Elektron-Users

syrusate wrote:
If it gets under 1000$ ill get one. At 1475 there are so many other machines close to that I would rather get. I do want a real analog though, and a new one with patch storage sounds nice to me.

the one thing I dont like about this one is the panel, it doesnt move. Sounds like there will have to be a proprietary case made for "the lil phatty". Oh, i dont like the name either, which doesnt matter.

I doubt it will be in stores at $1475... but you are right about the panel...I love that the voyager can lay flat.

papertiger wrote:
the MEK -- now THAT'S something I can get excited about.

wooha!

what? and soil you're nice clean studio? :-D

I'm definitely picking up a MEK as soon as they're shipping - wanted one before NAMM, and when I saw it at NAMM in person it only sealed the deal.

As for the Little Fatty - I know for some people it will be fantastic! The benefits being it's a new, under warranty Moog monosynth, and a simple small board for live gigging.

For me though, that money would be better spent on other monosynths (says the guy who just sold a slew of em) For that same money you could pick up a Yamaha CS-30, A Pro-1, etc.... Or build the same feature set out of synthesizers.com modules in a portable cabinet, with tons of room for expansion.... but that's just me talkin...

yeah, like I said earlier I am not excited at all about this synth

you can tell where the company is going to head without Bob around - he was the visionary, and sure, maybe this synth was his last brain child but would he have released it? Who knows

the point is, for a monosynth, its still really expensive. We all know 100% analog signal path means shit these days - seems a little gimmiky to me

the fact that its a weird shape is kind of uncool too - the case for that thing is going to have to be enormous - and forget about being able to see the controls while playing it - the angle does not ever change!

I bet it only sounds slightly different than the Studio Electronics synths, which are way way cheaper (esp used)

I dont know - this might turn out ok for the new Moog company cause its the last moog design - however, it makes me nervous for future moog music releases. Bob was always really in touch with what musicians wanted - now that he is gone, the company might fall prey to the same corporate attitude that ruined Korg and Roland

milkmansnd wrote:
the point is, for a monosynth, its still really expensive. We all know 100% analog signal path means shit these days - seems a little gimmiky to me



I really gotta respectfully disagree with you there. For me there is a definitive difference between any real analog synth and a digital emulation.

Analog oscillators and filters are definitely worth having, but do you really need the envelopes and LFOs to be analog voltages, compared to a high-res digital signal? IMO the evolver design is as analog as I really need (analog oscs and filters, plus a bunch of functionality that only digital can achieve).

Count me in the camp that feels rather ho-hum about this new Moog release...and is it just me, or does the name alone make this feel kind of gimmicky?

actually, it looks like the product name was intended to be more of a joke than serious (ie roland's groove box marketing).

from http://moogmusic.com/moog.php?cat_id=86

So what about the name, Little Phatty? Taking a cue from Bob?s choice of the name ?moogerfooger? for our line of effects modules, we adopted the moniker ?Little Phatty? for our new synth because of its irreverent; tongue-in-cheek nature.

Looking again at it, this synth may actually be cheaper soon. Its says this is the "Little Phatty? Analog Synthesizer-Tribute Edition" and that its a limited run.

So after they go through all of the tribute edition, and start making the normal one. Maybe it will drop a few hundred bucks in price. If so I may go for one then.

Thunder wrote:
I really gotta respectfully disagree with you there. For me there is a definitive difference between any real analog synth and a digital emulation.

yeah, but what is in that analog signal path? The original minimoog and modulars were all discrete - this new synth is going to be the chip fest that the moogerfoogers are. Just saying, analog schmanalog - only certain types of people still fall for that old marketing gag. A behringer mixer has an all analog signal path too for example - how does that sound? Having a DAC in the mix at some point really makes no difference these days, they are so good at engineering it you can barely tell the difference. Plus, the interface on the Phatty is not even true analog either - is it continuously variable? No, its digital programmable like the moog source or alpha juno.

I agree to a point. I think that ggoodwin is pretty spot on here. It is important to have analog oscillators and filters. The rest isn't crucial as long as you have a high resolution digital signal controlling things. And supposedly that is basically what the new Moog offers, true it is not technically continuously variable, but Moog swears you won't be able to tell the difference, and for the most part I beleive them. You are right that having a DAC somewhere in the circuitry won't ruin your sound, but using algorithms instead of circuitry to emulate oscillators and filters is a different story. Look at Clavia's Nord Leads, they are great synths, but don't have that analog sound. And despite you saying Moogerfoogers use too many ICs, they still blow away their digital counterparts in my opinion.


And just because behringer is all analog and crap doesn't mean a thing, I could turn around and make a reciprocated arguement about Neve.

The phatty isn't even in production yet... isn't expected to ship until summer.