Looks like the Moog Modular will definately be released at NAMM

Now this I can't wait to see

Of course Babelfish came to my rescue :

The journalists of the ACME are privileged people: they received a confidential file concerning the TAE. Yes, I feel you jealous, this world is unjust. TAE means obviously True Analogic Emulation (and not Tarte With Spinaches), technique which (we quote)"makes it possible to obtain a sound of higher quality in the functions of synthesis of an analogical program of emulation, and in particular to avoid any form of aliasing in all the width of the frequency spectrum". And if programmers endeavour to entreat the spectrum of the aliasing thus, it is for better polishing the instrument of which Arturia (firm mother of Storm, http://www. arturia. COM) announces to us that it will be one of the bombs of Namm: virtual modular Moog (VST, RTAS, FARMHOUSE and Dxi, for Mac and PC, everyone will be spoiled). One crowned challenge, but our curiosity is all the more titillated that Papa Moog itself takes care on the birth of his virtual kid.

For those of you that haven't seen the screenshots yet:



http://www.cahiersacme.org/qdn/348

Alex quoth (VST, RTAS, FARMHOUSE and Dxi, for Mac and PC, everyone will be spoiled)

Until Cakewalk support the FARMHOUSE plugin standard natively, I just aint interested...

Alex wrote:

Looks like the Moog Modular will definately be released at NAMM

I think it will be officially announced, not released as it is still in beta afaik.

This nonesense has to stop! I don't even have money for my school books this semester (though if I don't buy books I might be able to pick up a few plugs.... ).

Its certainly "retro" year ahead folks with this, oddity and oscar, I wonder what else ? Maybe a waldorf Wave, because this is the only thing I feel is certainly lacking (apart from PPG), a good wave type digital synth with built in comprehensive fx, but I hear something similar is coming.

BUT I CANNOT SEE THE MOOG MODULAR . Is there a bigger screeny somewhere ?

Also will it be polyphonic ? I think the original is only mono, but I dunno.

Bluey.

the strange thing is that the latest beta is no longer called Moog modular......

bluey wrote:

BUT I CANNOT SEE THE MOOG MODULAR . Is there a bigger screeny somewhere ?

Yep, on my computer monitor Sorry, I'm not alowed to show you

Quote:

Also will it be polyphonic ? I think the original is only mono, but I dunno.

you usually don't play a moog polyphonic
so I wonder who will do when it will be polyphonic
I do know I will use it as a vocoder modulator
roger troutman used the minimoog first for vocoding with its talkbox
later he used a Yamaha synth
but I like the talkboxed minimoog the most somehow it was the most magical

Poweruser wrote:

you usually don't play a moog polyphonic so I wonder who will do when it will be polyphonic

Hmmmm..... did you ever heard of a MemoryMoog and.... errmmm... the POLY Moog

WTF is FARMHOUSE?

JohnVulich wrote:

WTF is FARMHOUSE?

I think Farmhouse in Japanese is "Mas" as MAS is the other standard that is supported and the above text is a Babelfish translation from Japanese.

Quote:

Hmmmm..... did you ever heard of a MemoryMoog and.... errmmm... the POLY Moog

MemoryMoog ... I did.

about the poly part .. hell you can play any sound source with 120 voices
if it would be monophonic you could open the pluggo a 120 times depending on your cpu power
set up chords and stuff .... but if it will sound cool is a second thing

I guess the coolest way to use any moog is to use it for a baseline or a lead.

crimsonwarlock wrote:

JohnVulich wrote: WTF is FARMHOUSE? I think Farmhouse in Japanese is "Mas" as MAS is the other standard that is supported and the above text is a Babelfish translation from Japanese.

Oh, silly me. I really need to brush up on my Japanese...

Thanks for the info.

Poweruser wrote:

I guess the coolest way to use any moog is to use it for a baseline or a lead.

You have no idea what you are missing

crimsonwarlock wrote:

Poweruser wrote: you usually don't play a moog polyphonic so I wonder who will do when it will be polyphonic Hmmmm..... did you ever heard of a MemoryMoog and.... errmmm... the POLY Moog

I think he meant that the Modular Systems were monophonic, which isn't really true. Some of the Later Modulars were, at least, duophonic.

