Minimonsta is 11 years old and it still sounds like the best VA to me.

[zerocrossing]

If you get a chance give the Monark by Native Instruments a try. I have two hardware moogs in the studio and the Scope Minimax and plugiator versions which were considered the closest emulations until Monark. I'd say Monark is at the top of the heap but they all very good. I probably wouldn't have purchased Monark but it came with Komplete Ultimate. I use it a lot. It is hungry for CPU but is worth the toll.

I have it, as a Komplete owner. As mentioned in my OP, I just don't like it. I've done A/B tests programming things on Monark and Minimonsta. For my tastes, Minimonsta always sounds better. And, it's much more fun to program -- the knobs on Monark are weirdly slow imo, so dialing in values is a PITA that it shouldn't be. Also, Minimonsta just offers far more modulation capabilities, since it's not (like Monark) a literal-minded emulation. I also like how easy it is to dial in MIDI mod control, like Velocity > Cutoff or Volume, etc.

But the main factor for me, again, is the quality of the sound, the character I find it has. Monark sounds...alright, but can also sound brittle and hard to my ears; I know, useless descriptors probably, but that's my feeling on it. I guess the point at the end of the day is that I love the Gforce/ Minimonsta "sound," regardless of whether it's more or less authentic than any other emulation. For the music I'm writing with it, though, it sounds to me the most satisfyingly retro-analog.

-M

I feel the same way about Monark being too literal but I do think it's sound is the best. Even a bit better than Minimax running on my Xite-1, though to be fair, minimax is polyphonic. Here's the thing, you can use the new Moog inspired Blocks in Reaktor 6 and leave those limits behind. (except for polyphony )

[Scotty]

I did miss your reference to the Monark, I have to read more carefully as it was very obviously stated that you have it and have worked with it. As stated they are all pretty amazing emulations and workflow can trump authenticity especially if it inspires you to create. Afterall that is the name of the game. - Scotty

If you get a chance give the Monark by Native Instruments a try. I have two hardware moogs in the studio and the Scope Minimax and plugiator versions which were considered the closest emulations until Monark. I'd say Monark is at the top of the heap but they all very good. I probably wouldn't have purchased Monark but it came with Komplete Ultimate. I use it a lot. It is hungry for CPU but is worth the toll.

I have it, as a Komplete owner. As mentioned in my OP, I just don't like it. I've done A/B tests programming things on Monark and Minimonsta. For my tastes, Minimonsta always sounds better. And, it's much more fun to program -- the knobs on Monark are weirdly slow imo, so dialing in values is a PITA that it shouldn't be. Also, Minimonsta just offers far more modulation capabilities, since it's not (like Monark) a literal-minded emulation. I also like how easy it is to dial in MIDI mod control, like Velocity > Cutoff or Volume, etc.

But the main factor for me, again, is the quality of the sound, the character I find it has. Monark sounds...alright, but can also sound brittle and hard to my ears; I know, useless descriptors probably, but that's my feeling on it. I guess the point at the end of the day is that I love the Gforce/ Minimonsta "sound," regardless of whether it's more or less authentic than any other emulation. For the music I'm writing with it, though, it sounds to me the most satisfyingly retro-analog.

-M

[chk071]

Monark sounds amazing, and has the snappiest envelopes i've ever witnessed on a soft synth. The only reason i got rid of it was that i don't really have a use for such a limited, monophonic synth, and the distortion on the filter was also a tad too much sometimes. But i have yet to come along a soft synth which seemed to do the analog thing better to my ears than Monark. I've demo'd Diva right after, and sorry, not the same class. I know i might get bashed for saying that, but compared, Diva sounded like yet another soft synth to me. It's surely is good, but Monark is just excellent at what it does.

[beely]

Most of my favourite uses of Minimonsta is as a polysynth, not a Minimoog emulation, or a mono-synth anyway - so for those things, Monark, while indeed sounding great, doesn't do them.

[pdxindy]

Monark sounds amazing, and has the snappiest envelopes i've ever witnessed on a soft synth. The only reason i got rid of it was that i don't really have a use for such a limited, monophonic synth, and the distortion on the filter was also a tad too much sometimes. But i have yet to come along a soft synth which seemed to do the analog thing better to my ears than Monark. I've demo'd Diva right after, and sorry, not the same class. I know i might get bashed for saying that, but compared, Diva sounded like yet another soft synth to me. It's surely is good, but Monark is just excellent at what it does.

Analog poly's tend to be a bit tamer than the mono synths otherwise they do not sound good with polyphony. So yeah, Monark is the overall best MiniMoog emulation. But I disagree with you about Diva. Diva is in the same class... its like a classic analog poly synth. It also reflects a different character, NI stuff in general tends to be harder than the U-he stuff. The MiniMoog that U-he used to model Diva is also on the less aggressive side. Different aesthetic interests among different developers.

And of course Diva is not intended to be an ultimate emulation of a single synth. The Diva MS-20 filters are so full of character and vitality, while the Uhbie filter is so smoothly gorgeous. Those are world class, as good as anything out there, including Monark.

[fluffy_little_something]

Since the Minimoog only did what its time permitted and Monark is said to be an almost perfect emulation, I would not even be surprised if Minimonsta sounded better or were at least more usable and interesting.

But with various mono modes including retrigger options in modern poly synths, I fail to see the purpose of a mono synth. I would only use it for bass and maybe a lead sound, but would I even notice the difference in the mix? I doubt it.

[pdxindy]

Since the Minimoog only did what its time permitted and Monark is said to be an almost perfect emulation, I would not even be surprised if Minimonsta sounded better or were at least more usable and interesting.

