Moog Vocoder

Any music gear discussions that don't fit into one of the other forums.

Moderators: lisa, Kent, Joe.

toxoplasma_gondii
Learning to Wiggle
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2018 4:21 pm

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by toxoplasma_gondii » Wed Feb 12, 2020 3:05 am

KSS wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 10:33 pm
First you say it does not provide *any* benefit then immediately contradict yourself with "ease-of-repair", which can be *VERY* important to some people.
FWIW, I don't even agree that TH *is* eaiser to repair, as SMD has been around now a *long* time. And even TH zealots in the repair world by now often have plenty of SMD tools, skills and experience. But that doesn't make your minimization of what might be important to others any better. :sstorm:
So you admit that SMT is not necessarily easier to repair, and never mention any other supposed consumer benefits which warrant the time and cost involved with hand-populating and soldering the boards. "Minimization"... give me a break. How absolutely dare someone say something that could make Moog fanboys feel bad! This is the internet; if you feel threatened by opinions that you disagree with, maybe you shouldn't be on here.

You keep making up these excuses for Moog, trying to justify the ridiculous price of this product. If Moog has to charge $5,000 for this vocoder to make a reasonable profit, something is wrong. It just sounds like they are too lazy to actually redesign the circuit using SMT, and the "worker owners" need something to justify their existence. Behringer-haters are always disparaging that company for a supposed lack of innovation, but at least they aren't afraid of redesigning their clones for SMT and then passing on the savings to the consumer. Maybe next Moog can start hand-rolling their capacitors?
On the other hand, your conclusion that this results in an "absurd" and "insulting" price is personal and reflects your own beliefs. Because the fact is that moogs choice -whether you agree with it or not- *does" in fact mean that these *will* cost more to produce. Therefore an assertion that "hand-made" or TH *does* affect the price *is* warranted.

Whether real -or deceptive, as you claim- marketing was involved or not.

You've confused your own beliefs with moogs choice to do something different than you would hope or expect. Be frustrated, be mad, whatever. But you're not going to get very far when the practical and economic reasons behind the choice you disagree with do indeed support the choice made.
I haven't confused anything; you're just talking in circles. I stated my opinion on the subject matter, so of course those are my "own beliefs." I never said that there are not higher labor costs due to populating and soldering the boards by hand, merely that the supposed benefits of this are dubious. I will criticize Moog whether you like it or not. This vocoder is extremely overpriced, and anyone who would pay what Moog is asking for it deserves to be ripped off.

User avatar
racooniac
Wiggling with Experience
Posts: 258
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2015 6:53 am
Location: Austria, Salzburg

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by racooniac » Wed Feb 12, 2020 3:10 am

these days i am just glad somebody has not released yet another awesome synth toy i want to have, that list is long enough already so ... idk ... good job moog .... i guess!? :party:

KSS
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 866
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by KSS » Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:01 am

