Fantastic comparison! The history and ties between these two are so interesting. Keep up the great work! PS - I believe the Memorymoog uses an analog CEM 3340 for its LFO.
You're pushing the VCOs. way into.saturation which is why it sounds so harsh and aggressive .All the beautiful tones are when setting the VCOs to max 11 o.' clock.
I'll take an OB-X over either, but all of these are great synths. Dave Smith recognized the greatness of Oberheim too. And they were first to offer user presets, but not as extensively as the Prophet 5.
I can understand that; many would prefer a Prophet or memorymoog, but the Ob had certain characteristics that could be preferred depending on what you liked. It was more lush and musical for pads for example.
The MM sounds gorgeous and looks fantastic. If only it had been more reliable … Zach, why not just say ‘Curtis’ instead of C-E-M; it saves you one syllable. ;)
Memorymoog all the way! Proud owner of two, learned as much about electronics as I have music! Bob left before the MM was released, my favorite owned modern Moog is the Voyager XL, which Bob did work on.
Thanks for the overview, pretty unusual (& awesome) to see these both together. Just a few years difference but tech of the time really was moving forward at a great rate. Not really into 70s aesthetic for most thing but damn! These are still great looking 😍- ( unlike the current fugly Moog one).probably will never have chance to play a memory Moog but can’t help but hope an affordable clone of one might come along one day...
Love the synth content! I'd go with the MOOG. Question: Are the synth effects on applications like Logic accurate sounding? If I were to add one to my track, could I likely find a real instrument to perform that part in live concerts?
I think what I like more than either about this video: just your approach to playing. suddenly I’m back in my childhood watching Starman. All synth players should learn to master your style before they’re let near a synth.
@@asoundlab can I be brutally honest? That's exactly what I don't always like... I have no idea what training Zach had, but it's very obvious he can PLAY the keys !!! But personally, in this video, I found too many parts where he was playing too many notes at the same time, for sounds that weren't fit for that purpose. So you have lots of overlapping notes that don't always sound as great as they could when played with less notes. Less is more... it's a lesson I still have to tell myself very often when I use my classical training too much while playing my synths. They're not a piano, or Rhodes, or organ, or... They're synths, and it makes sense that most of them usually only have around 6 voices. And when you can play they keys, it's hard not to start using that 10 fingers possibility too much. (guilty here as charged) Also, for the sake of the video's, I think it would show-case the synths more if there was more knob - turning with one hand while playing with the other. Just my humble 5 cts... Keep up the EXCELLENT work !! ;)
Memorymoog uses CEM3340 for all 3 oscillators. Glad I sold mine. Gorgeous sound but service headaches. Bird told me Moog will likely announce new 6 voice polysynth within a year.
I believe that the Prophet 5 and the Memorymoog don't have split keyboard like the Prophet Rev2, the Novation Summit and the Korg Prologue. For me this is important on a poly synth as I like to play lead and chords live on a poly or string synth and have bass on a mono synth and other overdubs on another poly synth played via MIDI via a sequencer. I know definitely for the Prophet 5 that it doesn't do this and I don't think the Memorymoog does either. Both sound great at different things. I love the powerful sound of the Memorymoog but for practical use in my music I would probably go for the Prophet 5 out of the two of them as it would sit better in the mix in my opinion. Great demonstration of two great classics.
Correct. The Prophet 10 Rev 3 is the only Prophet that offers a split keyboard mode. Sadly, not even the Rev 4 P5/10 offer this feature. But maybe Dave will add that feature in a software update... Pretty please Dave!
@@FakeGlasses I bet if a manufacturer made an analogue synth with similar specs to the Jupiter 8 but added more patch storage memory, doubled the voices, more effects and a digital oscillator to add DX7 type sounds, people would still moan about it not having aftertouch and only having one LFO lol
@@samjones714 I was strictly talking about vintage Prophets under the original pruduct line, but you could count the T8 I suppose (although it uses different CEM chips).
I had owned a prophet 5 rev 2 and rev 3 before trying out a memorymoog. Many people had told me the prophet 5 is the more musical of the two. To me, it's memorymoog all the way. It felt like a polyphonic modular. The (sometimes almost rhythmical) beatings you get from 3 oscillators is quite magical. Having polyphonic lfo's (polymod) on 2 remaining oscillators is also great (compared to single remaining oscillator on the prophet 5). I also prefer the moog filter. Both have an amazing sound and interface.
Most users felt the opposite. The P5 made it onto thousands of records. MM not so.
2 года назад
I’d say the Memorymoog. I’ve never played one but I have the Cherry Audio Memorymood and it’s great. Sounds very much like the original. I have used a Prophet 5 though and allthough rhey sound great too I have never taken to them.
The memorymoog was way late to the analog party, and in fact, they rushed into production even to get it out in 82, as Moog by then was late to polyphony. Which is a large part of why it’s such a mess mechanically inside I got the last few from Moog; I sold them, because I felt I could get the same thing with less problems for unison by stacking several moog sources, which are very similar vintage and sound, and by using a Prophet five as well. The memorymoog is incredible when it comes to stacking voices and power, and was a seminal early contributor to the beginning of hip-hop and electro early 80s in NYC. It’s great for raw sounding stuff, Prophet more musical imo. however, the voicing isn’t nearly as musical as some others. Tuning was quite stable using the later plus version. One either loves or hates this thing usually. Here’re are early NYC examples of each, 1982 and 81 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-UA6R-JYVTlI.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-H1KQ3-XmBGU.html
@@SPAZZOID100 yes the value of the memory Moog is crazy high compared to the prophet. And it’s sound is more superior because you can’t really get that sound in any modern synth. The prophet you can get in plug ins and even the new prophet 5 rev 4 that you can get brand spanking new! So that leaves the Moog with a higher value and more superior sound since you can’t really emulate it, at least not that I know of
Sadly, used prices for these make them collector items only. Real musicians (with enough money) will opt for modern descendants. The Moog One is much more powerful, reliable, and cheaper than the MM. Musicians with a lower budget will opt for virtual software implementations ;-)
@@tihinter Really? I can understand buggy (firmware is clearly not Moog’s forte), but I didn’t expect noisy. That will be a problem as soon as I win the lottery and buy one ;-)
@@dans.8198 The Moog One has dynamic expanders that bing down each voice before they get mixed together for the internal FX and outputs. You can change the ratio of those in the system menu (quite hidden). If you open those up, its much noisier than a Memorymoog or an OB8. Same goes with the Voyager, that is much noisier than my vintage Model D. The Matriarch is quite clean, though, in this regard.
