From Mike Peake
Sent Thu, Jan 1st 1970, 01:00
Chris Whitten wrote: >With something like a Moog system you are paying additionally for the >collectability. Moog is without doubt the ultimate modular and fabulous >sounding. But does it sound two or four times better than Doepfer/RS? I'm >not sure. I'm basing the following statements on the rumor that the Doepfer utilizes Curtis Oscillator and Filter chips. I just don't remember which modules use what chips; it's in the archives. I can easily hear the difference between Moog Modular oscillators and Curtis oscillators (some friends arranged a three-way blind test once. Details are in the archives. And remember, go with what sounds good to You. This is only my opinion, and it's based upon what sounds good to Me.) I was easily able to pick out the two Moog oscillator designs from each other, and especially from the Curtis board. The Triangle wave simply wasn't a triangle. Upon hearing it, I thought something was very wrong with the unit, but it had been calibrated on a scope. In this way, the Moog does indeed sound twice as good. Live with both a Minimoog and a Pro One for a while, and decide for yourself what sort of timbre you're after and invest accordingly. Curtis Filters: Some (3320) are evil. Others (3350) are cool when used with non-curtis oscillators (Chroma). Actually, the 3320 sounds good when paired with digital waveforms (Gleeman Pentaphonic). The Moog filers, even those in the Prodigy and Rogue, sound better than Curtis chips (IMO). In this case, four times as good. Easier, mike ________________ Specifications: Signs and Portents/Buh Bye Newt ya Hump/Evolution in Action Reality has not been Beta tested.