Hi Scot, Yes, that's the article.Scot Solida wrote:Actually...If you are referring to the vintage vs. virtual feature, I wrote that one, and I found both virtual versions to be pretty much on a par with each other. Each had its plusses and minuses. It really depends on what you are after. I found that, compared to my particular Minimoog, Arturia came closest with the upper frequencies, while Minimonsta fared better at the lower end of the spectrum. Both were brighter than my Model D. Now, side by side with a different Model D, the results might not be the same. Minimonsta is overall a better and more flexible instrument and comes damned close to the real thing, though MinimoogV exhibited the same kind of overall wooliness (sorry, can't think of a better term to describe it) that my Model D has. It'd be very difficult to choose between the two virtual versions. Sounds wishy washy, but they both kick ass.TotcProductions wrote:I LOVE MINIMONSTA!!!!
The last computer music issue I read favored Arturia's MiniMoogV better, and I suppose I can see where they're coming from, has a more, I don't know, dry sound?I don't know....IMHO the Minimoog is alot thicker.
Very nice article actually, It really laid down a straight approach to the mathematical impossibility of anyone ever creating a "perfect" software resurrection of any old analog hardware, due to the inconsistencies inbetween analog models themselves. Very well written.
I just like the playability of the MiniMonsta better...Something about the Arturia version, IMO, is a bit less than inviting...On the Minimonsta however, lol, I keep trying to make a patch bank for it and I can't due to the fact that I just can't stop playing it. Just takes ahold of a fellow. 
I wholeheartedly agree on the playability of the Minimonsta. It feels like an musical instrument, even when using a MIDI keyboard controller. You can tell that this was designed to please people who really could play keys. Those guys went far beyond just an emulation and created something that inspires new music. To be honest, a Mini emu isn't all that important to me (pats the Model D lovingly), but something that takes the spirit of the original and gives it something new and different...that's special.TotcProductions wrote:Hi Scot, Yes, that's the article.Scot Solida wrote:Actually...If you are referring to the vintage vs. virtual feature, I wrote that one, and I found both virtual versions to be pretty much on a par with each other. Each had its plusses and minuses. It really depends on what you are after. I found that, compared to my particular Minimoog, Arturia came closest with the upper frequencies, while Minimonsta fared better at the lower end of the spectrum. Both were brighter than my Model D. Now, side by side with a different Model D, the results might not be the same. Minimonsta is overall a better and more flexible instrument and comes damned close to the real thing, though MinimoogV exhibited the same kind of overall wooliness (sorry, can't think of a better term to describe it) that my Model D has. It'd be very difficult to choose between the two virtual versions. Sounds wishy washy, but they both kick ass.TotcProductions wrote:I LOVE MINIMONSTA!!!!
The last computer music issue I read favored Arturia's MiniMoogV better, and I suppose I can see where they're coming from, has a more, I don't know, dry sound?
Anyways, yeah, that must have been what stuck in my mind was the MinimoogV having that "wooliness" you describe. Nothing wishy washy about it, they do both kick ass.
Peace
Audiomidi is an excellent company. Their head honcho has been in this business for decades (he worked with companies who made some classic synths back in ye good olde days) and they are pretty hard to beat for price. I had some issues with them on my first order (it was the delivery company's error), but they more than made up for it afterwards.Vonbrucken wrote: by the way is it a reliable company this audiomidi dot com ?
cause the vintage bundle is really cheap
Thanks for the compliments. That means more to me than you can know, 'specially coming from someone whose own talents are as considerable as your own. I was quite pleased that CM went for it. Having spent an ungodly amount of money over the years on vintage things, and having heard so many misconceptions (and some just plain bullshit) by retro-fetishists, I thought it might be a good idea. A lot of people are surprised to learn that I don't actually think vintage gear is inherently better than modern stuff. Quite the contrary. I find most of it to be a pain in the ass. However, there are a few that are works of art and masterpieces of design and ingenuity. Historically significant as well. Those items hold a certain appeal for me. But are they better than modern stuff? In my opinion, no. I don't think so. Maybe preferable for some jobs by some people, and certainly a lot of fun to collect and mess with, but I don't feel that they are in some way superior. Like I always say, it's what you play, not what you play with that counts.TotcProductions wrote:Hi Scot, Yes, that's the article.
