Korg Monologue – Monophonic Analogue Synthesizer
korg.comKorg has to be my favorite synthesizer company atm. They really hit the sweet spot of great aesthetics and usability. The sound is, of course, a matter of taste. The monologue is more mid-rangy than you'd expect from an analogue synth but I guess it has its place and, more importantly, it gives the synth a unique character. Personally I think the market is over-saturated with emulations of classics.
Someone else mentioned that the Monologue seems too limited and I think that's the wrong way to look at it. What counts, imo, is that a synth has a certain something that makes you want to be creative with it. The monologue/minilogue does that for me. While there is a place for complex synths, too many knobs can turn you from intuitive playing to abstract thinking which is not necessarily what you want as a musician. An extreme example: There are more people who made a career out of tweaking a 303 or a Moog than there are people who did so by (actually) programming a dx7 or a modular system.
I am of the mindset that the really interesting world is software synths. I love all the tools and sounds out there.
I use to buy chips for chip tune sound and own a few hardware synths. Now software rules for me.
I went with softsynths for a while, and you certainly get a wild variety of sonic possibilities for a lot less money. They are fantastic for sound sculpting. If I was going to do a movie soundtrack, or sound design for games or something, I would likely rely on them almost exclusively.
However I found myself really missing the immediacy of knobs and buttons, especially when I got back into playing my Korg MS-2000 with other people. That's not a true analog synth, but it has a front panel that is comparable to them. I have used MIDI controllers to try to get the same kind of feeling from a softsynth, but there's something to be said for having your control surface's layout match that of your synth--I never had the same kind of intuition about keying in or tweaking a sound via MIDI controller as I do with the Korg.
I dream of an interface that can be physically rearranged so that its knobs and sliders mirror the layout onscreen. Like a tactile touchscreen. A good synth's signal flow can be understood by "reading" its control layout, whether it's hardware or software, and for me at least, there is a huge loss when mentally mapping a well-designed interface to a boring row of eight unlabeled knobs.
Knobby synth (ms2k, sh201, jp8k or 8080, Supernova, ESQ1, DW6k/8k, AX60, KS4, AN1X etc etc) + knobby/easily mapped controller (i use Axioms and Novation SL Mark 2 even tho the pots/faders/encoders have proved not especially reliable) is a great combination.
(And when korg/roland/Yamaha/teenage/Waldorf/DSmith come out with new stuff, i'll spend some time on sonicState's youtube channel and the forums (Wigglers, Slutz, /r/Synthesizers) to see what the excitement's about.
I know this is 4 days late BUT have you looked at Native Instruments' keyboards? They are made to solve just this issue with their software.
https://www.native-instruments.com/en/products/komplete/keyb...
What are the best software synths that map easily to midi keybords?
There are so many. Some popular options -
Free and probably not easy: PD; SuperCollider; Csound; ChucK
Not free: Arturia Suite; NI Reaktor, Massive, Absynth; Serum; Sylenth; Nexus; Spire
They all have a different sound. Some are modular, some are straight analogue clones, some are hybrids.
I used to design analogue synth hardware. Now I design non-analogue software. The software does a lot more, is vastly less expensive, takes up much less space, is easier to keep clean, and much easier to move. :)
Korg essentially disrupted an industry doing exactly the rules outlined in the innovator's dilemma.
Starting with the monotron, then the monotribe, the volca series, now the minilogues. They're the only big 3 (roland, korg, yamaha) who has a competent analog synth division. The other two are stuck continuing to double down on their digital recreations of classic analogs (roland ACB)
Also worth checking out Teenage Engineering, who are doing fantastic work on digital synths... To my mind, the question is innovation, not whether one is keeping an analogue department alive.
Speaking as somebody who really liked his Monotrons until the novelty wore off and I didn't really have a use for them as effects chain devices nor did I want to hack them (honestly so much potential in them) and I sold them at a terrible loss, which is typical for me, I do have to admit that I think Korg's approach keeps me interested and itchy to buy some of their newer releases time and again.
>Speaking as somebody who really liked his Monotrons until the novelty wore off [...] and I sold them at a terrible loss
"Terrible loss"? They were some of the cheapest synths out there, less than what people pay for coffee in a week.
Selling all three for the price of one is not a good business model. I have terrible luck / no talent in buying and selling things. This I readily admit.
Fancy seeing this here - cool for sure. One of the music journalists I follow, Peter Kirn, has a piece regarding this release:
http://cdm.link/2016/11/gallery-korgs-synth-line-gets-refres...
I'd consider getting a Eurorack modular synth.
