I prefer the moog for most of them, it seems more full while the de tuned 2600 seems muffled. Korg is full too, I heard a more ring with the plain triangle than moog. great video.
@albedoshader What? Are you serious? : ) Yeah, when I made this video, I was in a bit of a rush and in my exuberance didn't check the tuning. However, this video isn't really about frequency, it's about timbre. : ) While the tuning is a tipoff if you're trying to guess, it bears little importance in regard to comparing the timbre of the oscillators of the various synths.
is the arp just naturally de-tuned or what? the detuning of C lends to an obvious bias...but mainly I was really thinking of getting an ARP before seeing this.
yay i guessed then right! It's good to know that the minimoog actually did have a special triangle. And everyone knows that the ARP is almost always out of tune :P
@adriansmithmusic: interesting, that's what i found to be the case with the MS-20 Triangle waveform. The Minimoog triangle looks normal to me but has slightly bent flanks.
As I wrote before, the rounded edge on one half of the triangle seems to be the result of a triange-triangel ring modulation. That's what I got with calculating ring modulation of two triangles.
@albedoshader: my bad, I meant sawtooth-sawtooth ring modulation. Also make more sense as you can produce this easily by ring modulating one oscillator with itself to get a "triangle".
The funny thing is the same discussion was prominent concerning CD A/D D/A converters. "All CD players sound the same". That's so wrong. As soon as a single analog part is in the circuit you will have differences even if the digital rest is the same. And A/D converters can sound very different.
I'm not that familiar with analogs, but I recognized the moog triangle right away. I think because the triangle has a delicate tone, not brash like an unfiltered saw or square, it allows you to hear the unique distortions of an instrument more clearly, perhaps? The moog definitely has the nicest filter, too, but my ear isn't familiar enough to be able to pick it out blind. These subtleties are SO important in choosing an instrument, though!
@AbsurdistLover: The Moog triangle has a strong resemblance with a strongly filtered aquare wave. And the Sawtooth has a very harsh amount of overtones.
@albedoshader: I checked the waveforms of your video.
It's interesting that the MS-20 Triangle waveform seems to be a sawtooth ring modulated with another sawtooth, actually. The ARP-2600 triangle looks almost like a perfect triangle waveform, the Minimoog version has slightly exponential flanks. Very interesting: my virtual analog Korg Prophecy produces a triangle waveform that looks exactly like the Moog version.
@albedoshader: The Minimoog Sawtooth is special. The sawtooth has falling flanks whereas the MS-20 and the ARP-2600 have rising flanks. All three synths have very irregular flanks that show a lot of extra overtones. The MS-20 seems to be different, again. The flanks looke like cut-off sine waves or sigmoid functions (s-shaped).
In comparison, my Prophecy produces a cleaner sawtooth wave, but it's possible to emulate e.g. the MS-20 with waveshaping to get a very similar waveform and character.
@albedoshader: The ARP 2600 Sawtooth is very similar to the Minimoog but its overall shape is the cleanest.
The MS-20 Square waves are very strange. They look like peaks of sine waves with steep flanks at both sides. Minimoog square waves have slightly exponential fall-offs with many irregularities. My Prophecy square wave is much cleaner but also has these fall-offs. The ARP produces the cleanest waveform, again. The tops and bottoms are pretty flat, but with the typical random irregularities.
@albedoshader: You could say the MS-20 does produce waveforms that haven't much in common with the name ;)
The ARP 2600 is the synth with the "most mathematical" oscillators.
And the Minimoog oscillators hahave a pretty "raw" character.
It's surprising how much all three oscillators fluctuate. There's a lot of randomness visible, even the amplitude seems to vary quite a bit from cycle to cycle. All three have these tiny fluctuations in common that give each their own characteristic overtones.
The waveforms from any of these synthesizers are extremely distant form true squares, sines, triangles, sawtooths, etc. Sines on most analog synths have at least 2% distortion. But there is no need for waveform purity in these machines. Fundamental waveshapes are not common in most types of music.
Thanx for the samples haha... Amazing how the Minimoog Tone... reacts with Filters etc... compared to the MS and 2600.. I just don't get it... took the samples, same volume, attack.. filtered it and the moog just seems to react differently.. ps Your MS 20 Sounds wonderf!!!!! thank you so much take care!!!