toxoplasma_gondii wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 3:05 am
So you admit that SMT is not necessarily easier to repair,
best re-read what I wrote, I said that TH is not necessarily easier to repair.
and never mention any other supposed consumer benefits which warrant the time and cost involved with hand-populating and soldering the boards.
Again, perhaps a re-read of what i wrote is in order. It is not for the consumer that moog made this choice, at least not directly. As I explained at length, there are valid economic -read business- reasons for moog to choose hand assembly, even though it will end up costing more for both them and their customers. I made no reference at all to any TH benefit except to acknowledge that for some people who have the belief that it is easier to repair, will find that to be a worthwhile reason to pay more. I did not say i agreed with them. Some people buy expensive cables and power cords too. I think they're making a costly mistake. But that's not going to change their minds.
"Minimization"... give me a break. How absolutely dare someone say something that could make Moog fanboys feel bad! This is the internet; if you feel threatened by opinions that you disagree with, maybe you shouldn't be on here.
Not threatened at all, and also not a moog fanboy. If i felt bad, it was for your completely misunderstanding possible pure economic business motivations for moog to make the choice they did. That of offering something at a higher price than someone else might, and asccepting that sales quantities may not be as high as using another business strategy like Behringer might use. FWIW, I'm neither Behringer hater or fan boy either. I look at each individual situation with an open mind.
You keep making up these excuses for Moog, trying to justify the ridiculous price of this product.
Do you have me confused with someone else? I do not keep making any excuses for moog. I explained to you how a business might choose a higher cost method to make a product and why that choice can have nothing to do with customer deception.
You do understand that moog and Behringer are not in direct competition? They have chosen entirely different market segments, and so have decidedly different business strategies to service their chosen market. Of course there is some crossover, but this doesn't make one or the other wrong. Both appear to be doing well in their chosen segments.
If Moog has to charge $5,000 for this vocoder to make a reasonable profit, something is wrong. It just sounds like they are too lazy to actually redesign the circuit using SMT,
Can you still not understand that they chose to do this a different way than SMD. And I've already shown you why that can make sense for them as a business.
Behringer-haters are always disparaging that company for a supposed lack of innovation, but at least they aren't afraid of redesigning their clones for SMT and then passing on the savings to the consumer.
As I said, I'm not a Behringer hater. I think it's great they're making low cost synths available. You don't seem to understand that these two truths can co-exist. Moog can make more expensive items for reasons that make sense in their market and with their resources, AND Behringer can make inexpensive products for the masses. Neither is harming the other. This is not a zero sum game.
Maybe next Moog can start hand-rolling their capacitors?
No. But they should have used axial caps in their modular re-issues. Using radial on PCBs designed for axial was a crap move. Expecially considering the boutique price. Do you still want to call me a moog fanboy?
I haven't confused anything; you're just talking in circles. I stated my opinion on the subject matter, so of course those are my "own beliefs." I never said that there are not higher labor costs due to populating and soldering the boards by hand, merely that the supposed benefits of this are dubious.
Your point was that the supposed *consumer* benefits were dubious. So I tried to show you that the reasons were not so. But rather that they had reasonable answers based on sound business practice, and therefore not dubious at all. I did notice you chose not to respond to any of that argument. Just kind of bypassed its points in your reply.
I will criticize Moog whether you like it or not. This vocoder is extremely overpriced, and anyone who would pay what Moog is asking for it deserves to be ripped off.
I will support your right to criticize moog, whether I like it or not. And also your right to believe a certain price is unjustifiable. I don't need to be a moog fanboy or a behringer hater to disagree. I am neither. Plenty of people will buy the moog vocoder, andplenty ofpeople will buy Behringer synths. I choose not to vilify either choice.

User avatar
Voltcontrol
Common Wiggler
Posts: 132
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 1:31 pm
Location: Sprang-capelle, The Netherlands

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by Voltcontrol » Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:45 am

Moog launches an expensive Vocoder. Moog sells a decent number of them. Moog Makes some money. Good for Moog.
Some artists use the vocoder to produce interesting music. Good for all who like the music in question.
Some collectors proudly add it to their collection. Good for them.
Some people whinge about it on the internet. Who cares.

User avatar
chiasticon
Wiggling with Experience
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 5:33 pm
Location: the heart of it all

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by chiasticon » Wed Feb 12, 2020 11:48 am

I have zero interest in vocoders but I'll say I love that Moog is strong enough to do this. good for them.

User avatar
Analog Prophet
Learning to Wiggle
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 2:24 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by Analog Prophet » Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:05 am

I love vocoder and yes,I want it. But to me it’s to high milage to how much I would use it in my, or my clients, songs. Still I’m happy Moog rerelease it - great instruments deserve to be available.
The best beat of any music
is the beat of your own heart


http://www.analogprophet.com

User avatar
Moskowitz
Common Wiggler
Posts: 111
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2018 11:22 pm
Location: Earth

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by Moskowitz » Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:42 pm

toxoplasma_gondii wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 3:05 am
You keep making up these excuses for Moog, trying to justify the ridiculous price of this product. If Moog has to charge $5,000 for this vocoder to make a reasonable profit, something is wrong. It just sounds like they are too lazy to actually redesign the circuit using SMT, and the "worker owners" need something to justify their existence.
Poor reasoning has no place in a debate - it is usually better suited to an argument, which is a type of discourse that helps no one except maybe the people who need to vent in such a manner.

