KVR Audio

macmurphy · Post by **macmurphy** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 7:34 pm

Well, that's an interesting read ghettosynth.
But to my ears at least, my Mopho doesn't sound thin...
I dunno, maybe i haven't had enough experience with analogue synths or my ears are f**ked from too many years of loud music

ghettosynth · Post by **ghettosynth** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 7:47 pm

Shy · Post by **Shy** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:06 pm

Can you really hear any harshness with that quality?

That youtube sound quality is harsh all around. Tetra/Mopho does indeed sound "glossy" compared to some analog synths with VCOs and different filters, its raw oscillator sound can be "buzzy", and various modulations can make it sound "glitchy" very fast instead of "stable" and raw. It's -very- different from my Little Phatty for example. But, guess what, I really like that sound. It reminds me of the sound of video game console chips (which I'm a huge fan of) but on steroids. The filter does get "harsh", but that can be "fixed" in various ways. The envelopes are not nearly as "snappy" as my LP's, but that's not unique to DCO synths or whatever, most "fully analog" synths don't excel at that. Anyway, I think it sounds really nice and has great uses, even if it it can't replace a "true analog" synth.

ghettosynth · Post by **ghettosynth** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 9:18 pm

zerocrossing · Post by **zerocrossing** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 9:52 pm

macmurphy wrote:
Dogboy73 wrote:
illsub1 wrote:I think the Dave Smith caters to poly because it sounds THIN! Head to head with a moog little phatty or voyager is no comparison! Might as well save to get the best. Sound beats specs any day.

Hmm. Interesting comparison. If you can put up with the fellas awful playing

I don't understand what's interesting about it. It's meaningless. First of all the two instruments aren't even in tune, and it's quite obvious the Prophet is a lot louder. That effects everything from your brain's perception of the sound to how it reacts to the preamp it's running into... and then top it all off with horrible youtube compression and you end up with a guy noodling around on two different synths, nothing more.

But... frankly disregarding all that, I like the sound of the Prophet a lot more than the miniMoog. The moog sounds tame in comparison. Limp. I have no idea how you could call the DSI stuff "thin." What does that word even mean to you? To me it means lacking in the mid and bass frequencies. Ridiculous. My Mopho is oozing with big phat bass tones.

As an actual owner I'll tell you that this is a true example of the sound you will get from it:

http://www.dsisynth.com/audio/mopho_dem ... o-rock.mp3

What you're calling harsh, I call "rude." I love that tone. I'm not going to use it to try and make Vangelis style pads, because that would be silly. However and angry bass line or a screaming lead, it's my go to synth.

I'm not cutting down Moog products at all though I wish they'd figure out a way to make them more affordable. Trust me, if money were no object I'd be on my way to buy a Voyager right now. It wouldn't make me want to get rid of the MoPho though, just like getting a new bandsaw wouldn't make you want to though your nail gun away.

zerocrossing · Post by **zerocrossing** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 10:04 pm

ghettosynth wrote:If you're debating between a tetra or a Jupiter4 because they both have four voices and an analog filter then I think that you are deluding yourself to believe
that one can replace the other and in particular that the modern variant will sound AS "analog" as the vintage machine.

Yup, I agree the debate would be silly, as a Tetr4 is something that you can purchase and a Jupiter 4 isn't... without a huge amount of hassle and expense. I just trolled the web for a while and found not a one.

ghettosynth wrote:If you want an updated machine with an updated mid-80s "analog sound", then you can get that from the DSI synths.

Yup, that's what I want. Well, one of the things. Truthfully I want it all, but there are practical issues I have to contend with. First of all, I lost my job a month ago. Well, I know where it is, it's just that the product I was working on is pretty much dead and buried. Chalk it up to the economy. Also, there's the matter of "good" and "good enough." I sit alone in my room and fiddle with my music. It's something I do for myself and I have a blast doing it, but I also realize that spending an extra few grand for an instrument that's going to give me a 1% increase in sound quality makes no sense. The world I live in is the world where you can get an affordable hardware synth every now and then, but for the rest there are some very good emulations out there that sound great to me. (though I was kind of disappointed by Arturia's Jupiter8 emulation)

ghettosynth · Post by **ghettosynth** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 11:20 pm

macmurphy · Post by **macmurphy** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 6:06 am

zerocrossing wrote:
macmurphy wrote:
Dogboy73 wrote:
illsub1 wrote:I think the Dave Smith caters to poly because it sounds THIN! Head to head with a moog little phatty or voyager is no comparison! Might as well save to get the best. Sound beats specs any day.