But with various mono modes including retrigger options in modern poly synths, I fail to see the purpose of a mono synth. I would only use it for bass and maybe a lead sound, but would I even notice the difference in the mix? I doubt it.

Maybe... but if you play on stage, there is something alive about a good analog mono-synth. A real MiniMoog sounds damn good on stage.

There is no need to be concerned about digital clipping or the sorts of not so nice sounding spots you get with digital synths... especially something older like the Minimonsta. If you do some life playing and tweak some knobs, Monark will behave much better than Minimonsta across a wide range of settngs... and a real Moog will be even better still. Start pushing a real Moog live and you will smile with visceral pleasure... Minimonsta will crap out.

[ghettosynth]

its a good low cpu synth, however the filter doesn't quite sound moogy to me.

EDIT: i'm poking around with it now in unison mode and it sounds great for the low CPU hit.

Yeah, pretty much. I think that when people like old VA synths that, in general, they must not be demanding too much of the filter. I've yet to find an older synth that is VA and sounds as good as the new crop of synths. That doesn't mean I don't use older synths, or even less capable ones, it just means that I know that they are limited when it comes to pushing the filter.

[annode]

Maybe... but if you play on stage, there is something alive about a good analog mono-synth. A real MiniMoog sounds damn good on stage.

When I saw Robert Plant his keyboardist used the Moog Voyager, and boy that thing cut right through. My blind friend sitting next to me said when he heard it "What the phuck is that?!".

It`s like that on "Tin Pan Alley" and " Dance on my Own".
What this has to do with the Minimonsta...well nothing really.
Oh yeah...mono unison oscillators.

[fluffy_little_something]

Since the Minimoog only did what its time permitted and Monark is said to be an almost perfect emulation, I would not even be surprised if Minimonsta sounded better or were at least more usable and interesting.

But with various mono modes including retrigger options in modern poly synths, I fail to see the purpose of a mono synth. I would only use it for bass and maybe a lead sound, but would I even notice the difference in the mix? I doubt it.

Maybe... but if you play on stage, there is something alive about a good analog mono-synth. A real MiniMoog sounds damn good on stage.

There is no need to be concerned about digital clipping or the sorts of not so nice sounding spots you get with digital synths... especially something older like the Minimonsta. If you do some life playing and tweak some knobs, Monark will behave much better than Minimonsta across a wide range of settngs... and a real Moog will be even better still. Start pushing a real Moog live and you will smile with visceral pleasure... Minimonsta will crap out.

Well, live I would not want to use any soft synth, frankly. Good hardware is simply more reliable, at least I would feel that way and thus feel more secure about playing.
In terms of sound, though, I think what matters is how people use a synth, whether or not they want it to stick out during a concert. One could also set up a good poly synth accordingly, even software, although maybe not the Minimonsta.
I won't even try it on my slow computer, but I have repeatedly that Diversion sounds awesome.

[fluffy_little_something]

Since the Minimoog only did what its time permitted and Monark is said to be an almost perfect emulation, I would not even be surprised if Minimonsta sounded better or were at least more usable and interesting.

But with various mono modes including retrigger options in modern poly synths, I fail to see the purpose of a mono synth. I would only use it for bass and maybe a lead sound, but would I even notice the difference in the mix? I doubt it.

Maybe... but if you play on stage, there is something alive about a good analog mono-synth. A real MiniMoog sounds damn good on stage.

There is no need to be concerned about digital clipping or the sorts of not so nice sounding spots you get with digital synths... especially something older like the Minimonsta. If you do some life playing and tweak some knobs, Monark will behave much better than Minimonsta across a wide range of settngs... and a real Moog will be even better still. Start pushing a real Moog live and you will smile with visceral pleasure... Minimonsta will crap out.

Well, live I would not want to use any soft synth, frankly. Good hardware is simply more reliable, at least I would feel that way and thus feel more secure about playing.
In terms of sound, though, I think what matters is how people use a synth, whether or not they want it to stick out during a concert. One could also set up a good poly synth accordingly, even software, although maybe not the Minimonsta.
I won't even try it on my slow computer, but I have read repeatedly that Diversion sounds awesome.

[mholloway]

Start pushing a real Moog live and you will smile with visceral pleasure... Minimonsta will crap out.

Could you be more specific what you mean here? How is it going to "crap out," specifically? And when you say "pushing" it what the heck are you actually referring to?

I'm not arguing what you're saying, I just think terms like "pushing it" and "it'll crap out" are pretty functionally useless in a discussion of A vs. B if you don't say what they actually mean

[pottering]

I could imagine various ways a synth could "crap out", but I was wondering what "pushing it" means in a synth context as well.

[ghettosynth]

Start pushing a real Moog live and you will smile with visceral pleasure... Minimonsta will crap out.

Could you be more specific what you mean here? How is it going to "crap out," specifically? And when you say "pushing" it what the heck are you actually referring to?

I'm not arguing what you're saying, I just think terms like "pushing it" and "it'll crap out" are pretty functionally useless in a discussion of A vs. B if you don't say what they actually mean

I can't speak for pdxindy, but, to me, pushing it refers to input overloading, extreme resonance settings, filter FM, and most importantly, rapid modulation, particularly of cutoff. If you can't hear how bad old filters sound compared to newer filters like Diva and Monark, then you probably aren't doing these things. Rapid modulation, and it doesn't have to be that rapid, you can hear it with filter sweeps, will reveal distortion from less accurate filter models.

[annode]

I just love how all you are willing to simply post audio examples...helping to support your points.
You`re not unique, I don`t see ppl doing it in any posts.