Thank you for the comparison, Mark! I was very impressed with the Matriarch’s fast envelopes, paraphony, stereo panorama, and chameleon-style ability to shift from classic Mini sounds to more modern style. Awesome synth in its own right
Very helpful to hear a skilled synthesist doing this comparison. The more I spend time with the Matriarch, the more I realize it can go further timbrally than I’ve taken it so far.
I love my Matriarch, but my Roland HS60 died so I need to replace it. So...Grandmother or Model D mini? I can get a new Grandmother for about a grand. How much for the MMD?
@@auxorion that's exactly where waldorf went wrong when they made the quantum. slap some rosewood panels on that bad boy and it would sound so much less cold and sterile
Omg - don't tell me, finally someone who gets it? I used to say the same thing decades ago when comparing say the DX7 Mk II to an original DX-7. If you do your own programming then you know about tweaking relentlessly to find that sweet spot, or at least that magical moment that says hit the save button. Now try to duplicate that same sound exactly on something else and it's never going to be as good. Best comment I've ever seen anywhere... not including my own :) Thanks - you made my day!
Great comparison. Never had a MiniMoog (too expensive for me). But a Matriarch and and a Subsequent37. Both are so beautiful synths. A Grandmother has been sold rececently to get an Access Virus KB. Nevertheless the Grandmother is also a great sounding synth ... and affordable too (at the first glance pretty simple but using the patch points it offers so much sound shaping features).
Those are all great boards. Don't let the market forces and such influence what your own ears tell you. The Mini sounds great and is what it is. But it's not the be-all to great sound and is extremely limited in its functionality by today's standards. I bought mine 35+ years ago or so for a whopping $375 . Wouldn't dream of buying one at today's prices when there's much more fun stuff to be had. Thanks for watching!
I have a Matriarch and a Voyager. The Voyager I've had for about 18 years now and the Matriarch for four months. I've been using the Matriarch to help 'reverse engineer' some of the patches I created on the Voyager but forgot how I made them!
Cool- I’ve got the Voyager as well. They all take me to different sonic places. It’s rare I do a comparison between any 2 synths, usually just a curiosity thing and a way to get familiar with a new synth. I just don’t care if one sounds different from the other. In fact that’s the point of having multiple synths. Thanks for your comment.
Mark 3:44 PM (1 minute ago) to UA-cam Hi Olivia- I would think so since the Matriarch and Sub37 provide a much different sound from the OB6. I think either would compliment it well. It really comes down to which flavor of Moog you prefer and of course the features that are important to you. I can't think of a Moog synth whose sound I don't like. But based on the other synths I have I look for something that really stands out as different. I also have a Voyager, Memorymoog and of course you saw the Minimoog. The Matriarch was one that after a few notes I just had to have it. While I can get it to sound pretty close to the Minimoog on certain sounds it goes many other places that the Minimoog can't. Also I love semi-modular synths. But if you need patch memory then certainly consider the Sub37. It's also fine synth and would work well with the OB6. Thanks for asking and watching my video.
Hi Mark, are you able to explain what you're doing with those patch cables, and why that leads to a closer sounding minimoog rather than just having no patch cables?
Hi AJ- oooh that was a long time ago but fortunately it was very basic patching. The Matriarch doesn’t have dedicated knobs for adjusting the pulse width. So you have to patch it externally in order to change it. In this case I have it going to one of the on- board attenuators to match it up with the narrow pulse width waveform on the Mini. For the other waveforms it’s not doing anything. Thanks for watching and for your comment.
@@Mark-fc7id Thanks for the super quick reply! I've watched this video like a hundred times, and I'm sure I'll watch it again a hundred more.... especially now that there's another reissue!
I love this video and reference it often. Everyone loves the Minimoog of course, but the Matriarch is its natural evolution: It sounds exactly the same. I'm sure I get some raised eyebrows here, but hear me out: "Purists" might say the Mini sounds richer, warmer, while the Matriarch sounds flat and boring. I disagree and here's why... Long ago, my Minimoog Voyager was THE synth reigning in my arsenal. Then one day without warning, oscillator three fell WAY out of tune from the other oscillators. Since my day job is RADAR technician, I asked Moog for the calibration procedure and it took about 90 minutes to complete. In this comparison, the lower notes on the Mini sound sharp....but the Matriarch uses updated components - ICs likely, which can be still analog (without going too far into it, all digital circuits are analog, just A LOT faster) - but far more stable than discrete components. Discrete components vs ICs (plus 50 years) are the only differences between these two relatives. In summary, if this Minimoog had all three oscillators calibrated across their full range before filming, these two synths would likely sound exactly the same...except the Matriarch can play more than one note at a time.
