did the original, my guess is he never wanted the original’s artifacts, but lived with them because it was the best the tech could do at the time. Now that the tech is better, he took advantage of it. I feel he made the right choice. Inversely, Arturia decided to use higher resolution waveforms in their Prophet VS software and it fails to capture the magic of the original. So, it’s a bit of a tightrope when you decide to clean up old tech. I think the best route would be to offer different modes, like DX7 V does. You can run it in modern or vintage mode depending on your taste or needs.

If you really want the sound of old grungy D/A, just pick up Chipcrusher. It can really make you audio sound like absolute crap.

Old 1 week ago
  #161
Jose Ramón Alvarado Villa
 
Don Solaris's Avatar
Some quick points, since i've actually tested Dexed:

1.) Dexed sounds identical to a Yamaha DX-7 MkI.

2.) It is DX-7 MkII which adds extra detuning option to thicken up the sound often resulting in more bottom end. There is no such parameter in Dexed yet, hence some MkII patches sound thin when played in Dexed.

3.) No EQ can compensate for the extra bottom end, no matter how many times some layman repeats that silly phrase. Frequency bands that do not contain energy can not be affected, reduced or increased in any shape or form.
Old 1 week ago
  #162
Lives for gear
 
Crazy4Jazz's Avatar
 




Maybe not the same thing but there is a point here.
Old 1 week ago
  #163
Value of Vintage Synths

I find these threads very entertaining.

The answer to this question is multi-faceted, and complex.

IMO the value of instruments depend on:
  • Do you make music for a living?
  • Are you a collector?
  • Is space/real-estate at a premium where you live?
  • Are you a performer or writer?
  • Do you tour or are you a weekend warrior?
  • Are ergonomics driving your setup design?
  • Do you have a high/low salary?
  • Do you perform/tour with different gear from the studio?

Each of us prioritize our purchase decisions based on those questions above. Most of us acquire gear on a multitude of those previously listed categories.

In the end, it's whatever works for you and makes you happy. For me, it's about the journey. I'm always buying and swapping gear, which is why I try to hunt down used gear. I cannot write-off my music purchases, as I'm not running a business. I also have a mortgage and other priorities.

We're all different.

The funny part is: regardless of your opinion on new or vintage gear.., all of our perspectives on gear valuation affect price-points. The almighty dollar links us all, and I'm going to blame wealthy collectors for driving up prices on coveted pieces.., not the brilliant designers!

Fun thread.

-Phil
Old 1 week ago
  #164
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Solaris View Post
Some quick points, since i've actually tested Dexed:

1.) Dexed sounds identical to a Yamaha DX-7 MkI.

2.) It is DX-7 MkII which adds extra detuning option to thicken up the sound often resulting in more bottom end. There is no such parameter in Dexed yet, hence some MkII patches sound thin when played in Dexed.

3.) No EQ can compensate for the extra bottom end, no matter how many times some layman repeats that silly phrase. Frequency bands that do not contain energy can not be affected, reduced or increased in any shape or form.
ok. i tested Dexed vs volcaFm. maybe it's my crappy laptop sound device?
Dexed is fantastic but i get a more fullrange, yeah: bottom end on the
volca. i'll check again to make sure it isn't my imagination - and it is very
close anyway; just feel a bit more charm coming from the hardware.
don't knock the volcaFM, it's proper. does leave me in a bit of a
quandry about the TX81Z and TX802. 802 is obviously a keeper at
this point, and 81Z i've had forever, i wouldn't want to 'betray' it now!

also: no, EQ wouldn't fix it: it's a pristine distinct precise frequency,
not some mush you dial in
Old 1 week ago
  #165
Lives for gear
 
syntonica's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Sandman View Post
I know someone in Melbourne who just bought an SH 101 for $1200, it worked for a week and has now died. Nobody's fault, the seller sold it in good faith as working. However it highlights the risk you take buying old gear.
I hope that's AU$ and not US$. Either way, I don't think I'd pay that much for one.
Old 1 week ago
  #166
Lives for gear
 
Derp's Avatar
I used to think so, but having an Andromeda during that time when people were worrying about voices dying had me scared. Modern synths are generally cheaper and they can get pretty close if not close enough to the vintage sound. Having had the old JX-3P and Juno 106, I can vouch that the Boutiques sound just like them. You can get very vintage tones in modular, so I leapt over and have yet to regret it. I sometimes miss my old Pro One for the experience of using one, but I know I can pull the sound out of my current modular rig.
Old 1 week ago
  #167
Gear Nut
 

it also depends a bit on the weight a certain instrument might have in his setup/music. I'd probably be just fine with a boutique jx3p or a juno06.. same with other polys, they just don't play such a big role in my music. I could even use zebra2 and it would be alright for some pads or chords.
but I'd never trade my 303s and 101 for anything else since they are simply the absolute core in every single track / jam I do. someone else might have the same feeling with another synth and so on and so forth. It's quite individual, what's important to person x might be totally unimportant to person y and vice versa.
Old 1 week ago
  #168
Lives for gear
 
usedtohaveajuno's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Palaver View Post
The almighty dollar links us all, and I'm going to blame wealthy collectors for driving up prices on coveted pieces.