@SteefStevens: Even if the resonance of the Moog filter is set to zero there are still some ripples in the filter curve near the cutoff frequency. That's why the overtones are slightly enhanced if you sweep the filter across the spectrum.
totally got the Moog...maybe cuz i have one..lol...the ms 20 and arp though were harder...although i tried to think how R2d2 sounded in the original star wars as a reference for the arp, ms 20...i was at a loss...Thanks for the awesome demo
the korg ms 20 wins hands down in sound quality (in this particular test) hands down if you ask me. Anyways, they are 3 of the most famous retro synths out there today, the one will never beat the other.
Wow, very interesting. I managed to guess correctly, just because I expected the MiniMoog has the "biggest" sound of the three, with the ARP not too far behind. One real surprise was the square wave, which sounded nothing like a "normal" square wave on the Mini... clearly extra harmonics stomping around in there.
I think I know what the difference between Minimoog square wave and MS-20 is, Minimoog is 48% duty cycle, whereas MS-20 is a perfect 50%. The 2% introduces some extra harmonics which gives it a different sound. Actually the MS-20 square is the "correct" one at 50% duty cycle. Arturias have made their minimoog square 48% like the orginal in their emulation - interesting.
Awesome. I guessed right. Which of the synths do I win? (the first demo of the triangle wave made me laugh because the ARP was a little out of tune. Those darn sliders!)
I guessed right on the first guess. I later guessed wrong because I was listening for the fat bottom end of the MS-20 filter. The minimoog triangle wave is the best sound ever, with the possible exception of the 901 triangle (anyone know who can build me one of those?). Of course it helps that I've played an ARP 2600 and I own a mini. The triangle and the square wave on the D has never been duplicated, not even on the voyager!
you could easily tell which clips where from the ms-20 since they're much much dirtier. i find it easier to tell which one's which from listening to the sound of the envelopes rather than the waveforms. for example, the minimoog's intial attack 'punch' is very special and easy to point out. the arp is also quite punchy but more oomphy than hammery like on the moog (i hope i make myself clear :P).
And triangle will have the same effect. Although the duty cycle isnt adjustable on the front panel, there might still be trimpots inside, or variations in component acuracy, or just more acurate electronics, that will cause variations in it's symetry. And likewise start to add in more of the even harmonics.
My sugestion would be to plonk em through a spectum analizer anc check the harmonic series. It'd be plain as day there. ;-)
One thing worth remembering is that even a tiny amount of offset in the square duty cycle will add in a load of extra harmonics. It's probably easiest to see with software as you can get exact with that. But you really need an exact 50/50 duty cycle to get a pure square. 49/51 will add in all the even harmonics, and will sound a lot richer and less like a pure square.
It was fairly obvious between the squares in your video. Synth A was much closer to a pure 50/50 than the other two.
The other thing that's hard to quantify is how these synths actually play, or how enjoyable they are to play. I like a lot of digital and v/a synths, once you play these on good speakers it's amazing how it sounds/feels. Too bad one of the greatest caveats is recording itself. It's obvious in the studio when you are listening to analog through your mixer vs. playback. It's a bit of a disappointment, though a manageable one.
Thanks for the video, it's quite educational and very well done!
Thanks for your comments! Sadly, the only way to know how enjoyable these synths are to play is to play them! The next best way to get information on them is to watch my other videos, which explore their sound and functionality better than a mere waveform comparison! : )
It's so hard to say with this demonstration, though I appreciate it. I think if we heard each play the same melody differences would be more obvious. In this situation (compression and digital recording), we might not hear the different overtones. For instance the Minimoog square wave definitely has richer overtones. You can hear the octave over tone and some more inharmonic bits though it's a little hard to listen for with the h.264 compression.
I'm not very fond of what compression did to the original samples, but even with the degradation of all of the samples, the two truths that existed with the original recordings still exist: 1. There isn't a gigantic difference in tone between them. 2. There is, howevever, a difference in tone between them.
It sounds very similarly. It can only be heard that the example C is detuned, saw has heavy distortion and volume levels are a little different. Sound spectrum directly from the synthesizer's output probably would show more differences.
I know the notes being played are A's so the detuned notes are ARP 2600s (since they are such a bitch to tune, and Gainsay has agreed...), the fatter notes are Moog, and the buzzier notes are Korgs...