As for playing then polyphonically, the early Moog Artists, like Wendy Carlos, would just multitrack one part at a time 'till they built up polyphonic passages.

Times sure have changed!

crimsonwarlock wrote:

Poweruser wrote: you usually don't play a moog polyphonic so I wonder who will do when it will be polyphonic Hmmmm..... did you ever heard of a MemoryMoog and.... errmmm... the POLY Moog

The MemoryMoog was not modular and had only 6 voices IIRC (actually, very few synths had more than 8 voices until the digital age, but anyway). The MemoryMoog sounded glorious, but was very expensive, and had serious reliability problems that most people weren't willing to put up with in the 80s.

The PolyMoog wasn't even a real Moog in sound or design. Bob Moog had nothing to do with it. Although it could play as many simultaneous notes as it had keys, it used "divide-down" oscillators normally found in string synths and certain organs. It did not have the glorious Moog filters either. And it wasn't even fully programmable. It sounded thin and cheesy (although a few folks like Klaus Schulze and Gary Numan have put it to good use, but usually with heavy processing). In short, it didn't have any of the things that made Moogs so great. Despite being the first commerical polyphonic synth, it was a major failure and marked the beginning of the end for Moog Music.

The Prophet-5 came two years later, but is generally regarded as the first real polyphonic synth.

Am I the only one getting tired of VSTi's emulating old analogue ones?

there is no decent moog emulation,.,. so yeh maybe..

NEA wrote:

Am I the only one getting tired of VSTi's emulating old analogue ones?

crimsonwarlock wrote:

JohnVulich wrote: WTF is FARMHOUSE? I think Farmhouse in Japanese is "Mas" as MAS is the other standard that is supported and the above text is a Babelfish translation from Japanese.

Actually it was from French but babelfish is babelfish is bablefish

Well, I was just guessing

le maison de la animals

Alex wrote:

le maison de la animals

La Maison de l' animal

Quote:

The PolyMoog wasn't even a real Moog in sound or design. sic.

Er was that the one with the ribbon on it- y'know 'crazy horses'? BTW I believe Wendy 'walter' Carlos found the Moog Modular did cool things to voices a bit earlier than the 80s, Tonto's Expanding Head Band as well.
Chi

Quote:

BTW I believe Wendy 'walter' Carlos found the Moog Modular did cool things to voices a bit earlier than the 80s. Chi

In fact he did much more than found that it did cool things to voices. He designed it with Robert Moog. Giving Robert feedback as a musicians point of view what he wanted on the synthesizer and the modules. "He" because, he was Walter then.

NEA wrote:

Am I the only one getting tired of VSTi's emulating old analogue ones?

Yep!

A BIG screenshot of this thing:

http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM03/Content/Arturia/PR/Modular-Sys tem-lg.jpg

What a monster, I wonder how is it supposed to fit in our virtual rack

Bruce Bartlett wrote:

....Despite being the first commerical polyphonic synth, it was a major failure and marked the beginning of the end for Moog Music. The Prophet-5 came two years later, but is generally regarded as the first real polyphonic synth.

I had the MemoryMoog and I agree that it was a major headach. Every week I had to open it up and spend a few hours tuning all 18 osc's using that three point tuning system. I think the Prophet five came out 2 years before the MemoryMoog. Some sites list the P5 coming out 4 years earlier with the P5 as coming out in 1978 and the MemoryMoog as 1982. Either way, I always considered the OB 4 voice as the first true polyphonic, even though it was not really programmable. Some consider the Yamaha CS80 to hold that spot, having come out in 1977. The P5 was the most sucessful of all of these.

I also consider 6 voice poly to be plenty for a synth that thick and using 3 osc's per voice. On a machine like that you don't really need chords with more than 6 notes though I admit I did really enjoy having more on my Rhodes Chroma. In my opinion the Chroma was best of the bunch and very ahead of its time.

Robert

autoy wrote:

What a monster, I wonder how is it supposed to fit in our virtual rack

It's actually using two screens that you can switch between: one holding the top Sequencer part and the bottom keyboard part and the other screen holding the middle two parts for the actual synthesizer.

Rabid wrote:

...I always considered the OB 4 voice as the first true polyphonic, even though it was not really programmable.