Advantages:
1 - it's much more fun to build your own synth out of components than to buy an off-the-shelf system designed and built by someone else
2 - and you get to build exactly what you want
3 - there are literally thousands of modules to choose from, giving you much more flexibility and features than any integrated synth
4 - lots of cables to make a patch, which can be fun to mess with and interesting/intriguing for audiences to look at
5 - audio and control voltages are the same, so you can do things like change synth parameters with audio
Disadvantages:
1 - price, typically much more expensive to get equivalent functionality to a cheap integrated synth. [A]
2 - size - much bigger than a typical integrated synth [B]
3 - lots of cables to make a patch, which can make recreating a patch a pain compared to a digital/hybrid synth
4 - can look intimidating to someone unfamiliar with modular synths [C]
5 - making a modular patch can be slower than just dialing in a digital patch
Notes:
[A] - But you don't necessarily need to replicate everything, you can have partial functionality that will still be useful and fun, and may get effects that would be hard to get any other way
[B] - though Eurorack is still much smaller than some other modular formats
[C] - But it's not hard to pick up, and learning modular synthesis is fun
I'd add another advantage: The physicality of it all. That was what drew me to it. It's kind of related to your advantage #4 and advantage #2, but it's more than that.
The physical nature makes it easier (for me at least) to remember instinctively what does what. I've build my synth exactly how I want it... I've put module X right where I want it between module Y and module Z. Using it as often as I do, my muscle memory kicks in and my arms remember where things are. I can recognize most of the modules and controls by touch. It makes composing, experimenting and performing to be almost exactly the same process (at least the way I do it) - which is something I've been striving for for my entire musical life.
That said, I wouldn't actually recommend Eurorack to most people, simply because of the extreme price.
The price issue can be mitigated in a number of ways:
1 - Buy used. You can get a lot of great modules in great condition used.
2 - Build your own, either from kits or (if you have the skills) from scratch. There are tons of kits out there, and you can make some pretty unusual and interesting modules with them. Plus, making your own helps you to understand them better, and help you to repair them yourself if they break.
3 - Limit your appetite for modules. You don't necessarily need a 4 voice modular synth, with 4 copies of every module. Try limiting yourself to one voice, or even to just a few modules that perform a small number of functions. That can still be really useful.
4 - (Related to 3): Combine your modular synth with an integrated hardware synth or even soft-synths. That way you can get the best of both worlds, and the non-modular synths can make up for what you're missing in your modular, again letting you limit your modular to just those functions that you need, thereby reducing the price of your modular.
5 - Buy from the less expensive module manufacturers like Doepfer. Their modules are often a fraction of the price of many other manufacturers.
I own a Microkorg and must say that I'm not really impressed by the sounds the Monologue offers; it seems far too limited and doesn't have that deep punchy bass that the Microkorg offers. And it's a lot more expensive too. It makes me think of the iPhone 5C.
I'm not sure where you're getting your pricing, but the Monologue is $299 [1] and a new MicroKorg is $399 [2].
The MicroKorg is a great piece of equipment, but it's also prone to aliasing problems at the upper end, which shouldn't be present in the Monologue since it's all analog.
The MicroKorg also offers different features: FM Synthesis and a Vocoder. The Monologue has a full 16 step sequencer, wheras the MicroKorg has only an arpeggiator.
For this price point I think a lot of mucisians are going to find the Monologue is a good value. It isn't far off the MiniBrute which came out at $400 and has less features.
Seems the Microkorgs have gone up in price over the years. I paid about $250 for it when I got it a few years ago. I noticed you can still get them for $200 second hand.
The aliasing can be a bit annoying indeed. You can really hear it when slowly bending a high lead. I don't think it uses band-limited waveforms. But for bass lines it is absolutely fantastic!
Microkorg is (especially for something so cheap) a really nice piece of kit and has some fancy features, but especially at the edges of the value ranges you clearly hear artifacts, which don't work for all kinds of music.
Given that it has digital memory I fear that live-twisting on the Monologue also will show artifacts, unless they increased the resolution a lot, but at least if you leave the settings alone it should avoid them. Having a sequencer compared to "just" the arpeggiator in the Microkorg is also nice.
But IMHO it's more important to look at the wider market: There have been tons of small-ish analogue synths in the last few years, in all sizes and price-points. On one hand, that shows that market interest is there, on the other it really will depend on how it compares to those to decide if it will be a success or not, since there are tons of alternatives.
Being able to create microtonal scales is the attraction here for me, most synths whether they're digital or analog lock you into standard western scale tuning.
You can still do that by sending raw midi data. Just a note immediately followed by a pitch bend.
Something I still wonder though is how serious this microtonality thing is. Is it more of a gimmick or it there a serious demand for it?
Some dubstep I've heard actually has quarter tones in it. If you find that everything you come up with on an equal temperament scale is boring and familiar, using different tunings and scales might be a useful next step to unlock creativity.