A more scientific approach to this problem would be to just study the spectrum and the exact wave shape of each oscillator without the filter and thus determine weather or not there is any real difference in the sound of the oscillators which there in my opinion is :P
I think it is silly for people to assume that oscillators from different synths using the same shape should sound the same. Just look at the schematics and you can see that they were generated differently. Oh, btw, I think I know why you like the Minimoog tri: The signal path for the tri is DC biased and goes through amplifiers that are slightly non-linear. This produces some even harmonics on a normally all odd harmonic wave as well as just a little extra perceived brightness.
Well it isn't just the oscillator you have to factor in the filter and the vca and all the electronics in between the oscillator and output too, if you breadboard just the oscillators they really all sound very much alike. But old electronics age and so older oscillators have more drift. Anyways you have to consider the path it takes to the output colors the tone even with the filter wide open.
It is only the oscillator you have to factor in if the point of your comparison is that the oscillators sound different from one another.
Granted, in each case, the sound of the oscillators are affected by the configuration of the synthesizer's signal path.
As I stated in the description, I have received flack because I stated that the Minimoog's triangle was quite nice. The statement was made in comparison to other unfiltered triangles, and this video (at least to me) proves my point.
You are right, but really you are proving different synths sound different, which is more important proof really. Anyways you have proved your point well enough that different oscillators (or really, different synths) DO sound different and that is a useful proof when people heckle people like us who love these things and appreciate the character. Why else spend $10k on old electronics that need to be pampered and spoiled to consistently work well otherwise? Your collection is pretty awesome
My core desire is to prove that oscillators play a part in overall desirable tone... that it's not just the filter. Admittedly, though... it's hard to escape the filter in non-modular synths! Thanks a lot for your input! Yes, I could tell a fellow enthusiast right away! I don't have all of these synths anymore, I sell some to buy others!
I don't know if it's just about luck but I've got them all right! I easily recognized the gritty triangle of the MS-20 and the smooth and warm minimoog. The ARP was just the one left. Actually, they all sound similar but great!
I could pick out the MS 20 really easily. But the Moog and ARP were different. I guessed that C was the Moog because it was out of tune. Moog sucks at tuning.
Of the three, my Minimoog is the one with the unstable pitch... but it's stable enough. The ARP was likely out of tune because I had mistakenly chosen an osc I hadn't tuned in the process of recording.
But youtube compression is not very good. I would like to see the same vidéo with a non destructive audio compression. I like the visual of this vidéo.
This actually makes me want to perform a similar test. It makes you wonder and really think about the sound. Great demonstration! Maybe now there should be a video of a synth from the same company, but different times. Like the ARP Odyssey and compare all three revisions. Or even different synths from the same company.
thx 4 this, moog has the top square 4 sure, arp takes the ramp, maybe give the korg the triangle even though it sounds saw-ish just so everyone is a winner!
I got them all right!
georgexkr 1 month ago
I prefer the moog for most of them, it seems more full while the de tuned 2600 seems muffled. Korg is full too, I heard a more ring with the plain triangle than moog. great video.
ShredMetalRoman 5 months ago
The problem with your comparison is that the slightly lower tuned samples always belong to the ARP. :)
albedoshader 6 months ago
@albedoshader What? Are you serious? : ) Yeah, when I made this video, I was in a bit of a rush and in my exuberance didn't check the tuning. However, this video isn't really about frequency, it's about timbre. : ) While the tuning is a tipoff if you're trying to guess, it bears little importance in regard to comparing the timbre of the oscillators of the various synths.
AutomaticGainsay 6 months ago
@AutomaticGainsay: Why is the higher quality video private? I’d really like to watch it.
albedoshader 6 months ago
@albedoshader According to my settings, it isn't! : /
AutomaticGainsay 6 months ago
@AutomaticGainsay: According to YouTube it is. That’s strange.
albedoshader 6 months ago
@albedoshader: Could you send me a direct link? That would be great. Thank you in advance.
albedoshader 6 months ago
is the arp just naturally de-tuned or what? the detuning of C lends to an obvious bias...but mainly I was really thinking of getting an ARP before seeing this.
13elieve 1 year ago
@13elieve No, the ARP had a different tuning because of my haste in making the video!
AutomaticGainsay 6 months ago
if anybody needs to tell what's better between a 555 timer, synth1 vst, and a redsound darkstar, i'll post it. just lemme know...
squeakyfromme69 1 year ago
yay i guessed then right! It's good to know that the minimoog actually did have a special triangle. And everyone knows that the ARP is almost always out of tune :P
dafridgemagnet 1 year ago
I was bored today, so i looked at these on a scope,
and the minimoog's Triangle has rounded edges on the negative half of the waveform, so its slightly more Sine like on the bottom half, (or filtered!)
adriansmithmusic 1 year ago
@adriansmithmusic I really wanted to include oscilloscope in this video, but the oscilloscope I have is really inadequate! Thanks for the info!