Well, if you include this type of synth (several independent voice modules controlled by one keyboard and microprocessor), then E-mu has bragging rights to the first polyphonic synth. They were making polyphonic modular units in the early 70s. Not very many people besides Frank Zappa could afford them though...

I just wish I had all the money back that I spent on keyboards from 78-85. Kids now think a K2600 is expensive.

Robert

kvr is a nice place for old farts and young wankers to meet , soon I'll be an old wanker !!
BTW : the pic is rather arousing !
Waiting to hear it ...

I suppose I'm not the only one who noticed the name Moog is now completely missing from the press release here at KvR...

Rabid wrote:

I just wish I had all the money back that I spent on keyboards from 78-85. Kids now think a K2600 is expensive. Robert

So true, so true! I remember getting into a discussion with a fellow about the Alesis Andromeda... he loved it, but thought it was ridiculously overpriced. I told him that given that it's a real analog synth, it was a bargain. Compare it against the Matrix-12, the Jupiter-8, CS-80, et al, and it's downright cheap. Before the arrival of the DX-7, a 6-voice no-frills 1-oscillator-per-voice synth that sold for less than $2,000 US was considered budget gear.

The flood of cheap digital gear in the 80s and 90s -- and the flood of extremely cheap or even free software in the 00s -- has drastically altered people's perceptions of what instruments are worth. This fellow assumed that because synths had become so cheap over the years, the Andromeda shouldn't cost more than your basic sample-playback keyboard. But analog gear, old or not, still costs big. That is why despite the bigger-than-ever demand for analog sounds, outside of the Andromeda, no major manufacturers are making real analog polysynths today. (Is the Andromeda still being made?)

OT (but..)

..you dont think greed had anything to do with rediculously overpriced hardware? no "hey its geared towards professionals so lets charge an arm and a leg" mentality?

i think (some) people got so used to paying massive amounts of money for that one, two, or four voice synth.. that they got used to it.

true, in a way, you (sometimes) get what you pay for..

but.. I can do much of what could have been done in the 70s and 80s on my pc for a fraction of the price.. (synthedit anyone?)


greed? nahhh had _0_ to do with it

VitaminD wrote:

OT (but..) ..you dont think greed had anything to do with rediculously overpriced hardware? no "hey its geared towards professionals so lets charge an arm and a leg" mentality?

Not really. Try building an analog synth yourself sometime and see

The various manufacturers were constantly trying to push the price/performance ratio, but there's only so far that you can go with analog -- the raw parts simply cost too much. When the Roland Juno 6/60 and the Korg Polysix came out, they were hailed as major breakthroughs -- polyphonic programmable synths that were relatively cheap, made affordable by no-frills design and effecient mass-production techniques (keep in mind that most of the classic analog synths required a fair bit of labour to manufacture -- even some digital synths like the PPG were largely assembled by hand). All of this changed with the Yamaha DX-7, which blew everything out of the water. 16 voices, velocity-sensitive, rock-solid reliability, was capable of a vast range of then-unheard-of sounds, and cost only $2,000 US. The price breakthrough was possible because it was made from mass-produced chips instead of individual VCOs, VCFs, etc., and that Yahama had invested a huge sum of money in developing FM synthesis -- something that the smaller players in the industry simply didn't have the resources to do. Moog, ARP, Sequential, and Oberheim were not large multinationals like Yamaha, who could sink millions into R&D while their current synths were largely ignored by the public (Yamaha released scores of analog synths before the digital age, most of which were decidedly lame and did not sell). For example, although they were a major player in the industry, ARP was still small enough to be sunk by the failure of one product, namely the Avatar. Moog began to falter with the Polymoog, but the real end came in the 80s, when the DX-7 raised the bar by several miles, and people just weren't willing to pay thousands for a "boring analog synth" that wouldn't even stay in tune. Most of the manufacturers who survived got by on selling lots of cheap digital gear. If you have any 80s synths, the philosophy behind them is usually "forget about how it sounds, how many voices can we get out of it?!". Knobs disappeared off synths, and nobody complained, because it meant they sold for less. Some synths weren't even programmable at all. The market was full of inexpensive -- but shitty -- digital synths like the Poly-800, the Six-Trak, and the TX81Z. If they could make them any cheaper, they would -- because no matter how bad it was, there was always a huge market for the cheapest stuff out there. Hence the FB-01, MT-32, K1, S612, S-10, and countless other crappy digital synths that you can probably now pick up for $30 at your local used gear dealer.

