Re: [AH] Personal Preference

From Mike Peake
Sent Thu, Jan 24th 1970, 01:00

Mike Kent wrote:
>There's no accounting for taste! I'm talking about yours but you're
>probably thinking the same of mine. ;-)  You really missed out on the
>System-100. Although I often agree with your taste on other things.

I hated the 100 at the time, because it didn't sound like a Moog. 
Now that I see that some forms of thin are cool (Chroma, SH5), 
I might enjoy aspects of the 100. 

I don't think you have bad taste; I simply like what I like and you do 
yours. Everyone knows that I loathe most Curtis chips, but that 
doesn't mean I think you're a bum if you use a Curtis'd synth. 
I hope people understand that, and don't take personal offense 
when I go off on rants. Bums. ;)

>My complete System-100 (with the addition of 2 extra external EG) has
>similar functional value to the Moog 15 I owned. Individual Moog modules
>were better than the couterparts in the System-100. But the Sytem-100 has
>more modules overall making it about equally useful to me. And the Roland
>was about 40% of the dollar value. And the System-100 sounds great.

Moog Modulars aren't really useful until you get multiples of most 
modules. 
A single System 15 will do great sounds, but you need to spend a ton of 
money just to get where a big Doepfer can take you. 

I just noticed that 
Mike Bucki raised his prices (a 921b is now $440.00). I guess I'll be 
getting some Doepfer to round out my Moog. 

> >Man, the SEM is fatter and rougher than a Pro-One. Put 'em side by side.
>
>I guess two different people get very different things out of their synths.
>The SEM is fat, but I don't think I
>use my 2 SEMs for rough sounds.  I haven't had these for very long and I
>don't think I know them very well yet. And maybe words like rougher, fat,
>phat, edge, smooth, big, round, hard, sharp, etc. are not adequate to
>describe sound.

Words like fullness are adequate, though. Put the two side by side, open 
the 
filters all the way, detune two sawtooth waves, match the levels, and 
notice 
that the SEM sounds larger due to a more prominent fundamental and 
second harmonic. And they're a bit dirtier sounding, due to what Tom 
Oberheim called a bad grounding scheme. Check it out. The SEM is 
great at every frequency. 

Bum. ;)

Easier,

Mike


________________
Specifications:

Signs and Portents/Buh Bye Newt ya Hump/Evolution in Action

          Reality has not been Beta tested.