Synths that didn't impress you

[Pro5]

Korg M1 - easily. It's so dead inside.


Wavestation was good in it's day but I've had the keyboard and the A/D rack and they don't blow my socks off. I think their tricks are still seeped in static romplage and c**p for filters.



And yes ladies and gentlemen, with alllll the synths I've had come and go, the D-50 is STILL an absolute gem of a sound machine. It really is something unto itself, and way more than it's 'digital' tag would suggest.


I've had 6 D-50s now, and I usually always have at least one hanging around, and when I play with new (2nd hand) synths and fall in love for a few months, the only synth I go back to that still holds my attention is the D-50! My V-synth is my main machine and is awesome, but it doesn't completely rule out the D-50's usefulness and sound (as the D-50 is so warm and thick for digital).

Sorry this turned into a D-50 love post rather than an M1 hate post, but good to be positive no?

[Pro5]

The Korg M1 never impressed me from the get-go. But when the SY77 came along, I was blown away (and have never looked back).

SY77 is another amazing synth.

[knolan]

Korg M1 - easily. It's so dead inside.

Not to start defending the M1 now that I've admitted I disliked the M1 (a tough thing for a man in his 40's to admit because it was so ubiquitous - you would have been linched when it was released for such an admission) - but that's the point - it's the most successful synth in history by a country mile. So though you say it's dead inside, it 'did it' for hundreds of thousands of users back in the day.

But the T3 was a significant improvement, and the O1W a very impressive instrument indeed - it still holds its own today - some of its multiwaves, programs and combis are magnificent (I own a rack version !).

And - the Korg Legacy version of the M1 is not bad at all either - it comes with all the expansion ROMs and played as a plugin within a DAW environment offers quite a lot of sonic power.

[ppg_wavecomputer]

My first ARP Odyssey, in 1994. I simply couldn´t warm up to it, and all the time I was wondering why I didn´t like it -- "hey, Klaus Schulze used it to great effect, it must be great!". Sold it in 2000. It was a Mk. 2 (2813). Never missed it.

The Mk. 1 is a totally different thing, though.

Stephen

I forgot to include the

Elka Synthex

and

Korg Z1

in my list.

The Synthex sounded like a mushy, oversized string machine (think Korg Trident) to me. The Z1 should have been great in theory but it turned out not to be -- too tricky to tweak, and it´s more a Virtual Analog rather than a Physical Modelling synthesiser (which I was hoping it would be, an extension to the WSA-1). As a VA, it does some very convincing stuff but it´s not what I wanted. That, and the user interface.

Korg Polysix was also a bit of a let-down.

Stephen

[HH]

MS20 - had it for 5 years but never used it much except sub basses and noises, other than that - pointless 1500-2000 $
got a monopoly and much more excited about it. you just have to know how to cook it

[knolan]

My first ARP Odyssey, in 1994. I simply couldn´t warm up to it, and all the time I was wondering why I didn´t like it -- "hey, Klaus Schulze used it to great effect, it must be great!". Sold it in 2000. It was a Mk. 2 (2813). Never missed it.

The Mk. 1 is a totally different thing, though.

Stephen

I forgot to include the

Elka Synthex

and

Korg Z1

in my list.

The Synthex sounded like a mushy, oversized string machine (think Korg Trident) to me. The Z1 should have been great in theory but it turned out not to be -- too tricky to tweak, and it´s more a Virtual Analog rather than a Physical Modelling synthesiser (which I was hoping it would be, an extension to the WSA-1). As a VA, it does some very convincing stuff but it´s not what I wanted. That, and the user interface.

Korg Polysix was also a bit of a let-down.

Stephen

Could you expand a little on the WSA-1 - does it sound good, is it a convincing virtual acoustic synth. I've always been interested in this instrument but for some reason have shied away from it if opportunity arose to acquire one. I own the VL1 and EX5 so adore physical modelling, and also own a Z1 and completely agree with your appraisal of it (though still like it a lot - it's a strong sounding and versatile synth). But would be interested in your thoughts on the WSA-1 and whether it's worth picking one up.

[ppg_wavecomputer]

[...] But would be interested in your thoughts on the WSA-1 and whether it's worth picking one up.

It depends on what you are looking for. I would say "definitely!" because this instrument is so unlike any other digital synthesizer I´ve played (which weren´t too many, I must confess). If you are looking for other-worldly soundscapes and non-pitched stuff, the WSA is the one to go for. This is what I used it for most -- didn´t bother to use the plethora of acoustic sounds it had on-board. In terms of programming it was a lot easier to access than the Korg Z1, and its character wasn´t aimed at simulating "analogue" synthesis in the first place.

I grew tired of it a bit, though, because at some point I had the feeling I couldn´t program any novelties into it anymore. Also, I found its plasticky character a bit overbearing. But for some five years, it was one of my main work horses for textural ambient stuff. There is some demo track on SoundCloud that I made with it some time ago (forgot the link but it should be easy to find).