Quote:

but.. I can do much of what could have been done in the 70s and 80s on my pc for a fraction of the price.. (synthedit anyone?)

Well of course! But the processing power needed for synthedit simply didn't exist in the 70s and 80s, at any price.

The sad thing is, despite the fact that there are more electronic instruments out now and they are cheaper and more powerful than anything from 20 years ago, most new electronic music is actually far more limited, formulated, and boring than what was coming out then. You'd think the TR-909 were the only drum sounds ever recorded...

Bruce Bartlett wrote:

The sad thing is, despite the fact that there are more electronic instruments out now and they are cheaper and more powerful than anything from 20 years ago, most new electronic music is actually far more limited, formulated, and boring than what was coming out then. You'd think the TR-909 were the only drum sounds ever recorded...

You think so? I've been absolutely blown away by some of the drum n bass and glitchy IDM stuff coming out.

Although you did say "most" new electronic music, and I would agree that there are artists and genres for whom originality is not an asset . . .

Bruce Bartlett wrote:

If they could make them any cheaper, they would -- because no matter how bad it was, there was always a huge market for the cheapest stuff out there.

No kidding... This is why roland creates all this "groove" gear, instead of reissuing their classic stuff, even though there's a big demand for it: they make a hell of a lot more money selling cheap boxes...

crimsonwarlock wrote:

bluey wrote: BUT I CANNOT SEE THE MOOG MODULAR . Is there a bigger screeny somewhere ? Yep, on my computer monitor Sorry, I'm not alowed to show you

Okay, you're not allowed to show us or probably even talk about it, BUT... since you're here, it's time to put a bug in your ear... which I'm sure you've probably thought of anyway...

BUT if you haven't thought of it and if it isn't the case... perhaps you could send this "bug" off in the appropriate direction...

I can't tell just from examining the jpeg and I don't think I read it in any of the press info:

I hope that the filter modules of this thing will be available as an fx the way that we can do this with a number of other synth plugins. At least the fixed filter module - the big one. That's the one I remember from my time of playing with the real thing. Assuming that the beast is as accurate as it sounds it will be, it would be waaay cool to have that awesome filter module available as a processor.

Furthermore, it would be almost equally as cool to be able to use the sequencer module to send midi out to other plugs.

Finally, I hope they've done their homework in terms of easily being able to assign real controllers to the various virtual controls.

Hmm... I don't suppose you could just blink or something... blink once for yes, twice for no, lol!!!

Liondream,

As far as I can see (or know of), it is not possible to use the filters on it's own. Same goes for the sequencer. It's all inside the instrument.

As for linking controllers, stuff like velocity and aftertouch are available as signals that you can route anywhere with the patch-cords.

One thing I really want to say: this has THE BEST filters I've ever heard implemented in software. When you sweep the filter with a high Q-setting there is NO STEPPING in the resulting sweep (I must say that I didn't realised it right away, but when you become aware of this you realise how incredible the filters are sounding)

You bloody bastard crimsonwarlock, shut up

bluey wrote:

You bloody bastard crimsonwarlock, shut up

OK

crimsonwarlock wrote:

bluey wrote: You bloody bastard crimsonwarlock, shut up OK

NO!!! DON'T!!! Post some music snippets done with it!

Oh man, no - keep talking!!!


I don't know why, because I thought the bloody patent had expired in 1989 and the thing was public domain, but it seems that nobody can get those filters exactly right. At least not how I remember them. That will be one of the keys.

Too bad that the filters aren't going to be available outside of the instrument itself, that would have broadened the market IMO. But on the other hand: who cares!!! It will still be awesome and maybe the other can come later as an update.

So... did they do a cool job on the patch cords? Looks from the jpeg like maybe you can choose your own colors or perhaps they're coded depending on where they're coming from and going to.

Listen, I don't want to get you in trouble or ask you to say anything you're not supposed to say, so thanks for sharing what you have shared.

