MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index
 FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 
WIGGLING 'LITE' IN GUEST MODE

Mos-lab to bring back 901s...
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> 5U Format Modules Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next [all]
Author Mos-lab to bring back 901s...
Synthoholic
...schematically identical to the original Moog.
kindredlost
A source for the news?

Is this the 901 full oscillator or the suite of 901-A/B ?

I'd love to have an EXACT duplicate of the 901-A this time. Instead of the exponential core 901-A. It would be nice to see the 901-A with the original linear core and exponential conversion circuit. The tracking behavior might be more akin to the character of the OG Moog modular. Not that the one's Seb made before weren't nice, and they do have a lovely sound but the original is so full of character that it would be great to have that cloned. Didn't noddyspuncture build his?
Synthoholic
It's on Mos-lab's facebook page. Details forthcoming.
kindredlost
Facebook is banned at work LOL. I’ll check when I get home tonight. Do you know if it’s the 901-A,B sets?
Synthoholic
Not sure about the details yet but I've never known him to do anything other than á la carte. The 901s are different obviously.
EMwhite
How about a thread entitled "A Serious Discussion on Osc Topology" that walks through examples of Hz/V, linear, Expo in driver vs. OSCs etc etc. By somebody that actually understands the theory of design because they've examined schematics and put these on scopes (Tek of course); maybe somebody like Dave Brown.

I hear, read, and in some cases even recite what I've read and learned about the original Taurus synth pedal design vs. Hz. based Korg vs. original 901 and 921 vs. the clones that are released, deceased, re-released, sheep in wolf's clothing (some of the COTK modules); The voltage range comes into question sometimes (Minitaur) and certainly use of tempco or not or where are also all part of the discussion.

I'm probably asking for too much; a white paper but anything factual will work.

I should add that I have the SW 901abbb and have been planning on doing a schematic check on a by-component basis, just don't have the time. If Seb says he is going to do a faithful design, I believe him.
Psychlist1972
Yay!!

I love my Mos-lab 921 set, but really wanted a set of 901s to go with them.

Pete
josaka
seb quit the 901s as they were taking too much time to build..
wonder whats changed..?
and how people who bought the non "authentic" ones he sold before feel..
kindredlost
josaka wrote:
... and how people who bought the non "authentic" ones he sold before feel..

Does't bother me. I've been having a ball with them up to now. They sound and perform well and if the "new" version are any different then that would be a good thing too. Having both would be extra flavor (okay, and a little excessive).

I still need to pick up a few of the 921-B's. I only have a 921-A I bought from some Wiggler here a while back. I never got around to buying the rest of the array. Sort of goofy but then again it sux being out of space in the system.
noddyspuncture
kindredlost wrote:
Didn't noddyspuncture build his?


I did indeed, both 901a and 901b... it was a labour of love and turned out great...! love
josaka
kindredlost wrote:
josaka wrote:
... and how people who bought the non "authentic" ones he sold before feel..

Does't bother me. I've been having a ball with them up to now. They sound and perform well and if the "new" version are any different then that would be a good thing too. Having both would be extra flavor (okay, and a little excessive).

I still need to pick up a few of the 921-B's. I only have a 921-A I bought from some Wiggler here a while back. I never got around to buying the rest of the array. Sort of goofy but then again it sux being out of space in the system.


smile .. the whole 5u thing is basically excess !!
Synthoholic
I'll probably always be curious to compare the legendary 901s to the original, and until I hear a vintage moog I will probably always wonder how close the clones (including the reissues) really get. I don't think I feel excluded in the meantime having the upgraded/tainted/inauthentic 901s. In fact, I've always tended to prefer the 921 series anyway. The jury is still out...
josaka
921 definately not as "phat" as 901 .. 921 has sync+pwm less drift.. more modern sounding..
as I wrote before its a little like a 909 vs an 808.. 901s have a bit more weight and roundness 921 a bit harder..

seb from mos labs said the 901 are the real sound of moog.. maybe why he has started making them again..

johny_gtr
I have 901ABBB set from Synth-Werk and 921 ABBB set from Mos-Lab. There is a difference in sound but it can disappeared in chain of other modules, delays and reverbs.