Hmm. Interesting comparison. If you can put up with the fellas awful playing
I don't understand what's interesting about it.

Heh, well forgive me for being interested

What i didn't mention is that i preferred the Prophet to the Mini.

I use the Mopho for bass in pretty much all my tunes now. Yeah you can make it harsh and rude or whatever but you can also get some really creamy sounds from it. I find it a very versatile synth.

Dogboy73 · Post by **Dogboy73** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:05 am

Shy wrote:Can you really hear any harshness with that quality? That youtube sound quality is harsh all around.

I recorded the sound from the Tetra into my sequencer & dubbed this over the video I made with my digital camera. This was rendered as an MPEG2 video with CD quality audio but I had to squash things down quite a lot using Riva flv encoder to get the file size reasonable for uploading to YouTube. After all that my lovely sounding Tetra recordings sounded a bit pants. You can hear the characteristics of the sound coming through but the sound quality is degraded to grainy & harsh. Not the best way to demo a synth I admit.

stonestreet · Post by **stonestreet** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:13 am

Hi chaps

I am not an expert synth programmer by any stretch of the imagination. Some of you guys mention snappy pizza, whoops snappy envelopes. Now I can see that with the Mopho you can modulate the envelope parameters by the envelope itself, positive or negative. So if you modulate the envelope attack positively does this make the envelope more 'snappy'? I have read something somewhere along these lines however not having ever owned a synth that is known for snappy envelopes I am not trained in knowing the difference. I would certainly like to hear from you guys if this is a valid workaround.

zerocrossing: maybe you have answered your own original question regarding your decision on the choices available to you. accvi's comments seem relevant to me. I hope your work situation gets sorted soon.

For me, I think the Mopho will last me years with what it has to offer.

Have fun Mark

ghettosynth · Post by **ghettosynth** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:20 am

Dogboy73 · Post by **Dogboy73** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 8:58 am

Added another vid on YouTube last night. More to follow soon;

Grain Bastard · Post by **Grain Bastard** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 11:27 am

Lol, my suspicions are confirmed - It is now a fact that DSI synth owners are the new demon in the synthesist's world.

Basically we are hated by both the software heads who think we have wasted our money on a hunk of steel that sounds no better than 'X' synthedit creation and the hardware guys who have seen their 'pensions' dip in value since no one wants to buy their old tat for ridiculously inflated prices, now that you can buy something new for less.

Interestingly, both parties suggest 'to use software' as it suits both agenda's and that is obviously financially motivated.

My favourite line so far was the notion that we (DSI users) simply add up the figures and assume that we have the top-of-the-line in analogue synthesis...... Yes indeed, apparently if you want a synth to sound like a Jupiter4 then you actually have to buy a Roland Jupiter4 - you can't just buy any old synth!!!! Maybe that's where I went wrong when I wanted a car that goes round a track like a Ferrari - (well I got something from Datsun that has the same shit like wheels and an engine but it don't quite go the same, mmmmmmmnn.)

Anyway, I'm off to enjoy my 'thin, sterile, static and no better than software' synth. I can be happy even though I'm potentially a deaf-retard according to the wisdom of the web........

<---- that means I'm just having a laugh with you, don't bite.

Peace.

macmurphy · Post by **macmurphy** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 11:37 am

Nicely put Mr Bastard

Neil.

Dogboy73 · Post by **Dogboy73** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 1:53 pm

macmurphy wrote:Nicely put Mr Bastard

Indeed. It's the way it is. Your never going to get a vintage synth enthusiast admitting that any modern equivelent is as good. If for example Roland re-launched the Juno 106 complete with identical parts as the original people would still say it doesn't sound like the original. It's as if Vintage synths age like fine wines. They improve with age & that, whatever that something is, can only be made over time.

Further to that point I think vintage synths are admired as much for their 'vintage' as their sound. We should remember that the advent of digital synthesizers had musicians throwing out their old analogue gear because they suddenly thought it was crap! My mate bought a Roland TB303 for £50 in 1990. You'd be lucky to get one now for much less than a grand!! That's echoed for most vintage synths, which is another reason the DSI Tetra was so appealing (that and the fact it had 'analog' written on the front of it

)

Tetra... Prophet 08 rack or something else?