AutomaticGainsay 1 year ago
@adriansmithmusic: interesting, that's what i found to be the case with the MS-20 Triangle waveform. The Minimoog triangle looks normal to me but has slightly bent flanks.
As I wrote before, the rounded edge on one half of the triangle seems to be the result of a triange-triangel ring modulation. That's what I got with calculating ring modulation of two triangles.
albedoshader 1 year ago
@albedoshader: my bad, I meant sawtooth-sawtooth ring modulation. Also make more sense as you can produce this easily by ring modulating one oscillator with itself to get a "triangle".
albedoshader 1 year ago
@albedoshader
my apologies it is indeed the MS-20,
i was reading the list in the info and forgot that was the randomized list. ;)
adriansmithmusic 1 year ago
@adriansmithmusic : Yep. And apologies for my typos. I wasn't very attentive writing my comments. ;)
It's funny. I'm still trying to get an idea how the waveforms of the MS-20 are generated. Especially the square wave looks weird.
albedoshader 1 year ago
Comment removed
albedoshader 1 year ago
The funny thing is the same discussion was prominent concerning CD A/D D/A converters. "All CD players sound the same". That's so wrong. As soon as a single analog part is in the circuit you will have differences even if the digital rest is the same. And A/D converters can sound very different.
albedoshader 1 year ago
I'm not that familiar with analogs, but I recognized the moog triangle right away. I think because the triangle has a delicate tone, not brash like an unfiltered saw or square, it allows you to hear the unique distortions of an instrument more clearly, perhaps? The moog definitely has the nicest filter, too, but my ear isn't familiar enough to be able to pick it out blind. These subtleties are SO important in choosing an instrument, though!
AbsurdistLover 1 year ago
@AbsurdistLover: The Moog triangle has a strong resemblance with a strongly filtered aquare wave. And the Sawtooth has a very harsh amount of overtones.
albedoshader 1 year ago
@albedoshader: I checked the waveforms of your video.
It's interesting that the MS-20 Triangle waveform seems to be a sawtooth ring modulated with another sawtooth, actually. The ARP-2600 triangle looks almost like a perfect triangle waveform, the Minimoog version has slightly exponential flanks. Very interesting: my virtual analog Korg Prophecy produces a triangle waveform that looks exactly like the Moog version.
albedoshader 1 year ago
@albedoshader: The Minimoog Sawtooth is special. The sawtooth has falling flanks whereas the MS-20 and the ARP-2600 have rising flanks. All three synths have very irregular flanks that show a lot of extra overtones. The MS-20 seems to be different, again. The flanks looke like cut-off sine waves or sigmoid functions (s-shaped).
In comparison, my Prophecy produces a cleaner sawtooth wave, but it's possible to emulate e.g. the MS-20 with waveshaping to get a very similar waveform and character.
albedoshader 1 year ago
@albedoshader: The ARP 2600 Sawtooth is very similar to the Minimoog but its overall shape is the cleanest.
The MS-20 Square waves are very strange. They look like peaks of sine waves with steep flanks at both sides. Minimoog square waves have slightly exponential fall-offs with many irregularities. My Prophecy square wave is much cleaner but also has these fall-offs. The ARP produces the cleanest waveform, again. The tops and bottoms are pretty flat, but with the typical random irregularities.
albedoshader 1 year ago
@albedoshader: You could say the MS-20 does produce waveforms that haven't much in common with the name ;)
The ARP 2600 is the synth with the "most mathematical" oscillators.
And the Minimoog oscillators hahave a pretty "raw" character.
It's surprising how much all three oscillators fluctuate. There's a lot of randomness visible, even the amplitude seems to vary quite a bit from cycle to cycle. All three have these tiny fluctuations in common that give each their own characteristic overtones.
albedoshader 1 year ago
God damn you post so many great VIDS! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!
simon12332 2 years ago
Please accept my sincere apology! : )
AutomaticGainsay 2 years ago
The waveforms from any of these synthesizers are extremely distant form true squares, sines, triangles, sawtooths, etc. Sines on most analog synths have at least 2% distortion. But there is no need for waveform purity in these machines. Fundamental waveshapes are not common in most types of music.
madamerotten 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
too much time on your hands
ybot1983 2 years ago
Thanx for the samples haha... Amazing how the Minimoog Tone... reacts with Filters etc... compared to the MS and 2600.. I just don't get it... took the samples, same volume, attack.. filtered it and the moog just seems to react differently.. ps Your MS 20 Sounds wonderf!!!!! thank you so much take care!!!
