So I picked up a Moog Little Phatty...

[Urs]

Of course it goes higher. I stopped at a point that there's still something for us humans to enjoy.

Fair enough. Just saying that the LP's filter always filters a bit of the high end of the oscillators. So one can never hear the full frequency range of the oscs.

Just a quicky, here's something similar (albeit faster) to your example (a bit more drive and less resonance) which shows that some other analogue filters pretty much fully open up in the high end:

http://www.u-he.com/music/quickone.mp3

Urs

[Shy]

Of course there are filters that can be "opened up" in a way that there's no audible change to the oscillator (usually 1 or 2-pole ones). I've just never found them to be as good (or as some say, "musical") sounding as Moog's and some others'. Anyway, if I want a super sharp and crisp oscillator sound (which doesn't have as much use), I can always use the 1-pole filter.

[Grain Bastard]

Of course it goes higher. I stopped at a point that there's still something for us humans to enjoy.

Fair enough. Just saying that the LP's filter always filters a bit of the high end of the oscillators. So one can never hear the full frequency range of the oscs.

Urs

It has always said it does so on the front panel - 12k

http://www.sequencer.de/pix/moog/voyager_control.jpg

Never made them a bad instrument either

[Urs]

It has always said it does so on the front panel - 12k

Ah... doesn't say so on the LP's front panel. Thanks for the clarification!

Back on topic, I was argueing that WMP's suggested "contest" is a bit unfair towards the Little Phatty. Zebra's oscillators will always "win" in that contest because you simply can't get unfiltered oscillators out of the LP.

[emdot_ambient]

Take a single oscilator of the Phatty say a saw tooth, do the same with Zebra.
Have the filter fully open on both.
Now play a very very low note, and do the same with a very high note.
Hear the difference?

Maybe, but who cares? I've never made a song using the lowest and highest notes of a synth with the filters wide open

[emdot_ambient]

That was always the trouble with Moogs - they bring out the worst in keyboard players...I could never understand why.

Except Klaus Schulze. I didn't even know he used Minis until recently. But it's still one of his live synths.

I think that the Minimoog is so popular with many bands just because it's so easy to handle. I mean, the spectrum of sounds isn't overwhelming, I hear at once if someone plays on a Minimoog. Yes, it has the possibilities of the flywheel and vibrato and you can do some wailing and howling as Rick Wakeman does. The English in general like to wail, the portamento seems to be their pet sound these days.

That was from an interview in 1976. Wiser words were never spoken.

[emdot_ambient]

...I came to the conclusion that it wasn't necessarily better sounding (which is personal preference anyway), just different sounding from soft synths.

And that is the birth of wisdom.

[ozmoz2008]

...I will say that after this comparison - I like Zebra even more, am not a huge fan of Sylenth1 (cool sound, but seems to be bit of a one trick pony - need to spend more time with it though), and really need to read the manual for Massive

Thanks for reading - hopefully somebody finds this useful,
C

Agree with you on Sylenth, nothing to be so excited about.

I also think that many hardware synths are not better sounding than many software ones.

[Grain Bastard]

It has always said it does so on the front panel - 12k

Ah... doesn't say so on the LP's front panel. Thanks for the clarification!

Back on topic, I was argueing that WMP's suggested "contest" is a bit unfair towards the Little Phatty. Zebra's oscillators will always "win" in that contest because you simply can't get unfiltered oscillators out of the LP.

Actually Urs, I'm not 100% sure about the LP but the 'Moog filter' used in Mini's, Voyagers & the Moogerfooger filter does show this 12k, so I just assumed it was the same one. The LP has dual purpose encoders hasn't it so they aren't screen printed with numbers IIRC.

If the LP uses the same filter then your right, you can't get unfiltered oscillators from it.

Anyway, you do realise that Zebra would 'loose' the contest if it was to judge which synth has the most muffled 'open filter sound'.......

[Grain Bastard]

I also fund many hardware synths are not better sounding than many software ones.

I've funded a few too - sorry, couldn't resist.

You do realise that the sound isn't the only factor when choosing an instrument - It is of course extremely important and I find that many software synths are not better sounding than many hardware ones.

[buscemi]

I also fund many hardware synths are not better sounding than many software ones.

Yes, there are some crappy hardware AND software synths out there, film at 11.

[ozmoz2008]

I also find many hardware synths are not better sounding than many software ones.

I've funded a few too - sorry, couldn't resist.

You do realise that the sound isn't the only factor when choosing an instrument - It is of course extremely important and I find that many software synths are not better sounding than many hardware ones.

Great user name.

Sorry for the typo. Nevertheless my opinion is the same. I don't particularly like hiss and dust. I hope you don't think you are making me realise something new about synths except maybe about my English spelling!

I'm not fluent in English apparently, but at least I do try.

I have already a lot of harware synths taking up some dust, maybe in your quest for truth, you could buy me some?

[spaceman]

They all sound like shit and neither of them can make toast

[buscemi]

neither of them can make toast

What's the "heat shimmer" for then?

[mistertoast]

They all sound like shit and neither of them can make toast

Wot?