Page 3 of 4

Re: will the mini brute replace the pro one/sh 101

Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2014 2:10 pm
by pflosi
Automatic Gainsay wrote:If you judge a synth on 24dB per oct, what the h**l are you doing NOT BUYING a MOOG? If that's the slope you want, and if if bass is what you want, the last thing on EARTH you should do is buy a Roland. Buy a goddamned Moog and get it over with.
Pah! The SH line (excluding 101) blows away any modern Moog :mrgreen:

Re: will the mini brute replace the pro one/sh 101

Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2014 3:05 pm
by stf-ran
I've had the MB since it came out. Used it a lot. Like it. My friend's SH-101 has sat next to it most of that time. Technical stuff aside, my ears like the SH better. But my ears are completely subjective and are not to be trusted.

So, if my buddy wanted to trade his SH for my MB, I'd do it in a second just based on that I like the sound better. But he's probably me want to throw in an extra $500.

Re: will the mini brute replace the pro one/sh 101

Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2014 3:13 pm
by sam
Love the pro-one and i would never sell it....Good mod section plus the Arp/sequencer and hey it looks great.

I would love to try a minibrute one day.

Re: will the mini brute replace the pro one/sh 101

Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2014 3:24 pm
by sam
There are a lot of synths better than the 101 but something about it makes me keep it...It's a red one so maybe my collecting side is talking to me.

It's true to say that the younger generation would buy the new analogs...Why not.

Re: will the mini brute replace the pro one/sh 101

Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2014 3:49 pm
by Jabberwalky
Ok, i'll feed the troll...

New analogs can get so close to the vintage sound that it's almost a non-issue. The build quality of newer synths seems to be improving too.

Why I still want vintage????

New s**t is f**k TINY!

I like when the patch panels are spacious, and clearly labeled. This is why I use my Octave Kitten all the time. The Pro-One is very similar in size and perhaps the physical size is subconsciously associated with the sound? I don't know.

Nom nom.

Re: will the mini brute replace the pro one/sh 101

Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2014 6:48 pm
by Automatic Gainsay
synthparts wrote:
Stab Frenzy wrote:
micahjonhughes wrote:Having had both, the minibrute does not have the same diversity of sonic pallete as the pro one.
You should have spent longer with the Minibrute, its sonic palette is MUCH bigger than a Pro One. It does hard and aggressive as well as soft and gentle, you can get a huge range of timbres from the oscillators alone and you've got a multimode filter rather than just a LPF.
The Pro One has a second oscillator and all the extra sonic possibilities that comes with that from the rich beating between 2 oscs to complex harmonic relationships, also osc Sync and FM. It also has the dual wheel and direct mod busses that opens up even more sonic territory...

I don't have anything against the Pro One... to be honest, I wouldn't lump it together with the SH-101 at all. It has a fair amount of interesting and diverse functionality.

That being said:

The MiniBrute is underappreciated. It really can't be described as a "single oscillator," because that term brings to mind the standard "single oscillator" on an analog synth... which is very limited indeed. The oscillator on the MiniBrute is capable of a staggering diversity of waveform due to its multiple sections and modulation possibilities for those sections. This incredible diversity of waveform coupled with the diversity of filtering means that the possibilities are really really extensive. Throw the unpredictable effect of the Brute Factor on top of that... and wow.

The thing about that extensiveness is that it is new. The noises the MiniBrute is capable of, due to its unique design, mean that it can do new and interesting analog sounds. And therein lies its value. If we all want a two-oscillator analog synth with sync and PWM and etc. etc. we're all going to get the same sounds no matter what synth we get. The diversity of the MiniBrute is off the chart compared to the standard one-oscillator analog synthesizer.

Also, the modulation routing definitely challenges that of the Pro One.

Detuning is a nice sound, and having different oscillators playing different pitches is also really great. But those are two great things... they are not necessities unless you're reproducing something. The MicroBrute addressed at least one of those in a modest way by adding the extremely cool "overtone" function... which multiples the sound possibilities again.