It is likely that in this case many things are 'wrong' including the distance between the incomes of musicians who may be interested in such a device and the economic environment worker owned companies must compete in. While this is indeed a complex problem which is currently prominent in our public discourse, asserting that it is simply because people who are 'too lazy' need to 'justify their existence' is beneath comment.

flashheart
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1625
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 7:58 am

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by flashheart » Sun Feb 16, 2020 7:14 pm

Moskowitz wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:42 pm
toxoplasma_gondii wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 3:05 am
You keep making up these excuses for Moog, trying to justify the ridiculous price of this product. If Moog has to charge $5,000 for this vocoder to make a reasonable profit, something is wrong. It just sounds like they are too lazy to actually redesign the circuit using SMT, and the "worker owners" need something to justify their existence.
Poor reasoning has no place in a debate - it is usually better suited to an argument, which is a type of discourse that helps no one except maybe the people who need to vent in such a manner.

It is likely that in this case many things are 'wrong' including the distance between the incomes of musicians who may be interested in such a device and the economic environment worker owned companies must compete in. While this is indeed a complex problem which is currently prominent in our public discourse, asserting that it is simply because people who are 'too lazy' need to 'justify their existence' is beneath comment.
Very well said :tu:
I'm not buying a maths though, not my idea of fun...

User avatar
SynthBaron
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 3315
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 2:43 am

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by SynthBaron » Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:06 pm

This is a limited edition collectors item, no more no less. There are better vocoders for a lot less money. But if you have to show off your Moog badges, then...

User avatar
thetwlo
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 4764
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:05 pm
Location: East Bay, CA US

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by thetwlo » Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:37 pm

SynthBaron wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:06 pm
This is a limited edition collectors item, no more no less. There are better vocoders for a lot less money. But if you have to show off your Moog badges, then...
There aren't many patchable vocoders in production, that I know of. The Doepfer is the only recent one I can think of, and that's no longer made.
Nord Modular excelled at this... but that's digital.
It's a "collectable" thing, for certain. None the less, it's cool that they made it available.

toxoplasma_gondii
Learning to Wiggle
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2018 4:21 pm

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by toxoplasma_gondii » Mon Feb 17, 2020 12:00 am

Moskowitz wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:42 pm
toxoplasma_gondii wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 3:05 am
You keep making up these excuses for Moog, trying to justify the ridiculous price of this product. If Moog has to charge $5,000 for this vocoder to make a reasonable profit, something is wrong. It just sounds like they are too lazy to actually redesign the circuit using SMT, and the "worker owners" need something to justify their existence.
Poor reasoning has no place in a debate - it is usually better suited to an argument, which is a type of discourse that helps no one except maybe the people who need to vent in such a manner.

It is likely that in this case many things are 'wrong' including the distance between the incomes of musicians who may be interested in such a device and the economic environment worker owned companies must compete in. While this is indeed a complex problem which is currently prominent in our public discourse, asserting that it is simply because people who are 'too lazy' need to 'justify their existence' is beneath comment.
So you literally have no argument then? We have to just assume that the company's restructuring into a pseudo-worker's cooperative (which they constantly promote as an inherent good) could not have any effect upon their business decisions? You don't think these worker-owners would have an incentive to maximize their income and short-term benefits? You don't think that collective decision-making might result in a minimization of risk and resorting to the status quo? Worker-ownership makes good sense for a business like a food co-op, which is oriented around a local community, but in the competitive global synth market the advantages are questionable. Meanwhile, Sequential operates with a very small team of only like 5 or so people (can't remember the exact number), while the actual manufacturing is done by a nearby business (unlike Moog, none of their manufacturing is outsourced to China). They produce some of the highest-quality gear I have ever had the pleasure to own, and don't seem to be having any trouble surviving. Is Dave Smith's company somehow less ethical because it's not "worker-owned"? As a logical consumer, I want to get the most bang for my buck. While I am willing to pay a higher price (within reason) for build quality, sustainable production, and such, how many hipsters Moog is able to employ in Asheville is honestly not my concern.