SteefStevens 2 years ago
Thanks for watching! : )
AutomaticGainsay 2 years ago
is the last synth on purpose out of tune?
TERRANCIO 2 years ago
No. It was an oversight born of haste and excitement!
AutomaticGainsay 2 years ago
@SteefStevens: Even if the resonance of the Moog filter is set to zero there are still some ripples in the filter curve near the cutoff frequency. That's why the overtones are slightly enhanced if you sweep the filter across the spectrum.
albedoshader 1 year ago
one day i'll actually do the test, but for now im just enjoying the different sounds of the analog world xD
Jobatone 2 years ago
totally got the Moog...maybe cuz i have one..lol...the ms 20 and arp though were harder...although i tried to think how R2d2 sounded in the original star wars as a reference for the arp, ms 20...i was at a loss...Thanks for the awesome demo
raulsworldofsynths 2 years ago
Thanks for watching! : )
AutomaticGainsay 2 years ago
minimoog sounds rich as Mrs Butterworths,
ms-20 sounds hollow and distorted, like a Marshall amp, uh ARP 2600 sounds like the oscilator is wearing out.
jumpmaster98 2 years ago
the korg ms 20 wins hands down in sound quality (in this particular test) hands down if you ask me. Anyways, they are 3 of the most famous retro synths out there today, the one will never beat the other.
thrcman 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
most boring video ever.
dimebucker2 2 years ago
Agreed. : )
AutomaticGainsay 2 years ago
Wow, very interesting. I managed to guess correctly, just because I expected the MiniMoog has the "biggest" sound of the three, with the ARP not too far behind. One real surprise was the square wave, which sounded nothing like a "normal" square wave on the Mini... clearly extra harmonics stomping around in there.
mooguphonic 2 years ago
I think I know what the difference between Minimoog square wave and MS-20 is, Minimoog is 48% duty cycle, whereas MS-20 is a perfect 50%. The 2% introduces some extra harmonics which gives it a different sound. Actually the MS-20 square is the "correct" one at 50% duty cycle. Arturias have made their minimoog square 48% like the orginal in their emulation - interesting.
picsynth 2 years ago
Heh...the only one I know and got right was the Moog....sounds like the Little Phatty's Triangle wave might be about the same as the Minimoog
Spaghettaboutit 2 years ago
I'd like to hear the three of them back to back with no spacing between them (square no filter)
madman22 3 years ago
guessed right
sunnypedaal 3 years ago
Awesome. I guessed right. Which of the synths do I win? (the first demo of the triangle wave made me laugh because the ARP was a little out of tune. Those darn sliders!)
MasterPerotinus 3 years ago
sampleandholds comment about the envelopes on the moog and ARP are well stated.
isopod 3 years ago
I guessed right on the first guess. I later guessed wrong because I was listening for the fat bottom end of the MS-20 filter. The minimoog triangle wave is the best sound ever, with the possible exception of the 901 triangle (anyone know who can build me one of those?). Of course it helps that I've played an ARP 2600 and I own a mini. The triangle and the square wave on the D has never been duplicated, not even on the voyager!
Brent R
isopod 3 years ago
you could easily tell which clips where from the ms-20 since they're much much dirtier. i find it easier to tell which one's which from listening to the sound of the envelopes rather than the waveforms. for example, the minimoog's intial attack 'punch' is very special and easy to point out. the arp is also quite punchy but more oomphy than hammery like on the moog (i hope i make myself clear :P).
sampleandhold 3 years ago
at the end was a key? saying somethin?
Baraquiel62 3 years ago
Idk how come but before I born I´ve seen this..
Baraquiel62 3 years ago
fooled!
markandjohanna 3 years ago
to me it sounds like
A = Moog
B = MS20
C = Arp2600
But that's a bit of a random guess. I'd say that definitely the middle one is the ms-20 though. Am I right??
markandjohanna 3 years ago
lol I thaught it was moog korg and then arp because C sounded a bit out of tune :P
Rhiz0m0rph 3 years ago
i wanna say B is minimoog. C is arp. so, A must be the korg.
tetavo 3 years ago
2:36 sounds like when you boot up a certain Super NES game.