I'm going to say that the MiniBrute is better than the Pro One, or more powerful. I've never owned one, I've only examined the functionality and heard it in music. I'm just saying that the standard "oh, it's just a ONE OSCILLATOR SYNTH" statement needs clarification. :)

Re: will the mini brute replace the pro one/sh 101

Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2014 6:49 pm
by Automatic Gainsay
pflosi wrote:
Automatic Gainsay wrote:If you judge a synth on 24dB per oct, what the h**l are you doing NOT BUYING a MOOG? If that's the slope you want, and if if bass is what you want, the last thing on EARTH you should do is buy a Roland. Buy a goddamned Moog and get it over with.
Pah! The SH line (excluding 101) blows away any modern Moog :mrgreen:
Oh, I didn't mean a MODERN Moog. :D

Re: will the mini brute replace the pro one/sh 101

Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2014 7:01 pm
by sam
From the demos it sounds like a quirky synth that can't be compared with a pro-one or anything else...Although it seems to have the magic of the OSCar somehow..

Re: will the mini brute replace the pro one/sh 101

Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2014 7:34 pm
by calaverasgrande
pflosi wrote:
Automatic Gainsay wrote:If you judge a synth on 24dB per oct, what the h**l are you doing NOT BUYING a MOOG? If that's the slope you want, and if if bass is what you want, the last thing on EARTH you should do is buy a Roland. Buy a goddamned Moog and get it over with.
Pah! The SH line (excluding 101) blows away any modern Moog :mrgreen:
Dunno, I own a Taurus III and an SH09.
The Taurus continues to surprise me, while the SH09 is a really good, but hardly mind blowing synth. Though it is the most solid vintage mono I have ever owned.
But that is again dinging a one osc (with sub osc) for not measuring up to a two osc synth.

Re: will the mini brute replace the pro one/sh 101

Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 8:02 am
by chimney chop
shaft9000 wrote:- arturia forgot to include a sequencer tie function, even on the metal SE version. So despite the apparent flexibility of the 'deluxe' seq section, it' still nothing but 16ths or no 16ths all the way "dur-dur-dur-space-dur-space-space-dur-dur-dur etc"
swing; great! gate length, fine... but effectively ho hum. why not definable note length too?
agree with you here. ties are crucial

i'm hoping this will be an under the hood function perhaps?

Re: will the mini brute replace the pro one/sh 101

Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 1:19 pm
by meatballfulton
Man, people are so religious about wasting their money :oops:

Image

I had a 101 back in 1990, best $25 monosynth I ever owned =D>

Current eBay sold listings: $1650 to $850 with one abberation of $160 :shock: I passed on the $1650 one and bought a Voyager for $1500 instead.
chimney chop wrote:ties are crucial
Image

Re: will the mini brute replace the pro one/sh 101

Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 9:49 pm
by CZ Rider
I think it is written in stone on some mountain top "No synthesizer is a replacement for another". :lol:

Having said that, they all have their particular quirks that can only be compaired by setting them side by side and playing/experimenting with them. For instance, on paper they all have somewhat similar arpegiators. Yet a simple C E G will sound slightly different on all three due to different gate lengths. The SH-101 has the shortest, perhaps only a few milliseconds. While the Pro~One has more of a 50% square wave gate. And the Minibrute somewhere in between. Many perfer that short trigger of the SH-101, while others may find the longer gate on the Pro~One just right. All depends on your application.
Same with sound, size, build quality, number of keys. They are all quite different, each with their own strengths and weakness.
Image
The sonic pallet of the old 1969 Moog has all those bases covered. :D

Re: will the mini brute replace the pro one/sh 101

Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 10:16 pm
by Bitexion
No, I don't think you can do the "wave wrapping" thing the Metalizer does to the triangle wave with a 1969 modular, can you?

Re: will the mini brute replace the pro one/sh 101

Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 10:34 pm
by CZ Rider
Bitexion wrote:No, I don't think you can do the "wave wrapping" thing the Metalizer does to the triangle wave with a 1969 modular, can you?
Not exactly, but have a Harold Bode type discrete ring modulator module that has those germanium diodes and large 20-20,000Hz transformers. You would be surprised at how many different tones come from such a simple module. I can get voltage controlled/shaped wave morphing. Sometimes similar to PWM, sometimes similar to an effect like the metalizer. Most associate the ring modulator with bell tones, but two closely tuned and tracking oscillators give a whole new waveform. Positive feedback loops get an incredible brute factor too! Can't really compare an open patching system like that on a Moog to a closed/fixed system of many monosynths.

Re: will the mini brute replace the pro one/sh 101

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 12:14 am
by pmh
Still an interesting thread, with allegiances coming out in favour of various synths. :D

As the older synths become rarer, and the prices continue to rise, I expect they will see the light of day less and less, and their gigging days will eventually be replaced by a life in a bank vault. :D

As such, I think it is always worthwhile trying to find an alternative synth that will give you "that sound".

Kind regards,



Phil