Moog model D reissue

[Stab Frenzy]

Spent 7 minutes with this synth yesterday, very disappointing experience. Sounds thin and plastic, like soft synth. Probably because it is PCB with modern made in China components and not handwired point to point circuitry. It lacked presence and felt 2D, not 3D like real woman with the massive buzungas.

Spoken like someone who has no idea at all about synths, electronics, or women.

[madtheory]

... you're welcome to believe whatever you choose

If we're really talking in engineering, then absolutely, belief is not a factor. Tell me what's different about the audio signal path in the Voyager? And the CV system? I'm interested in what you think are the actual technical differences. Let's talk facts, not opinion.

[monolith]

Spent 7 minutes with this synth yesterday, very disappointing experience. Sounds thin and plastic, like soft synth. Probably because it is PCB with modern made in China components and not handwired point to point circuitry. It lacked presence and felt 2D, not 3D like real woman with the massive buzungas.

Spoken like someone who has no idea at all about synths, electronics, or women.

This little exchange is arguably the greatest thing I've ever read on this site. Can someone make this the banner up top? ^^^^^

[Hybrid88]

^^ I think Stab just fed a troll

[Hybrid88]

... you're welcome to believe whatever you choose

If we're really talking in engineering, then absolutely, belief is not a factor. Tell me what's different about the audio signal path in the Voyager? And the CV system? I'm interested in what you think are the actual technical differences. Let's talk facts, not opinion.

I'm not sure I need to reiterate the point, I was talking about *my impression* as an end user, not as a synth designer, so no I can't tell you the specific technical facts as to why I didn't like the sound of the synth. I only mentioned the amount of components as a general by-thought or an idea. I'm certainly not qualified to go into it in detail, but I merely mention it as a consideration.

I'm really not interested in going on about this, but the engineering design work Bob did in his early days is apples and oranges to where the Voyager is at, and sometimes you know what? There more advanced the design becomes, the more it lacks character, and as we're talking music here (something abstract and personal) then I think looking to *prove* things technically is a complete waste of time.

The Voyager is an extremely capable synth no doubt but what I can tell you with 100% certainty is that I didn't come away from the synth feeling like it was worth the money, not something I felt after trying a Model D.

Moving on, what I would love to know is how this new one stacks up, can't wait to give it a go!

[stephenjbennett]

The Voyager just seems messy and overcomplicated for what it's trying to achieve to me,)

My Voyager OS is pretty simple—in fact, the only things it has in addition to the new Model D is a slightly more flexible modulation routing, FM and sync and the hi-pass filter. Stuff people would like on the new D, I suspect. It lacks MIDI though, so less 'complex' in that respect.

I assume when you're talking about complexity in a Voyager you're talking about things like the useful presets and the X/Y pad? As most people think that the sound of the OS is identical to the Voyager, these 'complexities'' don't appear to affect the sound quality of the Voyager/OS at all—which is phenomenal IMHO.

I have no problem reproducing the Model D sounds I used to use with the OS (apart from the 'headphone trick'). Others may think differently, of course.

Stephen

[chipaudette]

The Voyager just seems messy and overcomplicated for what it's trying to achieve to me,)

My Voyager OS is pretty simple—in fact, the only things it has in addition to the new Model D is a slightly more flexible modulation routing, FM and sync and the hi-pass filter. Stuff people would like on the new D, I suspect. It lacks MIDI though, so less 'complex' in that respect.

I assume when you're talking about complexity in a Voyager you're talking about things like the useful presets and the X/Y pad? As most people think that the sound of the OS is identical to the Voyager, these 'complexities'' don't appear to affect the sound quality of the Voyager/OS at all—which is phenomenal IMHO.

I have no problem reproducing the Model D sounds I used to use with the OS. Others may think differently, of course.

Stephen

I assumed that he meant that the *circuitry* was overly messy and complicated for what it was trying to achieve. I've never opened one up to see the circuitry, so I can't comment directly myself.

Chip

[knolan]

... you're welcome to believe whatever you choose

If we're really talking in engineering, then absolutely, belief is not a factor. Tell me what's different about the audio signal path in the Voyager? And the CV system? I'm interested in what you think are the actual technical differences. Let's talk facts, not opinion.

I honestly can't believe you have this stance. Just because of the generational gap, the physical differences, manufacturing techniques of components and so forth - the Voyager is going to be different. That's a fact! It's not a bad thing.

But from a more musical stand point, the Mininoog is an instantly recognisable sound; and one of truly exceptional 'character'. It is instantly recognisable to most. The Voyager is arguably slightly more 'vanilla'. I've watched a myriad of youtube demos over the years - and every single one of them point to significant differences - and significantly - they ALL point out the same differences. There is an overwhelming body of evidence that they sound different.

My opinion is that the Minimoog Model D sounds better - but that is a prejudiced stand point because I'm identifying it with a bunch of classic tracks that used it. I accept fully that someone half my age, and more importantly anyone who has heard a Voyager first, may thing it's the better one. That probably is a bit subjective (though I do believe that the Model D had extraordinary strength of character in its own right and is loved for good / sound reasons).