Thanks for that. The Matriarch survives the comparison better than I thought it would. * Can you explain a little more about why you patched the cv from the mixer to the pw of oscs 1 and 2? I’m not clear yet how applying a control voltage to change the dc offset will affect the sound. Thanks! Sub’d.
Yeah, that wasn't real clear. The Matriarch does not have dedicated knobs to control the pulse width. It only has a true square wave ( 50% duty cycle) and a somewhat narrower pulse width waveform (25%I believe) . You have to use the CV to vary the pulse width to anything else. I just patched in a mixer output that with nothing connected to its input lets me vary it between 0 and 5V. I set it for 5V and ran that through one of the Matriarchs attenuators so I could get variation in both directions (+/-5V). These are really attenuverters. Hope that make sense and thanks for your comments.
Great comparison Mark! Many thanks. I have a Minimoog reissue on its way. I also have a Prophet 6, a TVS Pro and a Sub 37. In terms of cover a wide palette of sounds I’m wondering if I should change the Sub 37 for a Voyager. I like its flexibility, stereo, and memory patches. Would that make sense to you? How would you compare the tone and timbre (presence-wise) from the Matriarch, Voyager and Sub 37 compared to the Mini? Thanks in advance, stay safe.
Hi Micka- that’s a tough question especially for someone who really doesn’t care what folks have vs what they’re doing with these cool toys . Voyager is a fabulous synth, but I’ve really enjoyed playing the Sub 37 when I get the opportunity. Unless there is a compelling reason to switch I would focus on making each synth you currently have YOURS. Own (really own) each of your synths and bend them, break them (figuratively) and nurture them until they bow to your every whim. That takes years and will never happen if you’re constantly “upgrading”. And remember, no one cares what you use. Get past the shopping/dopamine fix we all struggle with. Sermon over:). And thanks for your comments
Minimoog obviously a classic but remember comparisons make us bias toward the older or more expensive unit. I think we tend to only give the newer cheaper one credit for how close it can sound to the older expensive one. The new keyboard doesn’t get credit for its own character and sound territory. I see two synths that aren’t better than one another just maybe one is better for you
Couldn’t have stated it better myself Ryan. I think many people want a new synth to capture as much territory as possible including coming as close as possible to the vintage sounds they love. For me I want a new synth to give me something unique I don’t already have. But it still has to sound awesome. Thanks for your reply!
Though I prob won't get a response, I am curious how you have the Matriarch patched AS you add Osc"s and changes from the Mini and then on the Matriarch. I have both of these Keyboards and would like to patch the Matriarch as you have. Any chance to get info on what you patched ON the Matriarch? Thx.
Tbh I don't really remember what I used when. Looking at the video the only patching I'm using is connecting one of the attenuators to the PW input of osc 1 and 2 using the mult. Remember the Matriarch doesn't have dedicated PW knobs so you have to control PW with patching. I also having that attenuator going to the scope on my modular. When trying to match up to synths or replicate a sound my approach is always to go by sound. It doesn't matter that the settings don't match - just use your ears and experiment to get as close as possible. Thanks for the comment.
Great question (since I have all 3). I would say the Matriarch with the caveat that I almost never attempt to make one synth sound like another. I did so here for curiosity but to me it's one of the more boring quest with a synth. I much prefer letting a synth take you where it wants to go. Anyway the Matriarch has more of that bottom end "poof" like a mini where the Voyager is more pin point accurate. I wouldn't have all 3 if they sounded the same. I did come to realization the other day that the Voyager with the break-out boxes may be the best CV controller out there. I cant think of anything else that gives you the flexibility of so many CV outputs including all the pitch modulation that's available from the Voyager itself. Thanks for the question and for listening.
@@Mark-fc7id Thanks for answer. I'm asking because I have a choice - buy Voyager OS or Matriarch. Unfortunetally original Model D is out of my budget at this moment.
@@pproniuk . Just to clarify after some thought... Whether it sounds like a mini or not I don't recall reading anyone that's been disappointed by the Matriarch sound. Definitely not true of the Voyager. The Voyager does so much more than a mini and I'm ecstatic over my recent discovery with the feedback trick (see one of my other recent videos). But yeah, it's just not a mini sound-wise.