Do you agree that poor, innocent Moog Music simply cannot afford to do SMT runs? If they thought that there would be so little desire for this product that it didn't make sense to produce any more than a small handful at extremely high cost, maybe they should consider making a product that people actually want? I personally would have little interest in this devices even if it was $1,000 because the vocoder in my VC-340 is more than enough for me. Why not release a series of Eurorack modules, including the now-discontinued Moogerfooger circuits, which people have been asking for from Moog for years? But they can't do that because it would destroy their precious brand cachet! This idea that we cannot be disappointed with their management because 'it makes economic sense for them' is idiotic. I used to be a big fan, and miss the days when Moog was making great-sounding, high-quality synth equipment with unique feature sets that weren't entirely out of the price range of the average consumer. However, they have completely alienated me over the past five years or so not only with their condescending political propagandizing, but even more so, with their obnoxious exploitation of Bob Moog's legacy.

KSS
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 866
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by KSS » Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:51 am

toxoplasma_gondii wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 12:00 am
We have to just assume that the company's restructuring into a pseudo-worker's cooperative (which they constantly promote as an inherent good) could not have any effect upon their business decisions?
Seems you're the one making assumptions here. We don't have to assume anything. We can agree that the change in business structure has an effect, and still disagree about whether that effect is positive or negative. Clearly, you see it as negative.
You don't think these worker-owners would have an incentive to maximize their income and short-term benefits?
No more so than the realization that this short-term focus could lead to company failure which means they no longer have a job. I trust the employees understand this.
You don't think that collective decision-making might result in a minimization of risk and resorting to the status quo?
Unless you're intimately aware of exactly how the employee-ownership is arranged, you're just making biased guesses. Employee ownership is NOT synonymous with "leaderless" and neither is it inherently devoid of hierarchy. The result might follow your above concern. However, there's an equal possibility it might not.
Worker-ownership makes good sense for a business like a food co-op, which is oriented around a local community, but in the competitive global synth market the advantages are questionable.
Employee owned companies do fine in other global competitive mfg markets. There's nothing inherent in "employee-owned" to support your position. Details matter. Do you have those for moog? I do not, but then, I'm not making the assertion that they're messing up either. If Mike set this up as one would a food co-op, he's made a big mistake. I doubt he did that and the little that was shared in articles I read at the time -across both synth and non-synth business journals- did not see any standout red flags. Fortunately there are *many* other business arrangements falling under "employeee ownership" which do not look, or act like a food co-op. Your personal myopia is showing.
Meanwhile, Sequential operates with a very small team of only like 5 or so people (can't remember the exact number), while the actual manufacturing is done by a nearby business (unlike Moog, none of their manufacturing is outsourced to China).
Sequential KBDs are of Chinese origin. I'm not positive, but I think the nearby mfg you mention is setupp as a subsidiary of DSI/Sequential.
They produce some of the highest-quality gear I have ever had the pleasure to own,
It's quite easy to find literally a hundred plus posts online which disagree with you on this. Everything from encoders to pots to firmware to screen printing.
Is Dave Smith's company somehow less ethical because it's not "worker-owned"?
Only hear your voice making this straw man argument.
As a logical consumer, I want to get the most bang for my buck. While I am willing to pay a higher price (within reason) for build quality, sustainable production, and such, how many hipsters Moog is able to employ in Asheville is honestly not my concern.
Nor should it be. You,like everyone else gets to decide if a price is too high or not. You seem frustrated that moog is successful with prices you feel are too high. As soon as you add "within reason" to your price concern, you've made it subjective and personal. You don't like their prices, you're free to buy something else. Do you also complain about other high-priced consumer gear?