Amishman35 3 years ago
not much of a blind test since the ARP 2600 is a 1/4 tone lower! but cool video...
jazzm4tazz 3 years ago 2
Well, now you've given it away, haven't you. ; )
AutomaticGainsay 3 years ago
And triangle will have the same effect. Although the duty cycle isnt adjustable on the front panel, there might still be trimpots inside, or variations in component acuracy, or just more acurate electronics, that will cause variations in it's symetry. And likewise start to add in more of the even harmonics.
My sugestion would be to plonk em through a spectum analizer anc check the harmonic series. It'd be plain as day there. ;-)
FinbarDink 3 years ago
Hey, thanks for your comments! Interesting and informative!
AutomaticGainsay 3 years ago
One thing worth remembering is that even a tiny amount of offset in the square duty cycle will add in a load of extra harmonics. It's probably easiest to see with software as you can get exact with that. But you really need an exact 50/50 duty cycle to get a pure square. 49/51 will add in all the even harmonics, and will sound a lot richer and less like a pure square.
It was fairly obvious between the squares in your video. Synth A was much closer to a pure 50/50 than the other two.
FinbarDink 3 years ago
The triangle wave of A sounds alot different from that od B and C
lymph12 3 years ago
The other thing that's hard to quantify is how these synths actually play, or how enjoyable they are to play. I like a lot of digital and v/a synths, once you play these on good speakers it's amazing how it sounds/feels. Too bad one of the greatest caveats is recording itself. It's obvious in the studio when you are listening to analog through your mixer vs. playback. It's a bit of a disappointment, though a manageable one.
Thanks for the video, it's quite educational and very well done!
codecxo 3 years ago
Thanks for your comments! Sadly, the only way to know how enjoyable these synths are to play is to play them! The next best way to get information on them is to watch my other videos, which explore their sound and functionality better than a mere waveform comparison! : )
AutomaticGainsay 3 years ago
You should send them to me.
codecxo 3 years ago
I'll throw them in the mail. ; )
AutomaticGainsay 3 years ago
It's so hard to say with this demonstration, though I appreciate it. I think if we heard each play the same melody differences would be more obvious. In this situation (compression and digital recording), we might not hear the different overtones. For instance the Minimoog square wave definitely has richer overtones. You can hear the octave over tone and some more inharmonic bits though it's a little hard to listen for with the h.264 compression.
Any MiniMoog owners agree?
codecxo 3 years ago
I'm not very fond of what compression did to the original samples, but even with the degradation of all of the samples, the two truths that existed with the original recordings still exist: 1. There isn't a gigantic difference in tone between them. 2. There is, howevever, a difference in tone between them.
AutomaticGainsay 3 years ago
It sounds very similarly. It can only be heard that the example C is detuned, saw has heavy distortion and volume levels are a little different. Sound spectrum directly from the synthesizer's output probably would show more differences.
garniak 3 years ago
I know the notes being played are A's so the detuned notes are ARP 2600s (since they are such a bitch to tune, and Gainsay has agreed...), the fatter notes are Moog, and the buzzier notes are Korgs...
I think...
eddievhfan1984 3 years ago
Hey, I was right? J\Had to watch the whole thing though... :P
eddievhfan1984 3 years ago
A more scientific approach to this problem would be to just study the spectrum and the exact wave shape of each oscillator without the filter and thus determine weather or not there is any real difference in the sound of the oscillators which there in my opinion is :P
TheMorMor 3 years ago
I think it is silly for people to assume that oscillators from different synths using the same shape should sound the same. Just look at the schematics and you can see that they were generated differently. Oh, btw, I think I know why you like the Minimoog tri: The signal path for the tri is DC biased and goes through amplifiers that are slightly non-linear. This produces some even harmonics on a normally all odd harmonic wave as well as just a little extra perceived brightness.
AricWax 3 years ago
Well it isn't just the oscillator you have to factor in the filter and the vca and all the electronics in between the oscillator and output too, if you breadboard just the oscillators they really all sound very much alike. But old electronics age and so older oscillators have more drift. Anyways you have to consider the path it takes to the output colors the tone even with the filter wide open.
TheAntiPhilosopher 3 years ago
It is only the oscillator you have to factor in if the point of your comparison is that the oscillators sound different from one another.