Probably an unsatisfactory answer but it depends what I’m going for. I currently have a conventional bass sound out of the mini triggered by my foot pedals. The Matriarch has a synced rhythmic modulation sound integrated with some euro modules. Much more explorative sounds can be had with the Matriarch. Do I prefer it? Nah, just different tools.
Errr… I’m not the right person to answer that. I let my synths take me where they want to go. For the most part I don’t set out trying to make a particular sound although I know some people who are incredible doing this. Just not my thing. Thanks for listening.
I preferred the mini, but the Matriarch doesn't sound bad. Maybe just the difference between a vintage synth with aged components and a new one? It would be interesting to hear a comparison between a mini reissue and the Matriarch. Without meaning to be controversial it would also be interesting to compare the Behringer poly d with the Matriarch.
Thank you for your comment David. The Mini and Matriarch are quite different sound-wise. As this demo was done sometime ago I don't recall all the detail but you have to overcome the basic raw character of one synth to match up with another. No different then when comparing any 2 synths. In this case it's not old vs new components, just different designs by different people who select parts and component values based on what their ears tell them sounds the best. AFAIK (and read) there was no attempt in the Matriarch design to have it sound exactly like Mini. But you can get close on some sounds if you work it. Thanks for watching.
@@Mark-fc7id I read somewhere that the Matriach design is based loosely on their old modular synth modules. You can get an old moog modular and an old mini to sound pretty similar, hence my wondering if the new versions might sound close too. Anyway thanks for doing the comparison above it was informative.
There’s an interview with the designer out there somewhere. Iirc I think you’re right as to the starting point. But like this engineer said (paraphrasing) it sort of turns and twist along the way to what sounds good to the designer with inputs from others. Also it has to sound good in paraphonic mode which changes how mono mode sounds. It’s a lot of adjusting of part values until they’re satisfied with the entire end result. I have a MacBeth Elements and while I was waiting 18 months for delivery Ken changed the filter maybe 10 times until he got the results/sound he wanted. I’m a retired EE and while not involved in audio design I’m all to familiar with the design process. Hope that helps/ I enjoy these discussions.
@@DaveBessell I think the biggest difference is the Matriarch's lack of high treble compared to the Minimoog, although the Matriarch's eurorack outputs have more treble than the main ones.
Matriarch sounds so digital sounds coId , lifeless not fluid, you have to be Def not to hear huge difference , I will keep my old moog , same with my prophet 5 and even sh 101 tb 303 nothing came close as of sound of .. I'm not saying new not sounding , but ..but all sounds like paper. old synths sounds organic .. new is fake and old is real .,. get real not by media get real by your ears and heart... Mark thanks for video ...
Well people definitely hear things differently with lots of variables to consider. Btw digital doesn’t have to sound lifeless. But to me it often does sound so on again off again. Thanks for your comment.
Do you own a matriarch? I own one myself and I can tell the sound of the matriarch is anything but cold. I own software and hardware synths matriarch is one of the best sounding synths on the market. the minimoog and the matriarch will have slight difference because they are built different with different compartments. Its no different than a guitar player owning three different fenders they all sound different and have slight nuances that make them unique.
Thank you for the comparison, Mark! I was very impressed with the Matriarch’s fast envelopes, paraphony, stereo panorama, and chameleon-style ability to shift from classic Mini sounds to more modern style. Awesome synth in its own right
Thanks Paolo, could have said it better!
I wouldn't call the Matriarch's envelopes, "fast"...
Very helpful to hear a skilled synthesist doing this comparison. The more I spend time with the Matriarch, the more I realize it can go further timbrally than I’ve taken it so far.
Kind of forgot about this. The Matriarch gets a lot more use than the Mini these days being such a versatile synth. Thanks so much for your comments.
I love my Matriarch, but my Roland HS60 died so I need to replace it. So...Grandmother or Model D mini? I can get a new Grandmother for about a grand. How much for the MMD?
there is clearly an audible difference between the wood vs plastic side pieces
this is now a tonewood debate comments section
@@gizka6816 Plastic sounds a little more thin. I like the warmth of wood.
@@auxorion that's exactly where waldorf went wrong when they made the quantum. slap some rosewood panels on that bad boy and it would sound so much less cold and sterile
Hola amigo, it was a joke!!
;)
😂
Thank you, Mark - great comparison.
Thanks!
Just the video I was looking for! Thanks!