This second section below appears to address points Imade rather than the post you quoted.
Do you agree that poor, innocent Moog Music simply cannot afford to do SMT runs? If they thought that there would be so little desire for this product that it didn't make sense to produce any more than a small handful at extremely high cost,
Pleasr re-read what i wrote. You've missed the point. It was not that moog "cannot afford to do SMT runs". Nor was it the idea that they'd sell so few as to make that a lesser option. The point is that they made a choice to make a certain product a certain way (TH), and as part of that choice, see the value in the variable run size this TH choice allows. You seem unable to accept that they've made a business decision you disagree with.
maybe they should consider making a product that people actually want?
Maybe you could consider that you are NOT part of target market for this product? And accept that "people actually want" *this* vocoder, made *this* way. Moog music Inc has done a pretty good job of assessing and providing for their market. Since that market appears not to include you, why do you fault them for not meeting your personal expectations? I'll bet they will have plenty of customers for this vocoder, at this price.
I personally would have little interest in this devices even if it was $1,000 because the vocoder in my VC-340 is more than enough for me.
Thank you fro providing clear proof you're not part of the market you're complaining about.
Why not release a series of Eurorack modules, including the now-discontinued Moogerfooger circuits, which people have been asking for from Moog for years?
Eurorack is a race to the bottom, only moreso now that Behringer is involved. It would be foolish for them to pursue eurorack beyond what they've already done. This may change in the future, but for now they'll be better served continuing to serve the people who've bought from them before, picking up new buyers as they come. The easiest way to fail in busines is to try to serve too many different markets at once. Focus is a good thing.
But they can't do that because it would destroy their precious brand cachet!
No. They won't do that because it's a dumb business move. It is easier to upscale your brand than to downscale. Toyota can upscale to Lexus, and Ford to Mercury in past years. But you don't usually see upscale brands moving downmarket unless they create a *very* strong and *clearly* defined and understood division between the two entities. Doing this takes a lot of money, and moog isn't big enough to take that step.
This idea that we cannot be disappointed with their management because 'it makes economic sense for them' is idiotic.
I don't think anyone says you "cannot be disappointed with their management". You're still free to disagree and complain al you want. What *has* been said is that it's a choice they've made -which you clearly and strongly disagree with- and your complaints about it lack insight to the business reasons they've made in arriving at choices you disagree with. It might be idiotic to misunderstand that their economic choices are working fine for them.

I *do* believe they made a few poor technical choices in the ONE, and that they've botched the rollout to some degree. This could have huge effect on them, or not. I don't know enough of the details to say. But if they were to fail soon, I would blame the technical issues with The ONE. NOT the vocoder or other re-issues. *If that were to happen, they wouldn't be the first synth company to fail by putting too much on the line with a big new untested technology polysynth. They'd join ARP and E-mu and a few others.
I used to be a big fan, and miss the days when Moog was making great-sounding, high-quality synth equipment with unique feature sets that weren't entirely out of the price range of the average consumer. However, they have completely alienated me over the past five years or so not only with their condescending political propagandizing, but even more so, with their obnoxious exploitation of Bob Moog's legacy.
Yes, we've heard that very clearly by now from you. We get it. You don't like the choices they've made.
Can you understand that others disagree with you? With the same level of belief that you have in your position?

What's your goal in promoting your belief? Do you think they will change? Do you want them to fail? Do you want us all to agree with you?

My goal in taking the time to reply to you is to point out the alternative viable reasons behind your points of contention in moog's practice of their business. To show that there are two sides to this often seen argument aout what some individual or group thinks a company 'should' do, instead of what they've chosen to do. I've supported Behringer with similar posts, because it's not unique to any one company to have people disappointed with the business choices they've made. But there are often unposted realities behind those decisions that don't get much forum time.