Oh, hell yeah. Can't miss that one, either! Finally, a Live that recognizes my dual processor...Vonbrucken wrote:i am really looking for this bargain just the time i save up some money ,cause seems ableton is running after my money with the version 6 coming out
Agreed.Scot Solida wrote:Thanks for the compliments. That means more to me than you can know, 'specially coming from someone whose own talents are as considerable as your own. I was quite pleased that CM went for it. Having spent an ungodly amount of money over the years on vintage things, and having heard so many misconceptions (and some just plain bullshit) by retro-fetishists, I thought it might be a good idea. A lot of people are surprised to learn that I don't actually think vintage gear is inherently better than modern stuff. Quite the contrary. I find most of it to be a pain in the ass. However, there are a few that are works of art and masterpieces of design and ingenuity. Historically significant as well. Those items hold a certain appeal for me. But are they better than modern stuff? In my opinion, no. I don't think so. Maybe preferable for some jobs by some people, and certainly a lot of fun to collect and mess with, but I don't feel that they are in some way superior. Like I always say, it's what you play, not what you play with that counts.TotcProductions wrote:Hi Scot, Yes, that's the article.
Though I must confess to a sick pleasure taken in wrangling in a bunch of vintage synths percolating away, all locked together in a symphony of sequencery. There is some strange beauty in lashing together a phalanx of archaic hardware sequencers and praying that it all works...
A million softsynths or analog hardware synths may appear similar in the number of oscillators, LPF's and ADSR's in common (as you stated), however these aren't the heart of a synth. The soul of the synth, the magic, the personality, the uniqueness is in the filter(s). Minimoog is no exception, so the 'authenticity' (subjective from user to user anyway) of a Minimoog in a software recreation depends more on the ability to recreate the sound of the filters in software. Given that, due to the nature of analog synth construction, and as someone pointed out two hardware Minimoog's aren't even identical sounding (read: the FILTERS aren't identical sounding) and therefore this discussion seems a bit trivial to me - which plugin is closest to something that isn't static to begin with.Scot Solida wrote:<snip> The actual Minimoog is a special instrument, but let's face it, it has three oscillators, a lowpass filter and a couple of ADR envelopes...not dissimilar to a million softsynths. <snip>
Hi ScottScot Solida wrote:Actually...If you are referring to the vintage vs. virtual feature, I wrote that one, and I found both virtual versions to be pretty much on a par with each other. Each had its plusses and minuses. It really depends on what you are after. I found that, compared to my particular Minimoog, Arturia came closest with the upper frequencies, while Minimonsta fared better at the lower end of the spectrum. Both were brighter than my Model D. Now, side by side with a different Model D, the results might not be the same. Minimonsta is overall a better and more flexible instrument and comes damned close to the real thing, though MinimoogV exhibited the same kind of overall wooliness (sorry, can't think of a better term to describe it) that my Model D has. It'd be very difficult to choose between the two virtual versions. Sounds wishy washy, but they both kick ass.TotcProductions wrote:I LOVE MINIMONSTA!!!!
The last computer music issue I read favored Arturia's MiniMoogV better, and I suppose I can see where they're coming from, has a more, I don't know, dry sound?
, do you not feel/hear that there is just something really missing in the lower and higher end of the audio in vsti emulations of old analog as in lower end of keyboard and higher octaves.. I've just (last week) finished a 10 month, 3.2 gb, 13,762 samples, uber RSI in the wrist intensive sampling session for my first product. Submit: News, Plugins, Hosts & Apps | Advertise @ KVR | Developer Account | About KVR / Contact Us | Privacy Statement
© KVR Audio, Inc. 2000-2026