Thank you Brodie.
i’ll take 5 oscillators of unison any day
Should've tried making the refernce sound on the Matriarch, and then try recreating it on the Mini.
Omg - don't tell me, finally someone who gets it? I used to say the same thing decades ago when comparing say the DX7 Mk II to an original DX-7. If you do your own programming then you know about tweaking relentlessly to find that sweet spot, or at least that magical moment that says hit the save button. Now try to duplicate that same sound exactly on something else and it's never going to be as good.
Best comment I've ever seen anywhere... not including my own :)
Thanks - you made my day!
Great comparison. Never had a MiniMoog (too expensive for me). But a Matriarch and and a Subsequent37. Both are so beautiful synths. A Grandmother has been sold rececently to get an Access Virus KB. Nevertheless the Grandmother is also a great sounding synth ... and affordable too (at the first glance pretty simple but using the patch points it offers so much sound shaping features).
Those are all great boards. Don't let the market forces and such influence what your own ears tell you. The Mini sounds great and is what it is. But it's not the be-all to great sound and is extremely limited in its functionality by today's standards. I bought mine 35+ years ago or so for a whopping $375 . Wouldn't dream of buying one at today's prices when there's much more fun stuff to be had.
Thanks for watching!
The minimoog just has that sound, man.
Thanks! Wished for more snappy ADSR filter fatness tho
I have a Matriarch and a Voyager. The Voyager I've had for about 18 years now and the Matriarch for four months. I've been using the Matriarch to help 'reverse engineer' some of the patches I created on the Voyager but forgot how I made them!
Cool- I’ve got the Voyager as well. They all take me to different sonic places. It’s rare I do a comparison between any 2 synths, usually just a curiosity thing and a way to get familiar with a new synth. I just don’t care if one sounds different from the other. In fact that’s the point of having multiple synths.
Thanks for your comment.
Matriach got eq boost in mid/low which makes it sound much nicer.
They sound very different, Bahringer did a good job copying the sound of the Minimoog twice.
Hi Mark! Question from Argentina. Moog Matriarch is a good partner of DSI OB6 than the subsequent 37? (
Multipurpose style of music) Thanks a lot!
Mark
3:44 PM (1 minute ago)
to UA-cam
Hi Olivia-
I would think so since the Matriarch and Sub37 provide a much different sound from the OB6. I think either would compliment it well. It really comes down to which flavor of Moog you prefer and of course the features that are important to you. I can't think of a Moog synth whose sound I don't like. But based on the other synths I have I look for something that really stands out as different. I also have a Voyager, Memorymoog and of course you saw the Minimoog. The Matriarch was one that after a few notes I just had to have it. While I can get it to sound pretty close to the Minimoog on certain sounds it goes many other places that the Minimoog can't. Also I love semi-modular synths. But if you need patch memory then certainly consider the Sub37. It's also fine synth and would work well with the OB6.
Thanks for asking and watching my video.
I have all 3, all very different. I’ve recently added a prophet 10 too!
@@JamesCorbettMusic5000. Nobody asked. Weird flex, whilst offering the OP zero help. Kudos.
Hi Mark, are you able to explain what you're doing with those patch cables, and why that leads to a closer sounding minimoog rather than just having no patch cables?
Hi AJ- oooh that was a long time ago but fortunately it was very basic patching. The Matriarch doesn’t have dedicated knobs for adjusting the pulse width. So you have to patch it externally in order to change it. In this case I have it going to one of the on- board attenuators to match it up with the narrow pulse width waveform on the Mini. For the other waveforms it’s not doing anything.
Thanks for watching and for your comment.
@@Mark-fc7id Thanks for the super quick reply! I've watched this video like a hundred times, and I'm sure I'll watch it again a hundred more.... especially now that there's another reissue!
I love this video and reference it often. Everyone loves the Minimoog of course, but the Matriarch is its natural evolution: It sounds exactly the same. I'm sure I get some raised eyebrows here, but hear me out: "Purists" might say the Mini sounds richer, warmer, while the Matriarch sounds flat and boring. I disagree and here's why...
Long ago, my Minimoog Voyager was THE synth reigning in my arsenal. Then one day without warning, oscillator three fell WAY out of tune from the other oscillators. Since my day job is RADAR technician, I asked Moog for the calibration procedure and it took about 90 minutes to complete. In this comparison, the lower notes on the Mini sound sharp....but the Matriarch uses updated components - ICs likely, which can be still analog (without going too far into it, all digital circuits are analog, just A LOT faster) - but far more stable than discrete components. Discrete components vs ICs (plus 50 years) are the only differences between these two relatives.