User avatar
chiasticon
Wiggling with Experience
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 5:33 pm
Location: the heart of it all

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by chiasticon » Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:35 am

toxoplasma_gondii wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 12:00 am
They produce some of the highest-quality gear I have ever had the pleasure to own, and don't seem to be having any trouble surviving.
please turn one pot on a $600 Mother 32 and then turn one on a $2800 Prophet 6 and tell me they're of equal quality. DSI make great stuff, I agree. but Moogs are literally tanks in comparison.

User avatar
Just me
Has enough VCA's
Posts: 4447
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 11:45 am
Location: Downtown

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by Just me » Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:25 am

chiasticon wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:35 am
toxoplasma_gondii wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 12:00 am
They produce some of the highest-quality gear I have ever had the pleasure to own, and don't seem to be having any trouble surviving.
please turn one pot on a $600 Mother 32 and then turn one on a $2800 Prophet 6 and tell me they're of equal quality. DSI make great stuff, I agree. but Moogs are literally tanks in comparison.
Which is why the MoogerFoogers worked so well! Everything is built so well you can stomp on it and it continues to work.
If I have water in my ear, is it safe for me to listen to electronic music?

User avatar
SynthBaron
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 3315
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 2:43 am

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by SynthBaron » Mon Feb 17, 2020 2:49 pm

thetwlo wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:37 pm
SynthBaron wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:06 pm
This is a limited edition collectors item, no more no less. There are better vocoders for a lot less money. But if you have to show off your Moog badges, then...
There aren't many patchable vocoders in production, that I know of. The Doepfer is the only recent one I can think of, and that's no longer made.
The Club of the Knobs "C 914B Fixed Filter Bank/C 914E Channel Enhancer/C 998B Audio Spectral Modulator" combination is also a patchable vocoder.

Does patchability make a vocoder "better"? I don't personally think so, especially since few people are going to experiment with it beyond what a pre-patched vocoder would give them. I think this is one of those things that is best done in the digital domain anyway, if only to not have to worry about the total signal to noise ratio of all those analog components combined in order to make a vocoder. Even the Moog One has a digital vocoder, for instance.

mattb
Wiggling with Experience
Posts: 326
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2014 1:11 am
Location: Lost Angeles
Contact:

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by mattb » Mon Feb 17, 2020 3:18 pm

toxoplasma_gondii wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 12:00 am
They produce some of the highest-

I love Sequential Circuits and DSI, however, having owned many of their synths (and working in quite a few studios that have them) ) I kind of wonder if you actually really mean what you wrote.

The encoders on all the DSI line (from prophet8 to the more recent PRO2) are absolutely a nightmare and their OS and UX a little bit clumsy.
That said, they are great sounding machines: I am potentially interested with future releases, regardless of the two points I made (encoders and UX) because I love Dave's sound and his team, from devs to costumer service, is amazing.

In this specific context, using the DSI quality point as a benchmark to diss Moog is very naive in my honest opinion.


At a more general level, I don't quite get how anyone will take so much energy to find negative things about a company.
Moog, like many other brands manufactures great products, some better than others, but ultimately it is up to user case.
Music instruments are tools, they are meant to produce sounds and music: how about putting them to use, and if you do not like one, sell it and buy what you like better.It is really that easy.

At the end of the day, what counts is what you do with them.


Just wanted to add to the critique regarding the price: prices are really subjective.I can understand why someone might think something is overpriced, however, if you are using a specific tool for your business, and you clearly can afford the cost because you know you are going to make money with it, then you will have a different outlook.
I really enjoy playing Cello as a hobby: a $5000 cello will definitely be perceived as expensive to someone like me, because my skills and goal are very different from someone playing, for instance, in a orchestra.

toxoplasma_gondii
Learning to Wiggle
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2018 4:21 pm

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by toxoplasma_gondii » Mon Feb 17, 2020 3:48 pm

