Oberheim Matrix 6R - Is £900 good price?

[XpanderDude]

actually. i had completely forgotten that cool audio/behringer cloned and are making the V3397, which is the CEM3396 used in the M6/1000. So i am sure that clone is incoming at some point.

[sibe_uk]

I've instead now just purchased a Matrix 1000 (with 1.2 firmware) for just over half the price of the 6R I was offered and getting the Stereoping CE-1 controller as well for £200.

oops just seen this. Look out for power hum, power supply issues and voices going walkabout (although that last one is something you can fix yourself if you are reasonably handy).

I wasn't aware of the power hum issues especially. I am told the voices are working fine, I did ask before buying, but like you said, is fixable.

[sibe_uk]

Behringer seems to promote a lot of potential new gear that never sees the light of day, but if they did eventually do an Oberheim clone then I would be all over that.

[Famous Last Words]

I’d much prefer a Prophet 08/REV2.

Even though the Prophet 08/REV2 are essentially the the same Curtis "synth on a chip" as the Matrix-6 and Matrix-1000, there is something about the resonance on the Oberheim synths that sounds better to me. Neither will win any awards for "sweetest analog resonance of all time." But the resonance on my REV2 module sounds more shrill than the resonance on my Matrix-1000. Overall, the Matrix-1000 just sounds a bit more "analog" to me, even for a DCO synth that doesn't come close to the warmth of an Oberheim Xpander or Matrix-12.

Plus, the Matrix-6 and Matrix-1000 synths are more architecturally complex in certain ways. The REV2 has certainly closed the gap as is much, MUCH easier to program from its front panel. You can't even program the Matrix-1000 without a software editor. And programming the Matrix-6R from its front panel is an absolute nightmare (as a former owner of one).

So if you intend to program or tweak ANY of your own sounds, you're much better off with a Prophet '08 rack for the money, IMO.

[zerocrossing]

I’d much prefer a Prophet 08/REV2.

Even though the Prophet 08/REV2 are essentially the the same Curtis "synth on a chip" as the Matrix-6 and Matrix-1000, there is something about the resonance on the Oberheim synths that sounds better to me. Neither will win any awards for "sweetest analog resonance of all time." But the resonance on my REV2 module sounds more shrill than the resonance on my Matrix-1000. Overall, the Matrix-1000 just sounds a bit more "analog" to me, even for a DCO synth that doesn't come close to the warmth of an Oberheim Xpander or Matrix-12.

I disagree. To me, the Oberheim synths just sound more muted, and the ability to use the slop effect pushes the REV2 farther from DCO land than the 6/1000s, IMO.

Plus, the Matrix-6 and Matrix-1000 synths are more architecturally complex in certain ways.

How so? It's been a while, but when I was looking at them, they seemed simpler to me, but I think I was comparing it to my dual Tetra setup, which has a few more things than the REV2, like feedback.

So if you intend to program or tweak ANY of your own sounds, you're much better off with a Prophet '08 rack for the money, IMO.

Yeah, DSI did a great job with the interfaces, as usual.

[Famous Last Words]

I disagree. To me, the Oberheim synths just sound more muted, and the ability to use the slop effect pushes the REV2 farther from DCO land than the 6/1000s, IMO.

The more "muted" tone of the Matrix-6/1000 is really just a matter of the preset patch programming which reflects the audio sensibilities at the time. But we now live in an age of intolerably bright, overly glossy, ultra thin, crappy plugins. But it's really just a simple matter of opening the cutoff and/or increasing the filter envelope amount on the Matrix-6/1000 to achieve a comparable tone to the Prophet '08 / REV2. You obviously haven't spent much time with these "budget" Oberheim synths or you would know this.

Regarding the "slop" parameter, this is practically useless on the Prophet '08 because its effect is so mild and just makes your REV2 sound out of tune with its more aggressive effect. It sounds absolutely nothing like the "Vintage Knob" effect on the Prophet 6, Rev 4 Prophet 5/10, and Oberheim OB-X8. That actually creates a somewhat more vintage sound. But one must wonder why VCO synths need anything like this? My MKS-80s certainly don't and they sound wonderfully "drifty" as a result. Is it because these modern Prophet and OB VCOs are so ass-clenchingly tight and precise that they might as well be DCOs? $5,000 "DCO" synths with a gimmicky "Vintage Knob." Who would have thought people would fall for this?

How so? It's been a while, but when I was looking at them, they seemed simpler to me, but I think I was comparing it to my dual Tetra setup, which has a few more things than the REV2, like feedback.

You keep changing the synths we are discussing. I thought we were talking about a used Prophet '08 rack and not a 4-voice Tetra or a more expensive REV2.

Regardless, the Matrix-6/1000 feature multiple simultaneous oscillator waveforms, ramp generators (useful for fading in LFO amounts,) a tracking generator for more precise key tracking and other uses, and a more sophisticated mod matrix. That sounds more "architecturally complex" to me.

[zerocrossing]

I disagree. To me, the Oberheim synths just sound more muted, and the ability to use the slop effect pushes the REV2 farther from DCO land than the 6/1000s, IMO.