In summary, if this Minimoog had all three oscillators calibrated across their full range before filming, these two synths would likely sound exactly the same...except the Matriarch can play more than one note at a time.
Thanks for that. The Matriarch survives the comparison better than I thought it would. * Can you explain a little more about why you patched the cv from the mixer to the pw of oscs 1 and 2? I’m not clear yet how applying a control voltage to change the dc offset will affect the sound. Thanks! Sub’d.
Yeah, that wasn't real clear. The Matriarch does not have dedicated knobs to control the pulse width. It only has a true square wave ( 50% duty cycle) and a somewhat narrower pulse width waveform (25%I believe) . You have to use the CV to vary the pulse width to anything else. I just patched in a mixer output that with nothing connected to its input lets me vary it between 0 and 5V. I set it for 5V and ran that through one of the Matriarchs attenuators so I could get variation in both directions (+/-5V). These are really attenuverters.
Hope that make sense and thanks for your comments.
@@Mark-fc7id Thanks for the quick response re using cv to change PW. I get it now.
Great comparison Mark! Many thanks. I have a Minimoog reissue on its way. I also have a Prophet 6, a TVS Pro and a Sub 37. In terms of cover a wide palette of sounds I’m wondering if I should change the Sub 37 for a Voyager. I like its flexibility, stereo, and memory patches. Would that make sense to you? How would you compare the tone and timbre (presence-wise) from the Matriarch, Voyager and Sub 37 compared to the Mini? Thanks in advance, stay safe.
Hi Micka- that’s a tough question especially for someone who really doesn’t care what folks have vs what they’re doing with these cool toys . Voyager is a fabulous synth, but I’ve really enjoyed playing the Sub 37 when I get the opportunity. Unless there is a compelling reason to switch I would focus on making each synth you currently have YOURS. Own (really own) each of your synths and bend them, break them (figuratively) and nurture them until they bow to your every whim. That takes years and will never happen if you’re constantly “upgrading”. And remember, no one cares what you use. Get past the shopping/dopamine fix we all struggle with.
Sermon over:). And thanks for your comments
I think its pretty obvious for the money amd the additional features Matriarch is the way to go.
what gauge strings are you using?
42.
Minimoog obviously a classic but remember comparisons make us bias toward the older or more expensive unit. I think we tend to only give the newer cheaper one credit for how close it can sound to the older expensive one. The new keyboard doesn’t get credit for its own character and sound territory. I see two synths that aren’t better than one another just maybe one is better for you
Couldn’t have stated it better myself Ryan. I think many people want a new synth to capture as much territory as possible including coming as close as possible to the vintage sounds they love. For me I want a new synth to give me something unique I don’t already have. But it still has to sound awesome.
Thanks for your reply!
@@Mark-fc7id I can see why you wanted a matriarch while having a minimoog ( Iassume you had that first?). Both these synths rule. Happy music making!
Could it be that you recorded the Matri in stereo? Cheers mate!
This is the audio equivalent of butter
Though I prob won't get a response, I am curious how you have the Matriarch patched AS you add Osc"s and changes from the Mini and then on the Matriarch. I have both of these Keyboards and would like to patch the Matriarch as you have. Any chance to get info on what you patched ON the Matriarch? Thx.
Tbh I don't really remember what I used when. Looking at the video the only patching I'm using is connecting one of the attenuators to the PW input of osc 1 and 2 using the mult. Remember the Matriarch doesn't have dedicated PW knobs so you have to control PW with patching. I also having that attenuator going to the scope on my modular.
When trying to match up to synths or replicate a sound my approach is always to go by sound. It doesn't matter that the settings don't match - just use your ears and experiment to get as close as possible.
Thanks for the comment.
Which one is better for you to emulate/sound closer to original Model D - Matriarch or Voyager ?
Great question (since I have all 3). I would say the Matriarch with the caveat that I almost never attempt to make one synth sound like another. I did so here for curiosity but to me it's one of the more boring quest with a synth. I much prefer letting a synth take you where it wants to go. Anyway the Matriarch has more of that bottom end "poof" like a mini where the Voyager is more pin point accurate. I wouldn't have all 3 if they sounded the same.