-Phil
I don't agree Phil. Many people, like myself, covet the goods and are willing to pay for them - we've all driven the price up, not wealthy collectors. I am not saying you don't need money to play that game, but there is a world of difference between choosing to spend money on synths (balanced with other stuff I could spend money on, like cars) and being wealthy.

My personal choice is to drive an older 911 that cost me 10K UK and instead spend some money buying the kit I wanted in the 90s but couldn't afford. I could have went out and PCPd something much quicker and newer, but I don't care, as I've got a great car and a fun studio to make music and keep myself amused

I bet most of the vintage gear sold is in use. It's not like people buying classic cars and sticking them in a garage, scared to use them.
Old 1 week ago
  #169
Lives for gear
 
Moonwhistle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Solaris View Post
Some quick points, since i've actually tested Dexed:

1.) Dexed sounds identical to a Yamaha DX-7 MkI.

2.) It is DX-7 MkII which adds extra detuning option to thicken up the sound often resulting in more bottom end. There is no such parameter in Dexed yet, hence some MkII patches sound thin when played in Dexed.

3.) No EQ can compensate for the extra bottom end, no matter how many times some layman repeats that silly phrase. Frequency bands that do not contain energy can not be affected, reduced or increased in any shape or form.
Might be my particular DX7 but it's grittier than Dexed. I actually prefer Dexed, some patches straight up sound better with it.
Old 1 week ago
  #170
Lives for gear
 

not kidding, i prefer my volca FM to Dexed. it sounds better.
(have 802)

dexed is the adjunct, the programmer.
Old 1 week ago
  #171
Gear Head
 

My microkorg doubles as a retirement fund.

Might be worthless and laughed at right now but just you wait and see...
Old 1 week ago
  #172
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlappyD00 View Post
My microkorg doubles as a retirement fund.

Might be worthless and laughed at right now but just you wait and see...
Haha, that’s the same reason I big up my ER-1 every chance I get - although it is a sick little drum/fx box anyway. One day it’ll be as coveted as at least the TR-606, and they aren’t exactly going for the pence they were just a few years ago. You see them go for anything up to £600 now. I remember once considering one for something like £200 and thought it was too much!
Old 1 week ago
  #173
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by babylonpanic View Post
ok. i tested Dexed vs volcaFm. maybe it's my crappy laptop sound device?
Dexed is fantastic but i get a more fullrange, yeah: bottom end on the
volca. i'll check again to make sure it isn't my imagination - and it is very
close anyway; just feel a bit more charm coming from the hardware.
don't knock the volcaFM, it's proper. does leave me in a bit of a
quandry about the TX81Z and TX802. 802 is obviously a keeper at
this point, and 81Z i've had forever, i wouldn't want to 'betray' it now!

also: no, EQ wouldn't fix it: it's a pristine distinct precise frequency,
not some mush you dial in
Never played a Volca but more bottom end doesnt make something better imo. I prefer well balanced synths that have a good character.
Old 1 week ago
  #174
Lives for gear
 

well, as i said, comparing it to Dexed, it could just be the laptop
soundcard output that is at fault. hard to think it could be when
it's supposed to handle 24bit/96khz (for whatever that really means)
and we're talking about FM.

should point out that Dexed DOES have the 'detune' parameter btw.

volca:
for this 'bottom end', it isn't muddy at all, or overwhelming: you can
tune it in and dial in exactly how much you want. i would describe
the sound as 'full fequency range' - i don't mean booming bassy,
although you can have that too if you want. i suggest trying one out,
see what you think. bearing in mind there are those limitations of
polyphony and velocity - but it really isn't a big deal if you consider
the plus points, what role it might have, and the workarounds available.
it's made me keener to get back to the big one, 802 - thing is, FM is
really quite limited for me in terms of what i want from it. but then
again, so is analog, but with a different perspective. and if you don't
want much from FM, it could be a really good format to have it in. it's
cheap 2nd hand, and if you want a 2nd part, just have more than one.
although at that point you'd be better off with an 802.
was disappointed though, that it doesn't receive single parameter messages,
that's the 3rd drawback. it does curtail my hope that any subsequent
volcas could really be mini-pro level programmable and offer real mobile
sound modules, if they are just going to cripple them in some way each
time. however, that said, a complete set should amply give you the tools
to do proper tunes if used judiciously, and having a bit of experience of
the 'real thing'. strange philosophical dilemma that they've presented,
with the limitations. but there are real vintage machines that offer less,
or not much more - i honestly don't want to, and can't cart around big
things any more.
Old 1 week ago
  #175
Lives for gear
 

I have never been impressed with hardware synths, vintage or not. Used to work at studio with MS-20, Jupiter 6, a few cubic meters of modular synth, P6 and some smaller stuff.. Never used any of that. I prefer VSTs.
Old 6 days ago
  #176
Lives for gear
 
Gnalvl's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerocrossing View Post
Arturia languished and let their software rot until recently, and they’ve only recently made minor upgrades in their old analog emulations, but to be honest, there older emulations still lag far behind developers like XILS, U-He, Synapse, Roland and Native Instruments.
Yeah, I agree Uhe and Xils have some of the most characterful emulations around these days. To me what makes Diva so useful isn't just the accuracy of its emulation, but all the functionality it offers over the original hardware. Not only can you run monos with 8 voice polyphony, but you can run the Moog oscillators through OB or MS20-style filters, use Alpha Juno envelopes, and do all sorts of other weird routings.

