[alex_x]

Am I the only one who takes these “legends returns“ for a lack of innovation?

Noticed that for a while in triple A gaming. I get it, companies are playing safe, but I don’t want to be sold the same thing over and once again..

Edit: typo

[Torn]

I think it's a bit different in this case. There are plenty of modern synthesisers, from Korg and others

This is intended to be a faithful recreation of a classic synth, for collectors / rich enthusiasts

[malthaus]

over the last few years there was a huge demand for analog synthesizers again after them being mostly replaced by digital synths since the mid 90s for 2.5 decades with users demanding from the traditional companies to re-issue the classics

they are classics for a reason and subtractive synthesis is mostly "done", so it's more about bringing classic sound characters due to subtle differences in components / architecture back

[ofalkaed]

I agree and even when they offer something new, they stick close to well established topologies generally just adding in more. I don't need 8 flavors of filter that I have to scroll through with a single button, just give me one or two good ones. Great that you are giving me four envelops but if they all trigger at the same time it is not that useful, provide some other way to trigger them or give us a trigger delay. Distortion after the filter? why? put it before so I can shape it, I can apply post filter distortion outside the box if I want it and there it can take advantage of the envelope's dynamics. But thanks for giving me a tincan reverb and a delay that can't be clocked by the LFOs or even synced.

There are so many simple things they could do to greatly increase what these synths are capable of, but they don't.

Oh, and give me a way to wipe the memory or at least a bank of empty patches so I don't have to delete a preset every single time or make an empty patch to save over the presets or make a file of empty patches on the computer that I can copy over through midi.

I could go on, 30 years of hitting my head against the same walls. I am almost at the point of building my own synth and a bela and a pi-zero would make it pretty easy to do, but I haven't quite gotten irritated enough to do it, would rather spend that time making music.

[TheOtherHobbes]

There's been a lot of innovation in music tech with synths like the MicroFreak.

Korg have made a series of original synths (and VSTs) that are nods to old tech with a lot of updated features.

The VST market in general is a bubbling mix of clonery and originality.

The reissues and clones are for people who want a specific vintage sound but can't afford the insane prices of vintage originals.

[mrandish]

> a lack of innovation

This is a recreation of a retro classic but in terms of new flagship hardware synthesizers there isn't much innovation because music synthesis because the gating factor is DSP and a well-configured modern laptop generally has more than enough power to generate just about any kind synthesized sound used in commercial musical performance. The innovation is happening in software plug-ins.

Synth hardware is generally for live performers or those who don't want to work with a MIDI keyboard connected to computer as their primary interface.

[willtemperley]

> I don’t want to be sold the same thing over and once again.

I don't want to be sold the same music, algorithmically recreated again and again to maximise profit while circumventing copyright law.

A lot of people like analogue music. I certainly do, and I wonder if Korg are anticipating a reaction to the slop.

[uwagar]

i am the other one.

[curioussam]

Maybe not. But you are clearly not the audience.

[steve1977]

Toys for rich kids with a lack of talent basically.

[Cthulhu_]

I'd argue if they had a lack of talent they would prefer modern and digital alternatives - same/more/better sound and tools to churn out stuff with.

[steve1977]

They don't need to churn out stuff. They just want to show off what they possess.

[bayindirh]

You're exactly right. Let me support you by adding some examples:

- Look Mum No Computer: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLluPQLh1xzlLcJd9CbAxE...

- Caught in Joy: https://www.youtube.com/@CaughtInJoy

They just show their stuff, and what they can do with these. No talent, just show. /s

[steve1977]

Look Mum No Computer is interesting.

On one hand, he's a bad example, because - at least as far as I know - he builds most of the stuff himself. So he's not showing off expensive synths he bought, which makes this kind of a category error.

On the other hand, he's a great example, because in terms of his musical output, he's a quite bland epigone of artists like Howard Jones or Thomas Dolby of the 80s. And in the playlist you linked of Wendy Carlos.

Now the thing is, I love Howard Jones, Thomas Dolby and Wendy Carlos. But they exist already. I don't need a copy. That's exactly the point I was trying to make.