The more "muted" tone of the Matrix-6/1000 is really just a matter of the preset patch programming which reflects the audio sensibilities at the time. But we now live in an age of intolerably bright, overly glossy, ultra thin, crappy plugins. But it's really just a simple matter of opening the cutoff and/or increasing the filter envelope amount on the Matrix-6/1000 to achieve a comparable tone to the Prophet '08 / REV2. You obviously haven't spent much time with these "budget" Oberheim synths or you would know this.

Regarding the "slop" parameter, this is practically useless on the Prophet '08 because its effect is so mild and just makes your REV2 sound out of tune with its more aggressive effect. It sounds absolutely nothing like the "Vintage Knob" effect on the Prophet 6, Rev 4 Prophet 5/10, and Oberheim OB-X8. That actually creates a somewhat more vintage sound. But one must wonder why VCO synths need anything like this? My MKS-80s certainly don't and they sound wonderfully "drifty" as a result. Is it because these modern Prophet and OB VCOs are so ass-clenchingly tight and precise that they might as well be DCOs? $5,000 "DCO" synths with a gimmicky "Vintage Knob." Who would have thought people would fall for this?

How so? It's been a while, but when I was looking at them, they seemed simpler to me, but I think I was comparing it to my dual Tetra setup, which has a few more things than the REV2, like feedback.

You keep changing the synths we are discussing. I thought we were talking about a used Prophet '08 rack and not a 4-voice Tetra or a more expensive REV2.

Regardless, the Matrix-6/1000 feature multiple simultaneous oscillator waveforms, ramp generators (useful for fading in LFO amounts,) a tracking generator for more precise key tracking and other uses, and a more sophisticated mod matrix. That sounds more "architecturally complex" to me.

Yeah, well I looked for a decent demo of one and they all sounded boring as shit to me, so that’s my opinion. Good luck with your elderly synth.

[Uncle E]

Jupiter-8 > MKS-80
Jupiter-6 > MKS-80
Jupiter-4 > MKS-80
Juno-60 > MKS-80
JX-8P > MKS-80

etc. etc.

[Famous Last Words]

Jupiter-8 > MKS-80
Jupiter-6 > MKS-80
Jupiter-4 > MKS-80
Juno-60 > MKS-80
JX-8P > MKS-80

Oh please. I'd take a velocity sensitive MKS-80 over a Jupiter-8, icey cold Jupiter-6, and 4-voice, ultra limited patch storage Jupiter-4 any day.

While I love my mint condition Juno 60 and my MKS-70, they are completely different animals than the MKS-80. The Juno 60 does sound terrific and is super fun to use. But it's a very limited synth. I'm just glad I bought mine new back in 1982 when they weren't absurdly overpriced.

I actually prefer the filter in the MKS-70 to that in the MKS-80. But the MKS-70 is clearly a DCO synth whose presets cravely tried to sound as "digital" as possible to compete with that absolute blight on synthesis, the DX7.

But if you program your own patches for which I use the outstanding Retroaktiv programmer, the MKS-70 becomes a real analog powerhouse with 12 voices of polyphony.

I actually own two MKS-80s. A Rev 4 and a Rev 5. I use the fantastic Retroaktive programmer to control them both. It's a pretty sweet setup.

But thank you. I got a good chuckle out of your passive aggressive, embarrassingly ignorant post.

[Famous Last Words]

Yeah, well I looked for a decent demo of one and they all sounded boring as shit to me, so that’s my opinion. Good luck with your elderly synth.

So all you've heard is a demo? I thought so. Next time perhaps try to have an informed opinion. People usually don't sound as foolish that way.

[revvy]

Yeah, well I looked for a decent demo of one and they all sounded boring as shit to me, so that’s my opinion. Good luck with your elderly synth.

So all you've heard is a demo? I thought so. Next time perhaps try to have an informed opinion. People usually don't sound as foolish that way.

Have you been a KVR member before, under a different name? You seem very familiar.

[whyterabbyt]

Yeah, well I looked for a decent demo of one and they all sounded boring as shit to me, so that’s my opinion. Good luck with your elderly synth.

So all you've heard is a demo? I thought so. Next time perhaps try to have an informed opinion. People usually don't sound as foolish that way.

Have you been a KVR member before, under a different name? You seem very familiar.

Ex Machina, Black Parade, Fashionista, Big Mouth Strikes Again yada yada yada.

[pugilistas]

The CEM3396 is not the same as the chip used in the Prophet 8 line. The 3397 was respun under the influence of Tom Oberheim, and then adapted by Dave Smith, who tweaked it some, according to various interviews. The Matrix 6 also had a slightly different approach than the Matrix 1000 and subsequent iterations.

"Both Matrix synths have DCOs. Master clock is derived from a quartz on the Matrix 1000 and from three free running, software calibrated (voltage controlled) oscillators on the Matrix 6.
M6 has a 4 to 2 split mode, the M1000 lacks this hardware, otherwise the voices are (nearly) the same."

[Uncle E]

It’s not even worth responding at this point. He’s just going to be banned in a couple of days, anyway.

[vurt]

It’s not even worth responding at this point. He’s just going to be banned in a couple of days, anyway.

yeah, but back again next tuesday.