As a fact 921 OSC is a lot more stable and can track (without range knob) 6 octaves with small deviation between lowest and highest C. 901 can be stable in 3-4 octaves with ~ the same deviation in frequency. As a plus for "less stable" 901 set has some unpredictability that some can name as "organic".
josaka
johny_gtr wrote:
I have 901ABBB set from Synth-Werk and 921 ABBB set from Mos-Lab. There is a difference in sound but it can disappeared in chain of other modules, delays and reverbs.

As a fact 921 OSC is a lot more stable and can track (without range knob) 6 octaves with small deviation between lowest and highest C. 901 can be stable in 3-4 octaves with ~ the same deviation in frequency. As a plus for "less stable" 901 set has some unpredictability that some can name as "organic".


I have same sets +a mos lab 921.. and concur on all points smile

..the sub bass of the 901 stays in a chain/effects mix though... you can use most any osc in a mix/chain and it becomes hard to tell any difference.. people who do "berlin" and go on about "that moog sound" I find a little funny as most "berlin" is about 50% effects..
johny_gtr
josaka wrote:
johny_gtr wrote:
I have 901ABBB set from Synth-Werk and 921 ABBB set from Mos-Lab. There is a difference in sound but it can disappeared in chain of other modules, delays and reverbs.

As a fact 921 OSC is a lot more stable and can track (without range knob) 6 octaves with small deviation between lowest and highest C. 901 can be stable in 3-4 octaves with ~ the same deviation in frequency. As a plus for "less stable" 901 set has some unpredictability that some can name as "organic".


I have same sets +a mos lab 921.. and concur on all points smile

..the sub bass of the 901 stays in a chain/effects mix though... you can use most any osc in a mix/chain and it becomes hard to tell any difference.. people who do "berlin" and go on about "that moog sound" I find a little funny as most "berlin" is about 50% effects..


after some time I found for myself quite boring to play "berlin school" on Moog sound and "techno" 606+101+303. It's more interesting to swap instruments for genres.

for my understanding "berlin school" features:
1) 16-8 or less steps sequences without syncopes
10) string pads
11) delays on sequences
kindredlost
you kids get off my lawn
I'm old enough to be a "BS or die" guy!

I like playing and listening to that style over almost anything anymore but I do get how it can be boring to play all the time and we all can use a break from our favorites at times.
Makes the return romance even better. Lotsa Love

There is just something magical about hearing that big Moog sound.
noddyspuncture
johny_gtr wrote:
901 can be stable in 3-4 octaves with ~ the same deviation in frequency.


I find my 901's are easily good for 5 octaves.. please could you explain/elaborate on your "stable in 3-4 octaves" observation...!?
SynthBaron
noddyspuncture wrote:
johny_gtr wrote:
901 can be stable in 3-4 octaves with ~ the same deviation in frequency.


I find my 901's are easily good for 5 octaves.. please could you explain/elaborate on your "stable in 3-4 octaves" observation...!?


I'm never sure if when people say "tracks for 5 octaves" if they mean 2 1/2 octaves above and below middle C or 5 octaves above and below middle C.
johny_gtr
SynthBaron wrote:
noddyspuncture wrote:
johny_gtr wrote:
901 can be stable in 3-4 octaves with ~ the same deviation in frequency.


I find my 901's are easily good for 5 octaves.. please could you explain/elaborate on your "stable in 3-4 octaves" observation...!?


I'm never sure if when people say "tracks for 5 octaves" if they mean 2 1/2 octaves above and below middle C or 5 octaves above and below middle C.

5 octaves always mean 5 octaves between lowest and highest notes, no matter it's middle C or not. Miley Cyrus
johny_gtr
noddyspuncture wrote:
johny_gtr wrote:
901 can be stable in 3-4 octaves with ~ the same deviation in frequency.


