And does the Behringer unit sound anywhere close to a genuine Model D?

-No

Sounds like a Model D to me, you just can't play it like one.

If the pin matrix is so very expensive then why not make a matrix with little buttons that you can push to make it more modern and cheaper?
Also implement midi routing and usb and other more modern techniques into it and keep the rest of the synthi original.
That would make it a synthi prepared for the 21 century and still original enough to make all the weird out of space sounds we all like.
If Behringer would bring that to the market for something like a 1000 euro and the character would be the same as the old one I would buy it immediatly.

I don't think it's the matrix that really does it- it's the sheer job of wiring those things to the board that is probably very complex and time consuming. It would require an awful lot of experience to get it consistently right.

My idea would be to have these as just pin connectors that push into sockets and the circuit boards are designed around this so that this job in itself is pretty much eliminated.

I believe it's still not a cheap unit as they are a very niche thing (how many pin matrices do you see in electronics now?).

A push button version would probably add complexity and cost to that part.

Arturia already solved the matrix problem on the MatrixBrute, and Microfreak.

It works well, but you still can't get the explicit "circuit overload" qualities you'd get with a real VCS 3.

That is what I think would be very difficult to implement.

We’ve seen a lot of modulation matrices that solve the issues of the pin matrix, but then we start moving towards the form vs. function debate. Is a Synthi still a Synthi if one of the salient characteristics is drastically changed?

Give me the basic sound characteristics still intact as much as is possible, but if there are modern replacements for awkward or problematic old tech, jettison that crap and bring me to the future. I know I’m in the minority on that front, at least here on GearSlutz. I’m sure if you 100% nailed the sound of the Synthi and added a Pro 2 style mod matrix instead of the pin matrix, the villagers would chase it out with pitch forks and torches, as usual.

Anyway, like so many things, if you want the OG, you should get the OG. Can’t afford it? Stew in your yearning and use that to write some really cool shoegazer tunes. What I do is buy things like XILS4 and pretend there’s no difference and cry myself to sleep each night.

Oh, and just remember, most original owners of an EMS Synthi would jump at the chance to trade it in for a really cool eurorack setup sent from the future.

It sounds quite like a Minimoog if the oscillator levels on the Boog mixer are kept below 12 0'clock.

I'm not so sure they'd want to swap a synthesizer with large, precise controls and a neat pin matrix for something with little controls that would get hidden under a rat's nest of cables to approximate some Synthi sounds. Musicians in the 1970s would have given everything they had for a Kronos or Montage, and would have been floored by a laptop with a DAW and soft synths on it, but a fiddly little version of existing patch cable analogue modular synthesizers wouldn't have elicited a second glance from them.

The VCS3 and Synthi are weird. As in bad. Terrible pitch vernier controls, bleedthru artifacts, lack of mixing and leveling CVs. Not something you'd play Switched On Bach with. I believe the market for them is small although I am one of them. I also think that any attempts to make it friendlier will ruin it. I will be surpised and absolutely delighted if Berhinger pull this off.

Also true.

I went through the period where we wondered what PCs would ever be good for, other than storing small databases of cooking recipes (at least at home).

Well, glad I lived past that! DAWs and soft synths are marvelous, as in, you wouldn't believe your fortune marvelous, from the perspective of the time when they didn't exist.

Ditto every current hard synth out there.

Not even disappointed I never got to flying cars (commercial airlines are amazing enough).

I really hope I get to experience a flying car... with this playing:

The badness is due to the fact that that they were cheap. A VCS3 in the UK cost £350 when American synthesisers like the Minimoog and ARP Odyssey were over £1000, so they didn’t use the best components that were available at the time to make them.

Nope. I sold off £7K worth of Eurorack to fund a Synthi. Eurorack is not particularly futuristic, as most modules are legacy designs. Yes, the MI modules and things like the Rainmaker take advantage of contemporary digital designs, but nests of cables, small knobs, restricted ergonomics and nasty minijack sockets are hardly forward thinking. It's the workflow and un-predictability of the EMS pin matrix that makes the synths such great instruments to play. More than the sum of all the army surplus parts. There's actually a lot more to the sound than 'On the Run' or Oxygene style noise sweeps, believe it or not.

I think you miss my point. I mean that bands like Pink Floyd were often moving towards whatever could give them fertile ground for experimentation. It’s undeniable that Eurorack isn’t superior for that. Who knows, though. They’d have probably moved back to the Synthi at some point, and continued to the lame state they’re in.

I’m with you, though. I’m allergic to cable spaghetti. I’d way rather have a Synthi... but I’d also much rather it has a Matrixbrute or Pro 2 style mod matrix. All my Eurorack is virtual these days, though I do use my Pro 2 to mess with my Dominion 1 and Torcido. My Synthi is virtual too. I’d love to hear your take on it vs the OG.

...But it does...

See here (I'm sure the link has likely already been posted elsewhere on the forum) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYxc8R_Qys0




RE the Synthi/VCS3 being weird/bad: yes, a completely understandable view.

But it does sound like a Synthi/has a unique voice, and the softsynth versions haven't yet managed a fully accurate replication (including Arturia's recent attempt. Accurate in places - but inaccurate in others i.e eq spectrum/filter ratio).



The worst marketing blunder by EMS is by EMS' very own Zinovieff. At c. 23:20 in the following video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KkW8Ul7Q1I), he refers to EMS' synth output as, and I quote, 'rather pathetic little synthesizers'.