KSS wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:51 am
Eurorack is a race to the bottom, only moreso now that Behringer is involved. It would be foolish for them to pursue eurorack beyond what they've already done. This may change in the future, but for now they'll be better served continuing to serve the people who've bought from them before, picking up new buyers as they come. The easiest way to fail in busines is to try to serve too many different markets at once. Focus is a good thing.
I have no interest respond to your entire wall of text, but this comment is especially silly. I guess the bankruptcy of all independent Eurorack companies is imminent now that Behringer is on the scene? There is no room for higher- and lower-end modules in Eurorack? No one is interested in paying a little more for higher-quality and reliable customer service anymore? What is foolish is Moog's refusal to release relatively-cheap circuits at prices that aren't massively-inflated, which merely allows a company like Behringer to swoop in and fill the gap. They could have easily released a stripped-down Model D reissue for $1,000 and sold a ton, but no, they had to do an exact replica priced as close to current vintage prices as they could get away with.
No. They won't do that because it's a dumb business move. It is easier to upscale your brand than to downscale. Toyota can upscale to Lexus, and Ford to Mercury in past years. But you don't usually see upscale brands moving downmarket unless they create a *very* strong and *clearly* defined and understood division between the two entities. Doing this takes a lot of money, and moog isn't big enough to take that step.
Lol. Eurorack is not "downscaling" for Moog. They already release products like the Subsequent 25 and Mother-32, which are lower-end than than the average Eurorack module in terms of features-to-price ratio. And if Moog simply has no choice but to upscale into the stratosphere, why don't we see every single independent synth manufacturer doing the same? The modern incarnation of Moog didn't even become this ultra-high-priced luxury brand making museum-piece replicas until like 5 years ago (coincidentally right after they became "worker-owned"). Bob Moog tried to create innovative and affordable synths (the original purpose of the Minimoog); I really don't think he would like the direction the company has gone in since his death.
Yes, we've heard that very clearly by now from you. We get it. You don't like the choices they've made.
Can you understand that others disagree with you? With the same level of belief that you have in your position?

What's your goal in promoting your belief? Do you think they will change? Do you want them to fail? Do you want us all to agree with you?

My goal in taking the time to reply to you is to point out the alternative viable reasons behind your points of contention in moog's practice of their business. To show that there are two sides to this often seen argument aout what some individual or group thinks a company 'should' do, instead of what they've chosen to do. I've supported Behringer with similar posts, because it's not unique to any one company to have people disappointed with the business choices they've made. But there are often unposted realities behind those decisions that don't get much forum time.
I made a brief comment of a few sentences expressing my disgust for the recent changes in the company. That would have been the end of my contributions to this thread, if you hadn't come along to dissect every one of my sentences, accuse anyone who disagrees with Moog's recent direction of simply not understanding economics (I never said that Moog's decisions were not economically-viable in the short-term), and imply that I believe my criticism will somehow cause Moog to change their business plan. Can you understand that I simply don't find your excuses for Moog's pricing and their unnecessary use of through-hole (let alone hand-soldering) credible?

mat1
Learning to Wiggle
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2015 6:57 am

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by mat1 » Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:26 pm

I can't imagine they are planning on making loads of these. This is probably aimed more towards Lawyers and Dentists than working musicians.

I hope one day they can offer the Model D at a more reasonable price.

User avatar
SynthBaron
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 3315
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 2:43 am

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by SynthBaron » Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:08 pm

mat1 wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:26 pm
I can't imagine they are planning on making loads of these.
I think they have a set number of new old stock case parts from the original Moog factory (via Mike Bucki), and that's all they're going to make in that format.

User avatar
synthetek
Wiggling with Experience
Posts: 438
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2015 3:32 am
Location: Orange County, California
Contact:

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by synthetek » Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:10 pm

toxoplasma_gondii wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 3:48 pm
Can you understand that I simply don't find your excuses for Moog's pricing and their unnecessary use of through-hole (let alone hand-soldering) credible?
There new products are all SMT the hand soldering is only on the reissue stuff.

Rally
Learning to Wiggle
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2015 7:43 am
Location: USA

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by Rally » Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:18 pm

mat1 wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:26 pm
I can't imagine they are planning on making loads of these. This is probably aimed more towards Lawyers and Dentists than working musicians.
If I had to venture a guess, the largest group of buyers will be the commercial studios. It is staggering the price tags for the microphones in the locker, outboard processing gear and collection of instruments.