Stephen

[Pro5]

Korg M1 - easily. It's so dead inside.

you would have been linched when it was released for such an admission) - but that's the point - it's the most successful synth in history by a country mile. So though you say it's dead inside, it 'did it' for hundreds of thousands of users back in the day.

and?


I'm also a man (just) into his 40s, I know all about how the M1 sold, what does that have to do with the thread's topic? Popularity means nothing in this debate. M1 was the epitome of all that went wrong with digital synthesis and barely any songs that used it 'back in the day' are able to sound anything other than 'of their time' (dated) today. It's a boring synth, with boring architecture, boring 'filters' and a very hollow façade of a sound. DX7 and D-50 are real synths and pre-ceeded it, and other better synths succeeded it. Just because for the time it had an ok-ish piano sample and a slightly impressive 'universe' patch, means zero in 2014. And yes I own the legacy collection and the M1 is still boring.

[ppg_wavecomputer]

Korg M1 - easily. It's so dead inside.

you would have been linched when it was released for such an admission) - but that's the point - it's the most successful synth in history by a country mile. So though you say it's dead inside, it 'did it' for hundreds of thousands of users back in the day.

and?


I'm also a man (just) into his 40s, I know all about how the M1 sold, what does that have to do with the thread's topic? Popularity means nothing in this debate. M1 was the epitome of all that went wrong with digital synthesis and barely any songs that used it 'back in the day' are able to sound anything other than 'of their time' (dated) today. It's a boring synth, with boring architecture, boring 'filters' and a very hollow façade of a sound. DX7 and D-50 are real synths and pre-ceeded it, and other better synths succeeded it. Just because for the time it had an ok-ish piano sample and a slightly impressive 'universe' patch, means zero in 2014. And yes I own the legacy collection and the M1 is still boring.

I remember being bowled over by the "Universe" patch when I first played an M1 in late 1989/early 1990 -- hey, I was 17 . I was desperate I couldn´t raise enough funds to buy one of these. Many years later I had to learn that being broke is nothing to be ashamed of -- I didn´t have the money to afford an M1, a D50 or a Wavestation and settled for analogue stuff instead (which still sounds so much nicer to me). I´ve still got most of the instruments I bought back then -- I doubt I would still have that M1.

Stephen

[musden]

Blofeld. I remember time when I was dreaming about it: cool-sounding, cabable, polyphonic, multitimbral instrument with wavetables... Once I tried it at a musical shop and it was kind of fine, but then I moved to polyevolver, then to nord lead... And since then I think I have been under impression of those two synthesizers! They sounded so alive, interesting, and programming-wise they were brilliant! Quality of that nord lead was really attractive... Anyway, somehow I happened to get Blofeld last autumn. I still have it. It is nicely packed in its original box next to me now, when I am typing this message... I know, it is quite deep, keys are very good and matrix is smartly organized, but.. it doesn't touche me... that is why we are selling it.

[musden]

M-audio Venom. Sad story.. I bought it considering only its price and sound-demos. I should admit it sounds pretty much Ok, but apart from that, it feels very chip indeed. You can't program it using only its face (if you need to go deeper, you have to use computer or tablet) and keys feel terrible... My friend uses it as a sound-card, which is helpfull, but as an instrument... well, in my eyes it really fails.

Interesting note: my first synth was soviet Poliviks and it was hilarious to spend time with it. It was s**t fron the beginning (I realized that), but I had a lot of fun with it. Actually, now I'm surprised telling myself that I prefer even Poliviks to Venom!

[princefan3]

Funny enough i just got hold of a M1 last week ....mainly for its Italliano Piano sounds.....
I think its a great synth.....just shows you that its the time and place when you buy these things.
for £ 200.00 squid there is a lot that this synth can do.

[Pro5]

Funny enough i just got hold of a M1 last week ....mainly for its Italliano Piano sounds.....
I think its a great synth.....just shows you that its the time and place when you buy these things.
for £ 200.00 squid there is a lot that this synth can do.

I got mine for £60 with two add on cards and a case. And I still think it's too much

(Other than the fact I parted it out for well over £350).

It's barely a synthesizer to be honest. Very limited in sound creation and feels very uninspiring to play let alone program. IMO.

[gcoudert]

I had a Korg M1 from 1992 to about 1999. I hated the filter. No matter how much you filtered those samples, they were still instantly recognisable. I preferred the Wavestation but, at the time, nothing beat the synth section of my D50.

[princefan3]

Ha Ha Pro 5.....that was a bloody steal....£ 60 squid and cards plus...the last owner couldnt have liked it either.

Nice trade in deal also.

I got a card with mine with another 100 sounds on it...some nice obx and a nice pro 5 string on it as well as a depeche mode ahh....yes it is limited.....but you cant beat the house piano sound can you....ride on time black box... or the organ2 preset.... total nightclubers track sound...general strings...velocity and aftertouch to boot.

also guess depends what your into...it seems some like creating bleeps....and some like melodies.

whats the big deal with the D50 then (a lot of likes)...sounds like the res filter thats all..?