I don't need yet another YouTuber recreating Axel F. on his freshly bought Jupiter-8. I want new Axel Fs!

[bayindirh]

He's a great DIYer and explorer of sounds, so that part is true.

However, he's not a sole YouTuber who imitates 80s music to put out videos. The videos are a mere side product.

He builds stuff, experiments and sets up museums[0], or even restores old cars[1]. When I first stumbled upon him, he was restoring old musical instruments in a warehouse and that place was a makeshift museum of sorts.

I believe he doesn't care if his musical output or taste doesn't meet someone's expectations, he's just being himself, and I like him being just that. Maybe he is not breaking new musical grounds, but he's thinking very outside the box while being a tonal copy of somebody else, and this is certainly something.

He would probably buy one of these, or clone it himself, just because he wants to, and this makes him the target audience of this squarely.

[0]: https://www.lookmumnocomputer.com/projects#/this-museum-is-n...

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/@lookmumnoengine

[defrost]

If it's purchased as an idle showpiece toy, then sure talent is optional.

There will be a few old school Brian Eno adjacent types who'll want one to make noise with ... and some talent will be requisite to avoid sounding like a bag of cats being poked with a stick.

[alwa]

I, for one, specialize my sonic practice in immersive cat-yowl soundscapes…

[defrost]

What are things Ronald Erle Grainer demanded of Delia Derbyshire?

[otabdeveloper4]

It's for collectors. There's no musical value in a polyphonic analogue synthesizer.

[Lio]

This is the oddest statement I've read in a while.

How is there "no musical value in a polyphonic analogue synthesizer"?

There's a lot of unique music written using polyphonic analogue synths. Enough that people clearly like the sounds of subtractive synthesis. If they were only used just to playback tracks written in the 70s, 80s and 90s then they would still have value.

The growth of cheap analogue synths proves it's not just collectors that appreciated the user interface and the sound. There's a legion of people buying Bass Stations, Korgs, Moogs, Behrigners and Eurorack.

If Yamaha could reproduce a modern analogue GX-1 or CS-80 recreation I bet they would get snapped up too.

[otabdeveloper4]

Sorry, I can't make any sense of your comment.

"Polyphonic analogue synth" means several independent envelope generators and VCFs.

Doing this is pointless -- it increases your synth's costs by orders of magnitude and provides no musical benefit whatsoever except make it slightly easier for piano players with no synthesizer experience to play it.

> The growth of cheap analogue synths

Yes, but literally none of them are doing analogue polyphony. The entire idea is just massively stupid and makes no sense in the 21st century.

[Lio]

What is it that you don't understand?

> Yes, but literally none of them are doing analogue polyphony.

That's simply not true.

Korg Minilogue, Mililogue XD, Prologue, Behringer Pro-800, Sequential Take 5, Prophet Rev2, Prophet-10, Arturia PolyBrute 12, Oberheim OB-X8, Moog One and many more.

Polyphonic analogue synths are popular and very useful actually.

[otabdeveloper4]

Most of these are either discontinued or some sort of paraphonic and/or hybrid-digital architecture. :)

There's no point in trying to make an analogue synth that mimics the percussive nature of piano.

Synths are much closer to woodwinds.

[Lio]

> Most of these are either discontinued or some sort of paraphonic and/or hybrid-digital architecture.

I can't tell if this is a serious reply or not.

A quick look at Thomman would show you that they are all analogue polysynths not paraphonic mono-synths.

I think the only model from my list in short supply is the Prologue but you could swap it for a Dreadbox Nymphes if you like.

The Minilogue xd is "hybrid" only in the sense that it has an additional 3rd digital oscillator per voice but that can be turned off. It's still a true 4 voice, 2 oscillator analogue polysynth. If that's not good enough then swap it for a Behringer UB-Xa.

There's no shortage of models to choose from.

There's so much amazing music made with analogue polysynths. I don't know why anyone would ignore the work of Vangelis for instance. If you think he uses his CS-80 polysynth as a bad piano I don't know what to tell you.