|
Mopho - New Dave Smith Synth - $439!!!
|
View this Thread in Original format
| echosystm |
| price is good, the interface looks pretty terrible though. |
|
|
| T-Soma |
Why isn't there more hardware synths with endless rotary controls like the nord lead 3 had?
This is one fugly yellow box... |
|
|
| cryophonik |
You guys do realize that a synth's primary purpose is to SOUND good, not LOOK good, right? :)
@T-Soma - all of the Dave Smith synths (Evolvers, Prophets, and Mopho) have endless rotaries. They just don't light up like the Nord 3's did. It's interesting to note that Clavia did not use those same rotaries for the Wave.
This synth is obviously following the trend of small, affordable desktop synths with minimal hands-on control, such as the DSI Mono Evolver, Access Snow, Waldorf Blofeld, etc. It comes with a software editor for creating/editing patches, and relies on the front-panel controls for easy access to the most-used parameters. Looks like a pretty well thought-out design for an affordable 100% analog mono synth, if you ask me. |
|
|
| Subtle |
| quote: | Originally posted by cryophonik
@T-Soma - all of the Dave Smith synths (Evolvers, Prophets, and Mopho) have endless rotaries. They just don't light up like the Nord 3's did.
|
Thats kinda the point now isnt it ?
The Moog Phatty does have lids like on the Nord 3, but no endless rotary. |
|
|
| kitphillips |
I really like the look, it reminds me of the 90s:p
Endless rotaries with lights aren't used anymore because they had too much lead or mercury or something, thats why the NL3 got discontonued. I don't know why they can't come up with LEDs which don't have heavy metals in them? Its a bit annoying they aren't putting in the effort...
I think synths need a good interface to be appealing, thats half the point of hardware, but I actually like what DSI have done with this thing, its pretty cool IMO. Don't really like monosynths though.
Actually, looking a bit closer, I really wish they'd put in a step equencer on the front panel so we could do the 303 thing... I'd buy it then... |
|
|
| cryophonik |
| quote: | Originally posted by Subtle
Thats kinda the point now isnt it ?
|
I assume you've never used a DSI synth? He uses a different approach with his controls. The rotaries are touch-sensitive, so when you grab one, the current value for that parameter is immediately displayed on the screen twice - one on top, which serves as the reminder for that preset, and one on the bottom which changes as you turn the knob. So, you can always see what your original value was, thereby achieving the same purpose as the LEDs on the N3. But, Dave Smith's approach is better IMO because you can still see original value even after you change it. |
|
|
| Subtle |
| quote: | Originally posted by cryophonik
But, Dave Smith's approach is better IMO because you can still see original value even after you change it. |
My Virus B does that too. |
|
|
| cryophonik |
| Of course, the advantage of the N3 is that you can see at a glance what all/most of your settings are for each patch. You can't do that with the DSI or Virus synths, except in the case of the software editors for the DSI synths and, to a lesser extent, the Virus TI (although the parameters are on multiple tabs in the Virus Control VST). |
|
|
| Kevy Kev |
| Ugly piece of kit. How does it sound? |
|
|
| echosystm |
| quote: | Originally posted by cryophonik
You guys do realize that a synth's primary purpose is to SOUND good, not LOOK good, right? :)
|
i meant the interface "looks" bad as in "it seems pretty useless for programming patches". using a software editor for a hardware synth kind of defeats the purpose for me.
for $439, I think I would rather pay to get an evolver ($549 or so?). alot of the componentry is likely to be similar, but you get a way better interface and more features. |
|
|
| Storyteller |
| Dave Smith motherphucker... Right:rolleyes: |
|
|
|
|