By comparison, something like Monark is less interesting to me... I wasn't blown away by the sound, it can't do polyphony at all, and it doesn't do much else. When faced with a software slapped with hardware limitations I'd sooner pay a little more for an SE-02 or Behringer D.

Quote:
Originally Posted by babylonpanic View Post
ah but dexed doesn't have the extent of bottom end that hardware FM does (only a partial reference to the angels mentioned earlier)
To your ears maybe. I did a/b comparisons with a TX802 using identical patches of my own design and didn't notice an appreciable difference beyong 2 LFO waveshapes being mixed up on certain patches. Both were running through my Scarlett 18i8, eliminating the soundcard uncertainty you had.

Mind you, I tend to use this stuff for glassy pads more than anything else... FM bass is generally not my cup of tea, so maybe my patches weren't bassy enough to make those differences noticeable enough in the first place. For my purposes, Dexed exactly what I want at the price I prefer.

But that was my whole point originally; it's better to do your own a/b tests and decide for yourself what suits your needs, than blindly trust claims that one option gives the same exact sound as another. If you've tested the volca and prefer it, more power to you.

And luckily in this particular case it's cheap and easy to pick up a Yamaha Mk1, Mk2, Volca and any plugin demos you want, compare them all, and sell the stuff which doesn't suit your needs. Obviously if you wanted to compare i.e. a real JP-8 vs. software and the boutique, the cost investment would be much higher and not too practical for the average user. Even still, merely drinking the koolaid and blindly believing the cheaper options are 100% equal doesn't serve much practical purpose.
Old 6 days ago
  #177
Lives for gear
 

Depends on the gear.

Moog Model D - Nope. A clone is too close and the price difference too great.

Hammond B3 - Yep. Play a real B3 and you won't have to ask. Somehow, tone wheels coming from a tube powered Leslie just sounds different than a digital wave coming from near fields.

Neve mic pre - Nope. Not only is it not really the same preamp any more (capacitors and stuff age), but the clones are great and waaaay cheaper than a name brand antique. Same with Neumann mics, vintage name compressors etc. Some reasonably priced vintage gear never really fluctuates in price, say a nice Drawmer or Demeter unit, buy it any time. Manley seems to hold it's value.

Obsolete tech - Yep. Considering what it goes for now, it's practically free. Scored a 24 channel Dolby SR system for $260, $24k new. Picked up a nice little 1" Otari 8 track, loaded with transformers for $300. With a bit of effort, you can pick up an 24 track Studer for $5k-$6k.

It's really a personal call. Personally, I hate buying surface mount component stuff (which is everything these days) cuz ya can't fix it.
Old 6 days ago
  #178
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnalvl View Post
Yeah, I agree Uhe and Xils have some of the most characterful emulations around these days. To me what makes Diva so useful isn't just the accuracy of its emulation, but all the functionality it offers over the original hardware. Not only can you run monos with 8 voice polyphony, but you can run the Moog oscillators through OB or MS20-style filters, use Alpha Juno envelopes, and do all sorts of other weird routings.

By comparison, something like Monark is less interesting to me... I wasn't blown away by the sound, it can't do polyphony at all, and it doesn't do much else. When faced with a software slapped with hardware limitations I'd sooner pay a little more for an SE-02...
Oh, yeah. I agree with that. I never used Monark much until they make it part of Reaktor Blocks. Then it gets a whole lot cooler.
Old 6 days ago
  #179
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Solaris View Post
Some quick points, since i've actually tested Dexed:

1.) Dexed sounds identical to a Yamaha DX-7 MkI.

2.) It is DX-7 MkII which adds extra detuning option to thicken up the sound often resulting in more bottom end. There is no such parameter in Dexed yet, hence some MkII patches sound thin when played in Dexed.

3.) No EQ can compensate for the extra bottom end, no matter how many times some layman repeats that silly phrase. Frequency bands that do not contain energy can not be affected, reduced or increased in any shape or form.
Well, Ive had my DX7-IIFD for 26 years, and the detuning doesn't add more bottom, it's that the machine itself has more bottom.

And yes, all the layering and unison modes make it MUCH thicker sounding than the original too.
Old 6 days ago
  #180
Lives for gear
 

hey i found out an issue with Dexed vs VolcaFM:
sending across presets, it is arriving with some operators
switched off - those have to be switched manually.
minor issue. still works brilliantly.

so that could've been what i was getting.
i take back what i said about difference, because i don't
know now.
Dexed is amazing, sounds great. what a gift.

i've been going through some of BlackWinny's compilation zip:
does anyone know where i can find LatelyBass/SolidBass?
(in the banks)
i made it, but i overwrote it with accidental bank load.
also nice Hollow Square i made... feeling lazy and haven't
got round to doing it again. was a bit like ToiToi on VZ.
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