Cherry Audio's next synth is (probably) a Polivoks on steroids

[bobbackwards]

Yeah, I got core + drums, Year 1, Year 3, and PSP ultimate all on sale. Will probably get Andrew Macauley's everything bundle before it leaves sale as well. I picked up VM a little over a week ago and have spent a dozen hours or more learning to create new patches. I have had Tassman for years, but I have only ever used presets, mainly b/c the UI is tiny and unintuitive. I have some second hand experience with hardware modular synths as I spent a decade in a prog rock band (I know... but it was fun) With a talented and prolific synth freak. But fooling around at rehearsel randomly plugging in cables while the keyboard player was on a smoke break did not really prepare me with how much fun sound design with a modular can be...I have yet to get a decent sound out of more than a simple mono lead but I have already gotten my money's worth out of the software, which is more than I can say for some purchases (I'm looking at you amplitube). Anyway, to get back to the OP, I think that at least in the case of the CA synths I own, a healthy discussion thread is definitely warranted. Sound design in Atomika is pretty straight forward, and even though I am 50% or more presets in my music I am more experimental with the quirkier stuff.

[IvyBirds]

You likely weren't aware of the Polivoks before this plugin, not a lot of people were. I was, it's always been on my radar, a more aggressive Minimoog has a place for sure.

Actually I have been well aware of the Polivocks and other Soviet Era Synths and electronics for a very long time. In fact before he passed away very suddenly in a tragic car accident my brother in law used to travel to Russia, Ukraine, Latvia and other former Soviet Union countries for his work on a regular basis and I asked him to keep an eye out for many Russian Synths, but he only made one trip after that and didn't find any

However thanks for proving my point that a "more aggressive Minimoog has a place for sure"

Of course it does, it's the aggressive part that makes this unique, not the non aggressive stuff

[machinesworking]

You likely weren't aware of the Polivoks before this plugin, not a lot of people were. I was, it's always been on my radar, a more aggressive Minimoog has a place for sure.

Actually I have been well aware of the Polivocks and other Soviet Era Synths and electronics for a very long time. In fact before he passed away very suddenly in a tragic car accident my brother in law used to travel to Russia, Ukraine, Latvia and other former Soviet Union countries for his work on a regular basis and I asked him to keep an eye out for many Russian Synths, but he only made one trip after that and didn't find any

However thanks for proving my point that a "more aggressive Minimoog has a place for sure"

Of course it does, it's the aggressive part that makes this unique, not the non aggressive stuff

Again, it's the rare nature of the synth that makes for the difference in popularity, Junos being common have sentimental value. You can consistently ignore that fact, but it doesn't change it.

[machinesworking]

There are plenty of popular modern synths that are marketed as aggressive or biting etc. They don't have sentimental value or a particularly clean sound bias in marketing, and they didn't have to. The argument I put up was that emulations of classic synths rely on sentimental value with a certain older crowd, and name recognition among a the younger audience. That, is the main reason for a 40 page thread on the Juno etc. VS this synth. Plus there are some pretty dodgy Cherry emulations in the past that make for some hesitation in buying, I could be counted in that category.

[Shabdahbriah]

I checked out CA's other stuff and quickly went down the Voltage Modular rabbit hole.

Voltage Modular is one of my favorite pieces of music software ever. I love to run it in stand alone to host other plugins that's where the magic really starts. It becomes almost like a DAW

That's exactly what (and why) I use it for as well. I prefer doing that to opening and dealing with the overhead/quirks of a "DAW". I only occasionally use one for the piano roll anyway, as I do all of my recording, editing, and comping in SoundForge (since v1.0)

[zerocrossing]

There are plenty of popular modern synths that are marketed as aggressive or biting etc. They don't have sentimental value or a particularly clean sound bias in marketing, and they didn't have to. The argument I put up was that emulations of classic synths rely on sentimental value with a certain older crowd, and name recognition among a the younger audience. That, is the main reason for a 40 page thread on the Juno etc. VS this synth. Plus there are some pretty dodgy Cherry emulations in the past that make for some hesitation in buying, I could be counted in that category.

I would add that younger people's interest in vintage synths has more to do with a sense of legitimacy and authenticity. Name recognition sort of is a secondary attribute. More people know the name Moog because it was a winner in it's market and made a lasting impression, of course it did this by also making a great product, so it's a bit chicken-eggy.

I'd say that in America, there's almost no name recognition for Polivoks amongst the general electronic music musicians, though it's been slowly increasing. I had no idea they existed until 2008, when Stillwell Audio released Olga.

[Shabdahbriah]

There are plenty of popular modern synths that are marketed as aggressive or biting etc. They don't have sentimental value or a particularly clean sound bias in marketing, and they didn't have to. The argument I put up was that emulations of classic synths rely on sentimental value with a certain older crowd, and name recognition among a the younger audience. That, is the main reason for a 40 page thread on the Juno etc. VS this synth. Plus there are some pretty dodgy Cherry emulations in the past that make for some hesitation in buying, I could be counted in that category.