"Too bad that the filters aren't going to be available outside of the instrument itself, that would have broadened the market IMO"

>>>Yeah, that would be way cool!

"So... did they do a cool job on the patch cords? Looks from the jpeg like maybe you can choose your own colors or perhaps they're coded depending on where they're coming from and going to"

>>>The patch cords are a little "squirmy",(not quite as stable and solid as those in Reason), and the GUI is a little too big for some hosts. That
being said, it sounds absolutely FRICKING AMAZING!! It's really the
first Moog emu that sounds right IMHO.

Cheers....CL

The big huge GUI is one reason why I hated Dynamo, but I'm willing to live with it for this. I can see how it would have to be a certain size in order to see where you're plugging stuff in, etc.

I'm glad and excited to hear that the sound is going to be on!!!

In terms of big graphics to navigate... I could never figure out why in Cubase (which is what I use and why I mention that one)... why you couldn't just do an alt-key type thing and just interactively pan the portion of the screen to where you needed instead of having to mouse around so much.

Or, am I daft and it IS possible and I just don't know about it?

I'm talking about how in Photoshop or Illustrator you just hold down the spacebar and drag. Or, in Quark it's alt-drag.

Obviously in a music app it can't be the spacebar since that's usually start/stop.

Sounds like something of that sort would be handy here...

I am dying to hear this new Moog synth...did anyone hear it at NAMM? Anyone know when MP3s will be posted? I am curious if you can really get that deep bass that you feel in your chest out of this like you can with a moog or an Studio Electronics ATC...

this thing is scarry looking and scarry sounding - a totally amazing work!
the cpu usage is a little more in heavy configurations
the delay and the chorus modules are vivid and excelent sounding
sounds like a real moog - a true milestone in the VA business

ether: Are these the MP3s you are looking for?
http://www.arturia.com/en/modular/modulardemos.html

freaking amazing sounds! listen to this demo:
http://scaldor.cult.bg/music/OHLJUVPOSTRUMNOTO.mp3

the bass the lead and the echo theme at the end are from the modular, the other sounds in the background are from oddity

I hate to say this, but the mp3 demos on Arturia's website sound like thin cheezy simulations of a Moog to me. A few sounds are interesting, but at this point I'm disappointed. I bought the Oddity and I'm blown away at how "hardware" it sounds. The Oddity just doesn't sound like a softsynth - it sounds like the real deal. Seems odd that an Odyssey emulation would sound fatter and richer than a Moog Modular emulation.

I suppose much of Wendy Carlos' incredible sound (especially Switched on Bach II) is due to the beautiful production, but Arturia's demos don't have any of that "huge bank of electronics" sound I was hoping for.

Hopefully I'm mistaken and the final release will be fat and amazing.

andrewfa wrote:

I hate to say this, but the mp3 demos on Arturia's website sound like thin cheezy simulations of a Moog to me. A few sounds are interesting, but at this point I'm disappointed. I bought the Oddity and I'm blown away at how "hardware" it sounds. The Oddity just doesn't sound like a softsynth - it sounds like the real deal. Seems odd that an Odyssey emulation would sound fatter and richer than a Moog Modular emulation. I suppose much of Wendy Carlos' incredible sound (especially Switched on Bach II) is due to the beautiful production, but Arturia's demos don't have any of that "huge bank of electronics" sound I was hoping for. Hopefully I'm mistaken and the final release will be fat and amazing.

I thought the same of the Oddity demos... but I bought it anyways (I'm a sucker for these retro things) and was surprised how good the synth sounds. I have high hopes for the Arturia Modular... I think those demos are just recorded very neutral, but the overall sound is already much more smooth and "analogish" than many other VSTi's... rest of the punch might be very easy added by eq-ing and mixing...

I dont count Wendy Carlos as definitive moog. Sure it was done on a moog but I find it a very pompous album and was dissapointed. However I was stunned by Tomita and his renditions of classics. If you want to hear the Moog Modular shine then early Tomita demonstrate the real Moog electronic sound with style and imagination.

It is true that I was dissapointed at the "Leaked" beta since there was only about 4 presets that distinguished it. Hopefully they will have a lot more on final release. However after some twiddling this VSTi truly sounds amazing and unique. The presets in the beta do not show of the true potential of this amazing synth. But like I say it will change and I was able to get some cool early TD sounds out of it and complete madness.