But - they are significantly different. I have no idea why anyone would deny that!

[ApolloBoy]

^^ I think Stab just fed a troll

A really lame troll at that.

[blueknob]

Just as an alternative viewpoint... I have seen people replicate (make identical copies) of the circuits as used in the MiniMoog, I think the modern term is "cloned". What's the opinion on these? I've had a Model D in my house to play with, it does have a unique edge to the it. I would think anything clocked (digital) just can't match that so an analogue circuit would be the way forward (except use digital for the keyscan) hence why I wonder if these "clones" are the next best thing.

[madtheory]

But - they are significantly different. I have no idea why anyone would deny that!

There's a lot of emotion in these opinions, and that's important. The musician's impression of the instrument, even though it is probably cognitive bias, is still very real and it's what makes the instrument speak. My own emotional impression of the Voyager was that it reeks class, is very easy to dial in the sound you want, and had bags of personality. Just like the Minimoog. It's Bob Moog's personality. I have the same experience with Dave Smith's instruments. As Bob Moog said in reference to the clean and clever design of the RCA Theremin "Those guys had smarts".

The only way we could truly resolve this argument is to design a specific double blind AB test. Could be fun- one of us behind a curtain with a bunch of typical patches programmed in the Voyager and replicate them as we go along on the Minimoog. The rest of us out front trying to tell the difference. That party will never happen, but it sounds like fun!

But stating they're "significantly different", or that there is some kind of "clocking" involved in the audio path, or that the circuit is too "complicated" or that a Minimoog is "discrete" (tip: it isn't)... sorry, that is just making an assumption about electronics. Unless you know your way blindfolded around a common emitter amplifier or a 741 (which the Mini has) 555 timer or a passive crossover or a DAC ladder or whatever, forget about it. Don't even go there. Make your impression as a user/ musician, but don't make assumptions about electronics based on that.

And I'm sure Moog are well aware of this bias, which is why they discontinued the Voyager and are replacing it with an instrument that's much easier to build, and is unarguably identical to the original. That is a f**k ing clever move.

[commodorejohn]

and is unarguably identical to the original.

Nothing is unarguable in the world of gearheads, no matter what the facts have to say in the matter

[knolan]

But - they are significantly different. I have no idea why anyone would deny that!

There's a lot of emotion in these opinions, and that's important. The musician's impression of the instrument, even though it is probably cognitive bias, is still very real and it's what makes the instrument speak. My own emotional impression of the Voyager was that it reeks class, is very easy to dial in the sound you want, and had bags of personality. Just like the Minimoog. It's Bob Moog's personality. I have the same experience with Dave Smith's instruments. As Bob Moog said in reference to the clean and clever design of the RCA Theremin "Those guys had smarts".

The only way we could truly resolve this argument is to design a specific double blind AB test. Could be fun- one of us behind a curtain with a bunch of typical patches programmed in the Voyager and replicate them as we go along on the Minimoog. The rest of us out front trying to tell the difference. That party will never happen, but it sounds like fun!

But stating they're "significantly different", or that there is some kind of "clocking" involved in the audio path, or that the circuit is too "complicated" or that a Minimoog is "discrete" (tip: it isn't)... sorry, that is just making an assumption about electronics. Unless you know your way blindfolded around a common emitter amplifier or a 741 (which the Mini has) 555 timer or a passive crossover or a DAC ladder or whatever, forget about it. Don't even go there. Make your impression as a user/ musician, but don't make assumptions about electronics based on that.

And I'm sure Moog are well aware of this bias, which is why they discontinued the Voyager and are replacing it with an instrument that's much easier to build, and is unarguably identical to the original. That is a f**k ing clever move.

Clearly you've been engaged in this 'debate' for a lot longer than I have - I'm just a blow in - so you may feel emotional about it.

It's pretty simple to me. The Model D is made from components manufactured in the 70's and 80's; the Voyager is made from components from he noughties and presently.

The one thing that has changed beyond all recognition in that time is manufacturing techniques - even of the same components.

So the differences between the two are real and identifiable. Indeed I've read that Moog have had to have parts remanufactured for the new model D that don't otherwise exist. Plus - the Voyager is likely designed different; and circuit boards are likely laid out differently - and - the keyboard is different. You might think all of those add up to nothing, but that's a different discussion.


Whether you deem the differences to be better is subjective - but the differences are real, and there!

[madtheory]

Can you post links to articles about these components? What exactly has changed about the manufacturing? Have the specs of the op amps and transistors been changed? Specifics please!

[chipaudette]

Can you post links to articles about these components? What exactly has changed about the manufacturing? Have the specs of the op amps and transistors been changed? Specifics please!

Voyager:

• Teardown Video, esp 9:46:
• High Res Photo: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... cna%29.jpg
• High Res Photo: http://sneak-thief.com/moog/moog-voyager-pcb-front.jpg

Model D:

• Oscillator Board: http://s275.photobucket.com/user/JohnLR ... t.jpg.html, and the other half of the board: http://s275.photobucket.com/user/JohnLR ... dRight.jpg

Where are the good Model D photos!?!?

Chip