I would add that younger people's interest in vintage synths has more to do with a sense of legitimacy and authenticity. Name recognition sort of is a secondary attribute. More people know the name Moog because it was a winner in it's market and made a lasting impression, of course it did this by also making a great product, so it's a bit chicken-eggy.

I'd say that in America, there's almost no name recognition for Polivoks amongst the general electronic music musicians, though it's been slowly increasing. I had no idea they existed until 2008, when Stillwell Audio released Olga.

Same

[machinesworking]

I would add that younger people's interest in vintage synths has more to do with a sense of legitimacy and authenticity. Name recognition sort of is a secondary attribute. More people know the name Moog because it was a winner in it's market and made a lasting impression, of course it did this by also making a great product, so it's a bit chicken-eggy.

I'd say that in America, there's almost no name recognition for Polivoks amongst the general electronic music musicians, though it's been slowly increasing. I had no idea they existed until 2008, when Stillwell Audio released Olga.

Yep, no one is buying Atomika because of Polivoks name recognition, but 100% any Mini emu is getting noticed. It explains why there is only a few emulations of it VS the Mini or Juno. In terms of actual sound quality or versatility it's just not as much a part of the discussion as is branding.

Even with big brands marketing is a bigger issue than sound, the Matrix 12 and Xpander were arguably better synths than the OBXa etc. but they did not gain the market share. So we have only one Xpander/Matrix emu I know of. [OK better envelopes on the OB's but that isn't an issue for an emulation]

[zerocrossing]

I would add that younger people's interest in vintage synths has more to do with a sense of legitimacy and authenticity. Name recognition sort of is a secondary attribute. More people know the name Moog because it was a winner in it's market and made a lasting impression, of course it did this by also making a great product, so it's a bit chicken-eggy.

I'd say that in America, there's almost no name recognition for Polivoks amongst the general electronic music musicians, though it's been slowly increasing. I had no idea they existed until 2008, when Stillwell Audio released Olga.

Yep, no one is buying Atomika because of Polivoks name recognition, but 100% any Mini emu is getting noticed. It explains why there is only a few emulations of it VS the Mini or Juno. In terms of actual sound quality or versatility it's just not as much a part of the discussion as is branding.

Even with big brands marketing is a bigger issue than sound, the Matrix 12 and Xpander were arguably better synths than the OBXa etc. but they did not gain the market share. So we have only one Xpander/Matrix emu I know of. [OK better envelopes on the OB's but that isn't an issue for an emulation]

Fully agree, though I wouldn't say "no one," as there have been increased interest in vintage analog synths in general, plus Russia trying to get the Soviet Union back together puts the idea of Russia more in the forefront, and I would add that it's quirky and aggressive nature make it well suited for the plugin user that has everything. I have Monark, Minimonsta 2, The Legend, Model 72 and UAD's Model D. You'd have to come up with something pretty special to make me try your Model D plugin, but the Polivoks is novel in comparison, so that instantly makes it more interesting.

Whether or not it's character is something that appeals to you, is an entirely different story. I like stuff like this, but I won't pick up anything that doesn't support polyphonic aftertouch or MPE, so it's off my list. Maybe at some point, if they add those things.

[IvyBirds]

Even with big brands marketing is a bigger issue than sound, the Matrix 12 and Xpander were arguably better synths than the OBXa etc. but they did not gain the market share. So we have only one Xpander/Matrix emu I know of. [OK better envelopes on the OB's but that isn't an issue for an emulation]

Eddie Van Halen used an OBXa to play Jump, it was highly visible in the music video, everyone who was into synths when 1984 came out wanted to jam out to that

By the time the Matrix 12 came out in 1985 it was a commercial flop and Oberheim went bankrupt because post DX7 digital synths ruled the world

People under 40 or 50 have no nostalgia for 80s Synths unless they are on records that they like. Jump was a massive mega hit and remains one today

As such there is a lot of nostalgia for OBXa

There is very little nostalgia for Soviet Synths, as they just were not used on hit records in the West , and even in the Soviet Union they were a rarity as the average Soviet Citizen in the 80s was focused on eating, more than Synths

[BONES]

What I find equally interesting is that the Junos are so well regarded these days. At the time they were cheap, entry-level instruments whose main attributes were patch memory and a decent number of keys for not a lot of money. They sold on price, not sound. I honestly can't recall ever seeing one on stage back in the day. I could never understand why the two osc JX-3P wasn't more popular, it was a much better synth.

This plugin is being marketed and reviewed as a dirty aggressive monster of a synth.

In marketing terms, that's called a "point of difference", which is something that differentiates your product from everyone else's. Who would be interested in it if the marketing blurb said "this synth does what every other synth can already do"? If you understand synths, you'd know that without having to be told.