(Justifying spending thousands on a synth when one of the company founders describes it as 'pathetic' is possibly going to be difficult. If Frederic Brun described the Matrixbrute as 'a hybrid piece of junk', I'd question my purchasing of the synth.)


This is followed later in the film by Zinovieff's commenting on the use of computers to pursue new sound worlds. Which I'd agree with fully (breakthroughs are generally in this domain i.e CCRMA, IRCAM etc).



However, there are generally two camps i.e those wanting to create/explore new sound worlds, and those wanting to replicate the sounds of the music they have an affinity for. It isn't a black/white dividing line, but the synth world can generally be divided into those categories.

'There is nothing new here' could easily and justifiably be met with 'it isn't meant to be new'. And vice-versa, of course.



The most innovative musical instrument of the past 30-40 years is without doubt the PC (or rather, digital technology). Chowning's 'Stria' still sounds like it could have been written yesterday (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=988jPjs1gao), as do most pieces by Murail (e.g 'Desintegrations' - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4basuUUatf8)



Modular, whilst interesting, isn't exactly pushing boundaries of innovation. Granted, there are some interesting modules out there. But most interesting modules are the equivalent of certain words from the dictionary repackaged as a bite-size selection of words.


They aren't expanding the vocabulary.


(Which doesn't mean I don't own a modular. Or don't write music on one.)


But I don't believe the companies are claiming to be the forefront of innovation (are they? Maybe they are. If so, this is perhaps loose use of language), therefore no harm done.


Most analog synths also aren't expanding the vocabulary (but the innovation may be at a more granular level i.e refinement RE precision of filter etc). Hence the marketing focus.




I think the majority of 'clashes' online RE synths are clashes of assumption of function i.e innovation vs. replication/refinement of function.


Softsynth replications (and hardware replication, of course) are objectively quantifiable in terms of accuracy to original (comparative spectral analysis etc), but anything else is, objectively, probably a pointless discussion, as the discussions are more a matter of taste than anything quantifiable.


The best-sounding Synthi is a Synthi.
But it can't do what a DX does.
Neither can a DX do what a Synthi does.

Ah right, I understand. To be honest I'm not sure whether any of the 70's artists who ditched their EMS gear got any more interesting or innovative with poly's and patch saving.
I had a demo of the Xils Lab a few years ago, but those in the know seem to rate the iPad iVCS3 as more accurate - which actually should be more inaccurate if you know what I mean Don't have an iPad though.

Most of them sucked in the 80's with poly synths.

iVCS3 is not that accurate but does behave like a synthi.

I thought that comment was just embittered and dismissive of the innovative work that Cary and Cockerell had put into the VCS3 at the time. I have a dual view on Zinovieff - on one hand I really admire his pioneering search for digital control and sound creation, but on the other hand I see him as a rich dilettante who got others to do all the actual design and engineering work.

Yes, I agree. It certainly comes across as a little bitter/resentful. Certainly short-sighted. And potentially damaging to EMS. 'Never speak ill of one's own children'...


From the perspective of innovation, his view is valid. But if the only products released were ones where the wheel was reinvented, we'd be waiting a long time for new products!

Midas, Turbosound etc might as well let the Germans take the Putney they've taken the rest.
and we are going to end up paying Americans for our own health insurance.

This country, the only thing we are still good at is making a parody beyond satire...

Some kids should remake the Putney and do a better job than Dave smith or Moog's
contemporary designs, all the ideas are there for a killer modern instrument.

If people want to get closer to the original, build a clone...

I accept of course Bristol based modal have made some rather tasty instruments!
rather spend that kinda money on a Moog One though...

Have any PIN Portabellas actually made it into the wild yet? Or has anyone here tried one first hand yet? That one looks fantastic, although (as others have already mentioned) the price is pretty steep. Wish it had internal speakers too. But otherwise looks like the best recreation around. The SYNTRX might have potential too as far as the experience goes anyway (since they aren't cloning the original sound).

I keep reading that the Cloney project is a pretty tough build. Anyone here tried it before? What exactly is so hard about the build? I'm guessing some of the component soldering and wiring is just tedious. I was considering trying that in 2020 since it seems like a pretty neat way to get a VCS3 clone for (relatively) cheap.

The component soldering isn’t that tough. There’s only like 3 little boards in there. Not even many components. Check out some pics online. It’s the wiring that takes a ton of time.

https://www.dsl-man.de/display/DSO/T...ect+VCS3+Clone

Yep, that site has a lot of great detail and photos. I guess I was asking because it sounded like it was so hard that few people finished, or that it took years. In the photos I've seen (incl. on that site) it looks tedious but not too bad. I can't believe how good the finished product looks/sounds.

I agree with you. This one quote from that page stood out to me:

"ts not enough to build eurorack modules, a TTSH or a DDRM and you´re able to build a VCS3 Clone - because the VCS3 is an oldscool device - much wires and no instruction which cable you have to attach at first.. there´s only a wiring scheme available."

It sounds like you need a better understanding of wiring, schematics and construction compared to many kits out there that are basically adult lego sets. The TTSH I built was very straight forward with all building steps very clearly laid out.

This is just a guess though.. I haven't seriously looked into the project since I have the Synthi void filled.

Ok I can't resist - did you fill the void with a Synthi? Or one of the other alternatives discussed in this thread? Or .. ?

Haha with a Synthi A.

Wow! Out of curiosity how did you decide to make the plunge for the real deal versus other clones/alternatives? I've toyed with the idea for a long time, but can never quite justify the pricetag (although I've come close ..)