I find my 901's are easily good for 5 octaves.. please could you explain/elaborate on your "stable in 3-4 octaves" observation...!?

As minimum I will try. Maybe I did something wrong.

I have SW ABBB set and Kenton ProSolo/Expert Sleepers as midi-to-cv.
1) If I work with Kenton I configure tone (pitch for one note) and scale (difference in pitch between same notes in different octaves, as usual between C0 and C1 or C0 and C2) for one OSC B. After this I use Frequency verifier to match pitch for all OSB B.
2) If I work with Expert Sleepers, its software has auto tuning systems.
3) For both variants I use simple VCO->Mixer->VCA (no filters, no effects of course)

My results: for 3.5 octaves I have almost perfect pitch (for my ears, tuner will tell about difference for 1-2 indexing lines). For bigger range difference is bigger. On 5 octaves I will difference in tone (like F instead of G). On very high notes I will hear "limit of OSC" - it doesn't matter which note I press - I will hear the same note.

I had a conversation with SW and he told me that it's ok.

Just for me, it's not a problem because I'm used to using both voices (one for bass and one for lead) or just record parties track by track and 4 octaves range in enough. It can be an issue for a live compact jam with only 1 voice (1 voice per 16U cabinet).
noddyspuncture
johny_gtr wrote:

As minimum I will try. Maybe I did something wrong.


My results: for 3.5 octaves I have almost perfect pitch (for my ears, tuner will tell about difference for 1-2 indexing lines). For bigger range difference is bigger. On 5 octaves I will difference in tone (like F instead of G). On very high notes I will hear "limit of OSC" - it doesn't matter which note I press - I will hear the same note.


I think that the problem with the original / standard 901's 'as they come' is indeed the 901a expo temperature/moisture thing. It's the main reason they get the bad press - and indeed the useable keyboard range can vary drastically.

The only solution, basically, is that you need to calibrate the unit for how things are 'there and then' at that moment in time. I take my modular out on live shows and also to demo and display at synth meets. It's usually plain sailing.

I once took it to a meet on a really wet day after it had been in the van in the garage overnight. When I got it there it was the worse it had ever been. It was unusable and I was actually quite worried... but as the afternoon progressed - and luckily well before 'showtime' - they turned the air conditioning on, it steadily improved and suddenly was as I know it to be... completely solid.

I have learned from that and now take a hairdryer out with me so I can blow warm air into the back and 'dry out' any moisture...!

The other thing is, with the standard set up, the modules would need 'pulling' and the calibration procedure performed so that the scale corrected for the new environment. I don't need to do that with my 'scale compensating' modification and I can just tweak the scale from the front panel. It's a God send and means within minutes I can be up and running - and stay up and running without any problems. Just a re-tweak/fine tune needed now and then.

It's just the nature of the beast... but luckily I have the beast reigned in more with my modifications... cool
Analog Music
But isn't the drift on Moog 901s considered a feature ?
josaka
if you want in instrument that plays perfect notes all across the scale (ie most keyboard players) I would say no.. if you are a moog lover and like the "imperfections" then yes.. its not rocket science..
noddyspuncture
josaka wrote:
if you want in instrument that plays perfect notes all across the scale (ie most keyboard players) I would say no.. if you are a moog lover and like the "imperfections" then yes.. its not rocket science..


Here's a video of a I played gig last year. If you wind in to 17:05 - where the main 'AquaTarkus' synth section starts.

I've used this to demonstrate because this uses basically the full range of the keyboard and also I am switching different oscillator banks (controllers) in and out. You can hear it's definitely not perfect, in that it has indeed drifted from where I'd set it at the start of the piece - but it is a long piece..!

I don't think it's any worse than any of the early ELP bootleg recordings - in fact it's better than some I've heard... cool

MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> 5U Format Modules Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next [all]
Page 1 of 6
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group