Fair or not that is reality and no one is buying this to get Minimoog sounds

I have four different MiniMoog emulations but I didn't buy any of them to get MiniMoog sounds. As I said, that is a deeply flawed way of looking at things. If I am being honest, I don't even know what that means because a Model D is a synth, it can sound like almost anything you want it to (except deep, squelchy bass, thanks to it's shithouse filter).

Nothing special about CA synths, it's nice to have them but you can do without them.
Atomika presets and demos show nothing special, it's just another CA synth, nothing unique about it.

I used to think that way but this is definitely not that kind of Cherry Audio product. This thing is the real deal. I thought they did a decent job on their SEM clone but this and their ARP Soloist are on a completely different level. I have no idea how well they emulate the synths they are based on, they just sound f**king great!

More people know the name Moog because it was a winner in it's market and made a lasting impression

That may be true in the US but you never saw Moogs out here. The Model D I got to play around with in a second-hand shop in 1982 is the only one I have ever seen first-hand in my life.

Even with big brands marketing is a bigger issue than sound, the Matrix 12 and Xpander were arguably better synths than the OBXa etc. but they did not gain the market share.

That's an interesting perspective because, here in Australia, Sequential was far and away the dominant US brand. In fact, around 1980 it was pretty much the only US brand you ever saw - Prophet Vs and Pro-Ones were everywhere. Yet by 1983, Oberheim had made huge gains with the OB-Xa. And OB-Xa was the first Oberheim synth I'd ever seen here, so they had to be doing something right to gain ground so quickly. Of course, Jupiter 8 was still the daddy. That Matrix 12 and XPander didn't do so well is probably more down to the fact that everyone already had what they wanted - a poly synth with patch memory - so they weren't interested in trading up.

[IvyBirds]

What I find equally interesting is that the Junos are so well regarded these days. At the time they were cheap, entry-level instruments whose main attributes were patch memory and a decent number of keys for not a lot of money. They sold on price, not sound. I honestly can't recall ever seeing one on stage back in the day.

Juno's were everywhere in the 1980s here in America and they were used on a ton of records as well. Everyone from Madonna to Enya to Guns 'n Roses to Vince Clarke to Vangelis used them on giant hit records

Pretty sure all of them could have purchased any synth they wanted or booked a studio that had any synth they wanted. They chose the Juno for its sound not because it was cheap

[stoopicus]

What I find equally interesting is that the Junos are so well regarded these days. At the time they were cheap, entry-level instruments whose main attributes were patch memory and a decent number of keys for not a lot of money. They sold on price, not sound. I honestly can't recall ever seeing one on stage back in the day.

Juno's were everywhere in the 1980s here in America and they were used on a ton of records as well. Everyone from Madonna to Enya to Guns 'n Roses to Vince Clarke to Vangelis used them on giant hit records

Pretty sure all of them could have purchased any synth they wanted or booked a studio that had any synth they wanted. They chose the Juno for its sound not because it was cheap

Actually you're both right, which was kind of my point way above - the Juno was a popular synth because it was simple, less expensive, and easy to get good '80s sounds out of. They were used a lot because they were easy to use and sounded great, and especially had an iconic chorus. But it was pretty limited when compared to other synths at the time, even in comparison to earlier Roland synths like the Jupiter-8.

[IvyBirds]

What I find equally interesting is that the Junos are so well regarded these days. At the time they were cheap, entry-level instruments whose main attributes were patch memory and a decent number of keys for not a lot of money. They sold on price, not sound. I honestly can't recall ever seeing one on stage back in the day.

Juno's were everywhere in the 1980s here in America and they were used on a ton of records as well. Everyone from Madonna to Enya to Guns 'n Roses to Vince Clarke to Vangelis used them on giant hit records

Pretty sure all of them could have purchased any synth they wanted or booked a studio that had any synth they wanted. They chose the Juno for its sound not because it was cheap

Actually you're both right, which was kind of my point way above - the Juno was a popular synth because it was simple, less expensive, and easy to get good '80s sounds out of. They were used a lot because they were easy to use and sounded great, and especially had an iconic chorus. But it was pretty limited when compared to other synths at the time, even in comparison to earlier Roland synths like the Jupiter-8.

So did people buy them because they sounded great, or just because they were cheap

Bones said "They sold on price, not sound" I 100% disagree with that statement, why do you agree with Bones?

Tell me why do you think the Juno sounds like shit and the only reason anyone would use them is because it's all they could afford?

Again they were not used on Grammy winning, platinum selling records, that were recorded in big money studios because they were cheap. They were used because of their sound.

[carrieres]

We can't know if they were used for their sound because we need to ask each artist their reason to use a Juno synth.
What is a fact is that the Juno serie was a cheap serie in price and feature (only one osc) against the Jupiter and JX synth series.
They were sold by Roland like entry level synths (cheap), it doesn't imply that the sound is bad.