I did come to realization the other day that the Voyager with the break-out boxes may be the best CV controller out there. I cant think of anything else that gives you the flexibility of so many CV outputs including all the pitch modulation that's available from the Voyager itself.
Thanks for the question and for listening.
@@Mark-fc7id Thanks for answer. I'm asking because I have a choice - buy Voyager OS or Matriarch. Unfortunetally original Model D is out of my budget at this moment.
@@pproniuk . Just to clarify after some thought... Whether it sounds like a mini or not I don't recall reading anyone that's been disappointed by the Matriarch sound. Definitely not true of the Voyager. The Voyager does so much more than a mini and I'm ecstatic over my recent discovery with the feedback trick (see one of my other recent videos). But yeah, it's just not a mini sound-wise.
Which do you prefer?
Probably an unsatisfactory answer but it depends what I’m going for. I currently have a conventional bass sound out of the mini triggered by my foot pedals. The Matriarch has a synced rhythmic modulation sound integrated with some euro modules. Much more explorative sounds can be had with the Matriarch. Do I prefer it? Nah, just different tools.
@@Mark-fc7id can matriarch get into p funk bass territory
Errr… I’m not the right person to answer that. I let my synths take me where they want to go.
For the most part I don’t set out trying to make a particular sound although I know some people who are incredible doing this. Just not my thing.
Thanks for listening.
Nice video thanks
Thank you Nicolas!
I preferred the mini, but the Matriarch doesn't sound bad. Maybe just the difference between a vintage synth with aged components and a new one? It would be interesting to hear a comparison between a mini reissue and the Matriarch. Without meaning to be controversial it would also be interesting to compare the Behringer poly d with the Matriarch.
Thank you for your comment David. The Mini and Matriarch are quite different sound-wise. As this demo was done sometime ago I don't recall all the detail but you have to overcome the basic raw character of one synth to match up with another. No different then when comparing any 2 synths. In this case it's not old vs new components, just different designs by different people who select parts and component values based on what their ears tell them sounds the best. AFAIK (and read) there was no attempt in the Matriarch design to have it sound exactly like Mini. But you can get close on some sounds if you work it. Thanks for watching.
@@Mark-fc7id I read somewhere that the Matriach design is based loosely on their old modular synth modules. You can get an old moog modular and an old mini to sound pretty similar, hence my wondering if the new versions might sound close too. Anyway thanks for doing the comparison above it was informative.
There’s an interview with the designer out there somewhere. Iirc I think you’re right as to the starting point. But like this engineer said (paraphrasing) it sort of turns and twist along the way to what sounds good to the designer with inputs from others. Also it has to sound good in paraphonic mode which changes how mono mode sounds. It’s a lot of adjusting of part values until they’re satisfied with the entire end result.
I have a MacBeth Elements and while I was waiting 18 months for delivery Ken changed the filter maybe 10 times until he got the results/sound he wanted. I’m a retired EE and while not involved in audio design I’m all to familiar with the design process.
Hope that helps/ I enjoy these discussions.
@@Mark-fc7id Coincidentally I have a Macbeth M5n. Ken makes great sounding stuff.
@@DaveBessell I think the biggest difference is the Matriarch's lack of high treble compared to the Minimoog, although the Matriarch's eurorack outputs have more treble than the main ones.
Mini low notes at 3:18 rule over the Matriarch. Much more character.
Moog is like Mexican food. All the ingredients are the same, just in different configurations
Matriarch sounds so digital sounds coId , lifeless not fluid, you have to be Def not to hear huge difference , I will keep my old moog , same with my prophet 5 and even sh 101 tb 303 nothing came close as of sound of .. I'm not saying new not sounding , but ..but all sounds like paper. old synths sounds organic .. new is fake and old is real .,. get real not by media get real by your ears and heart... Mark thanks for video ...
Well people definitely hear things differently with lots of variables to consider. Btw digital doesn’t have to sound lifeless. But to me it often does sound so on again off again. Thanks for your comment.
@@Mark-fc7id I did have for long time R.A moog
I have a record when I sold my R.A Moog called Musonic , I think I can tell differences how moogs synths sounds
Do you own a matriarch? I own one myself and I can tell the sound of the matriarch is anything but cold. I own software and hardware synths matriarch is one of the best sounding synths on the market. the minimoog and the matriarch will have slight difference because they are built different with different compartments. Its no different than a guitar player owning three different fenders they all sound different and have slight nuances that make them unique.
Digitial? Where do you get that? My Matriarch and Grandmother sound warm and rich.