Granted, in each case, the sound of the oscillators are affected by the configuration of the synthesizer's signal path.
As I stated in the description, I have received flack because I stated that the Minimoog's triangle was quite nice. The statement was made in comparison to other unfiltered triangles, and this video (at least to me) proves my point.
AutomaticGainsay 3 years ago
You are right, but really you are proving different synths sound different, which is more important proof really. Anyways you have proved your point well enough that different oscillators (or really, different synths) DO sound different and that is a useful proof when people heckle people like us who love these things and appreciate the character. Why else spend $10k on old electronics that need to be pampered and spoiled to consistently work well otherwise? Your collection is pretty awesome
TheAntiPhilosopher 3 years ago
My core desire is to prove that oscillators play a part in overall desirable tone... that it's not just the filter. Admittedly, though... it's hard to escape the filter in non-modular synths! Thanks a lot for your input! Yes, I could tell a fellow enthusiast right away! I don't have all of these synths anymore, I sell some to buy others!
AutomaticGainsay 3 years ago
I don't know if it's just about luck but I've got them all right! I easily recognized the gritty triangle of the MS-20 and the smooth and warm minimoog. The ARP was just the one left. Actually, they all sound similar but great!
Gabrioche 3 years ago
I could pick out the MS 20 really easily. But the Moog and ARP were different. I guessed that C was the Moog because it was out of tune. Moog sucks at tuning.
CKnoxW 3 years ago
It depends on if the Mini had temperature compensation, because the later ones did. ARP's were god-awful to keep in tune. The ARP 2600 was C.
Voltor07 3 years ago
The Moog is always obvious. It has that bent nasal sound
Qiwolf 3 years ago 2
that end music sounded like quest for glory
Hobbs360 3 years ago
I knew which one was the minimoog... typical moog triangle
AN0NYM00S 3 years ago 2
The arp's square doesnt seem to have that square sound.. and that's what makes it so unique ^^
Moccij 3 years ago
I watched this through my oscilloscope and cheated [not that i'd know which is which] but i can clearly see the difference!
grinick 3 years ago
Another great vid!
thechallengeresponse 3 years ago
Neat test....thanks, Marc!
mooghammondb3 3 years ago
i knew the 3rd was arp cuz it was out of tune
grandmaos 3 years ago
Of the three, my Minimoog is the one with the unstable pitch... but it's stable enough. The ARP was likely out of tune because I had mistakenly chosen an osc I hadn't tuned in the process of recording.
AutomaticGainsay 3 years ago
i figured it was the arp since the tuning knob is difficult to get precision pitch with
grandmaos 3 years ago
Well, that is certainly true! When you listen to the filter sweeps, you can hear the ARP because it is much harder to move a slider smoothly!
AutomaticGainsay 3 years ago
ooops, didnt mean knob
grandmaos 3 years ago
Great idea !
But youtube compression is not very good. I would like to see the same vidéo with a non destructive audio compression. I like the visual of this vidéo.
:)
francolamuerte 3 years ago
My guess was:
1.Korg
2.Minimoog
3.Arp
fystasjoppheng 3 years ago
This actually makes me want to perform a similar test. It makes you wonder and really think about the sound. Great demonstration! Maybe now there should be a video of a synth from the same company, but different times. Like the ARP Odyssey and compare all three revisions. Or even different synths from the same company.
Hossinfeffa 3 years ago
That is a FANTASTIC idea... I'd like to see it with different versions of Minimoogs, too... as well as a comparison between the different Moog monos.
AutomaticGainsay 3 years ago
To quote The Joker, "Where does he get all those wonderful toys!"
invis648 3 years ago
The miracle of eBay, mostly!
AutomaticGainsay 3 years ago
For the first three, I'd say:
1. ARP
2. Moog
3. Korg
I've owned a MM, but it's triangle was crook. :-)
nickeax 3 years ago
my guess as well. 1/3! ow!
supercluster 3 years ago
Ha ha!
I did a similar test between a Strat, a Tele and an LP. With overdrive, only a couple of people could tell. :-)
nickeax 3 years ago
really? i can listen to a record and and instantly tell the difference between a lp and strat
chazum0 3 years ago
I like A the best...
Tofuik 3 years ago
You would. ; )
AutomaticGainsay 3 years ago
thx 4 this, moog has the top square 4 sure, arp takes the ramp, maybe give the korg the triangle even though it sounds saw-ish just so everyone is a winner!
jmctag 3 years ago