Re: System 100M vs System 700

From yrrab
Sent Thu, Dec 21st 1995, 07:52

>On Tue, 19 Dec 1995, Barry Bernard wrote:
>> I've got a system 100 synth that I've had for awhile ( no m). That is I
>> have the model 101 synth with the model 102 expander.
>I have the same.  Both 101 & 102...
>> I suppose it is in a funny way, although it's a
>> bit "cheesy" sounding to me as well.
>I wouldn't go so far as to call it that.  It's quite a powerful little
>mono.  I don't think it sounds "cheesy" at all.  Set against an MS-20 it
>sounds like a monster.  True it has its limitations of patchability but
>compared to most mono's it sounds quite impressive IMO.

 True it has some powerful features, I'm just not that happy with the sound
of it. It has it's uses though, I wouldn't part with it.

>> Also
>> though I suppose you could refer to it as "warm", it doesn't have much low
>> end
>WHAA?  I don't know what you're listening to.  The thing has as much
>balls as a Mini!  I used it in a live gig over the weekend and the bass
>was working that PA to death!

I don't really agree. Granted these are all subjective judgements. I tend
to consider how thick a synth sounds when you're playing midrange notes,
and to me the system 100 sounds a little thin. I don't think of it's filter
as having "as much balls as a Mini".

>> and the envelope generators don't quite cut the mustard.
>They're standard ADSR's.  What do you mean?  Why don't you like them?

Well, The SSM 2044 and the CEM 3320 are both (or can be configured as)
"standard" 4 pole lowpass filter chips, does that mean that they sound the
 same ? Nonetheless, I should be taken to task for the above vague
language. It's hard to describe but, I much prefer the "sound of the shape"
of the envelope on my Octave Cat for instance to those on the system 100.
If you set both to an envelope with no attack time and a short decay, the
Cat has plenty of snap while the system 100 just sounds sort of flat to me.

      -Barry Bernard