Bluey.

I got a chance to play with the beta. It sounds great. My only complaint thus far is the lack of a ring mod module.

- Michael nil-x

Hey nevermind I was experimenting and you can ring mod with the mixer, heh. What do you know... plus lfo the modulator osc and it can get very complex ring mod effects. That sealed the deal, this thing is great, can't wait to buy the final version.

- Michael nil-x

nil-x wrote:

Hey nevermind I was experimenting and you can ring mod with the mixer, heh. What do you know... plus lfo the modulator osc and it can get very complex ring mod effects. That sealed the deal, this thing is great, can't wait to buy the final version. - Michael nil-x

Hey Michael, could you explain in detail how to do this ? Thanks

I dunno, it just seems like it doesn't have enough knobs to me.

Borogove wrote:

I dunno, it just seems like it doesn't have enough knobs to me.

Your joking right

killiuno wrote:

Hey Michael, could you explain in detail how to do this ? Thanks

Creating a ring mod type effect:

Create a basic patch using the mixer (Osc to mixer to filter to Amp/ADSR).
Connect the output of a second oscillator to the mod in of the mixer channel that the first oscillator is connected to (and change the mod amount positive or negative). This modulates the volume of the first oscillator with the frequency of the second.
This can be done with multiple oscillators in stereo for even stranger effects. True not exactly a ring mod but still similar sounding.

Hope this helps.

- Michael nil-x

that's not the same thing as ring modulation,though:-)

yeah and there is no S/H module neither, I looked at the modules that where available and some are missing. I really do not know what the true definition of this modular is ... but I assume new modules will be added in time.

I dont understand the developers also. Once again they have made a system that is limited by software and not the hardware. You should be able to add as many modules as you like, hence why its called "modular".

However this is no reflection to the product really, because with all that it offers, its still an amazing piece of work and offers more than most people would require.

But I feel that to get the full comparison of the product, somebody who actually used modulars extensively would be required to comment on just how good and true this is, since who here has used a modular extensively to make a comparison.

I see they now have the Moog name on it, which lends a certain cred value to the product. I'm curious was this because it had to be tested before bob moog himself, and was bob moog actually involved somewhere alone the line for it to be called Moog.

It is also a common belief of associating Jean Michel Jarre with the Modular. In his own words "I use both the ARP 2600 and the ARP 2500, and sometimes the Moog III, but that not so much. I use a VCS-3 synthesizer which is very interesting, mainly because of the matrix board. It's the only [modular] synthesizer that doesn't use patch cords. Wires are not so easy to use, because after about 20 wires you are a bit lost, but with the matrix board you have just pins, and it's very clear." .....

Bluey.

the ring modulator is electonic schematic with diods and transformer which allow to multiply two signal. When you do AM modulation, You multiply two signal. Most of the ring modulation multiply the input signal with a internal sinusoid.

I am curious about this beta ver. is there any limit function or any expire date ? and is it really sound good???? just curious about opinion for those betatester's experience:) and how many patch have develope on that beta now?.......wonder how good is it:)

I guess this is old news now, but this beta 4 is brilliant, i've never the oppertunity with h/w ver., but i think i'll be home from work tomorrow.

andrewfa wrote:

I hate to say this, but the mp3 demos on Arturia's website sound like thin cheezy simulations of a Moog to me. The Oddity just doesn't sound like a softsynth - it sounds like the real deal. Hopefully I'm mistaken and the final release will be fat and amazing.

Yes it will. Arturia asked me to make a demo for them (not on their site yet) and I compared the Oddity and the Modular. And I can say that the Oddity sounds muddy and has no power compared to the Modular.

c_huelsbeck wrote:

I think those demos are just recorded very neutral, ... rest of the punch might be very easy added by eq-ing and mixing...

I don't need to put any eq for a Modular part, except sometimes in the high when I need to add some air, I can do some extreme eqs without problems. But the basses are very strong and well balanced like for a real instrument.
Oh yes I like it

fgfab
http://www.fabricegabriel.com/

very instructive discusssion there

http://forum.cubase.net/forum/Forum4/HTML/008246-2.html

Arturia Moog Modular V sound better or not the real thing ?