User avatar
EPTC
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1192
Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 9:01 am
Location: Austin TX
Contact:

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by EPTC » Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:17 pm

Rally wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:18 pm
If I had to venture a guess, the largest group of buyers will be the commercial studios. It is staggering the price tags for the microphones in the locker, outboard processing gear and collection of instruments.
Will agree on this. There's an entire section of Sweetwater where the price per item is around $5-10,000 per piece of a mastering suite - all for post-production items (Compressors of any variety - Dangerous Music, API, Pultec EQ reissues, etc) - I've always suspected these prices are to the advantage of both the buyer and the maker (the buyer, being a business, can mark it as an expense) I know Moog made a go on getting into 500 series stuff but rackmount gear is surprisingly resilient and certain categories jump right into the price point we're all alarmed by with this.

I don't mind them doing this. I want Moog around. GRP V22 (not discussed here) has more patch points than the Moog and is in current production, as well.

Current price of Vocodium trending currently at $3,250.48 USD - It's on the move!

KSS
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 866
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by KSS » Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:32 pm

SynthBaron wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 2:49 pm
The Club of the Knobs "C 914B Fixed Filter Bank/C 914E Channel Enhancer/C 998B Audio Spectral Modulator" combination is also a patchable vocoder.

Does patchability make a vocoder "better"? I don't personally think so, especially since few people are going to experiment with it beyond what a pre-patched vocoder would give them. I think this is one of those things that is best done in the digital domain anyway, if only to not have to worry about the total signal to noise ratio of all those analog components combined in order to make a vocoder. Even the Moog One has a digital vocoder, for instance.
MW user Fitchie has a reboot -and offers a very fine DIY kit- of the Elektor Vocoder in the DIY section. It's patchable. Disagree that patchability is worth less because few use it. Lots of moduleshave features unused by the majority. Personally am glad they're there.

As for the digital vs. Analog, same logic can be applied to FFBs. Where the same reasons and justifications for each apply. Disagree that either is "best". Their differences make them each important and valid.
Last edited by KSS on Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

KSS
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 866
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by KSS » Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:43 pm

toxoplasma_gondii wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 3:48 pm
Bob Moog tried to create innovative and affordable synths (the original purpose of the Minimoog)
You really have no clue about this do you? The minimoog was developed -by Bill Hemseth- against Bob's wishes. Bob was dragged 'kicking and screaming' to its release. He wanted to continue the company's focus on sales of the very expensive modulars.
Can you understand that I simply don't find your excuses for Moog's pricing and their unnecessary use of through-hole (let alone hand-soldering) credible?
Yes.

Should probably add that Bob was quite literally near tears when Mike -Moog music Inc's president at the time; the man who engineered the employee ownership transfer- informed him that Moog music Inc had become profitable. His reply to Mike was that he'd never been part of a profitable company before. It was extremely emotional for him. This was near the end of his life, and one can feel quite confident that BobM believed in the judgement of Mike to continue the moog name and lineup. (I realize you said "after he died".) But while yours is speculation, here is yet another fact standing in opposition to your statements. /fix typos and add last paragraph

KSS
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 866
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: Moog Vocoder

Post by KSS » Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:05 pm

mat1 wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:26 pm
I can't imagine they are planning on making loads of these. This is probably aimed more towards Lawyers and Dentists than working musicians.
And studios. One way for commercial studios to remain relevent in todays bedroom music era, is to have devices available thebedroom folks cannot afford.

I admit it raises red flags for me when people try to leave out "working musicians" as if all or most are too poor to purchase gear at todays prices. They may well be, but even poor musicians have found ways to make the hard personal choices necessary to purchase the always expensive tools of their trade for many, many years before any of us were born.

Even at the supposedly unfairly high prices of mid and upper end gear today, the fact is that gear costs as a percentage of income is less than ever. And this was true before Behringer entered the synth market.

Post Reply

Return to “General Gear”