As a synth guy I'll say what I said on SonicState again here - nifty but at 299.99 I don't know why I would choose this over the more capable Korg Minilogue. Where this is mono and therefor can only play one note at a time the Minilogue is a ploy 4 synth so you can actually play cords on it. Of course there are more distinctions between the two but that's the most obvious comparison point for me.
I love the look of it and it's cool they are pushing more analog gear out the door at reasonable prices. But for me I still don't know why I would choose this over the Minilogue which can be had on the used market for close to $400. The only real practical use I can imagine for this is to use it as a bass synth compatible to the Roland TB-3 or TB-03 Boutique. Or to augment aTB-3 bass synth which is digital, to give it some nice bottom end; I do that with a moog slim phatty currently when needed,which is a pricier approach but I also use the Slim Phatty for some other synth duties, it's quite a versatile bit of kit.
http://www.korg.com/us/products/synthesizers/minilogue/
Edit: type-o on # of voices.
This seems to be an answer to the Microbrute / Minibrute market of small, cheap(er) mono synths for bass parts.
But to me it just doesn't stack up. Sure, it's got the onboard sequencer, which you're going to need somewhere in your kit. But the voice seems too similar to the Minilogue without any of the real low-end depth you can get from the Arturia devices.
But I'm with you, I don't really see what purpose this serves that can't be better served by a brute or moog.
The Minilogue has 4 note polyphony, not 6. But it has a couple of other nice features: voice layering, a three octave keyboard (two octaves is just too small for serious music) and it sounds a lot better too. I especially like those pad sounds.
But you get all those sweet Aphex Twin patches and can program weird microtonal stuff!
Artirua's been doing this for a few years, including their Brute lineup; the MiniBrute and the MatrixBrute would be the closest comparison. https://www.arturia.com/products
Ever since I got the Minilogue, my MiniBrute has been sitting in a closet. At the same price point you can get a polysynth with all sorts of polyphony modes instead of a monosynth. Kind of a no brainer.
I'm a big fan of Arturia and picked up a Key Lab 49 SE with their Prophet V & Solina plug ins. Truly beautiful synths...but the build quality of their key beds is horrible. I lurk their forums a lot and I feel really lucky I received a reliable unit. It seems like a lot of their customers are less than pleased with their purchase. I'm a happy customer though! Their synths deserve all the praise they receive.
I bought a Minibrute three years ago and it has cured my lust for gear ever since. After seeing the Minilogue however I'd love it if Arturia threw their hat into the analog polyphonic ring.
> "I bought a Minibrute three years ago and it has cured my lust for gear ever since."
Because it was so bad or because it was so good?
It sounds so good that you practically have to go out of your way to make it sound bad. It has a much wider array of sound design possibilities than what you see people using it for on youtube - I even made a great sounding woodblock sound on it.
So yeah it's really good.
Who is the target audience for this? Why did they spend quarter of the video on colors? Why does it even matter? It made me feel like the device is probably not that spectacular if color is one of its main features.
I read that it's E-to-E so it's essentially a replacement for a bass player. One you can program or play live. $300 to never have to deal with a bassist again is, in some circles, quite a bargain. I've seen several MiniNovas and other small frame synths in the wild, from dive bar acts to openers for larger venue groups like Run The Jewels.
Re: Color. If there is an aesthetic theme for one's act, then having a matching color is simply a nice-to-have. Personally I have a bad habit of tearing apart things, painting them, and trying to get them to work again so they're not just the average off the shelf piece of kit, and I can identify my own stuff easier.
> $300 to never have to deal with a bassist again
Are bassists dysfunctional or sth?
In my experience, no more so than any other person in a band, but the principle is that for the up front $300 you won't have to pay the machine at the end of a gig. All things considered it's customary to lightly jab each other based on the chosen instrument (singer, guitarist, bass, drums, keys) as a form of endearment.
Musicianship is as much showmanship as it is technical capability. This synth comes in five colors for the same reason electric guitars come in 1,000 different designs.
Aesthetics absolutely matter. It seems silly, but certain styles/feels appeal to me and motivate me to use the product more. I have a dingy synth (novation bass station II) and it's a beast, but it feels so plasticky and cheap and I haven't used it in months.
100% of the video was spent playing sounds. That's all that producers care about. You have to put something on the screen.
The is a rather large market of people who like to tinker with analog music hardware. Portable (battery-powered) synthesizers are also becoming a popular thing to use. There aren't many portable and analog devices out there.
I'm glad to see the move back to fully analog synths.
I see it as a move forward :)
I am such a fan! Great sounds, accessible, designed to be fun.
Korg often leaves me wanting just a little more in a good way.
Play. That's the best. People can just play. Serious or fun, it's all good.
I don't understand the point of this, aside from the hipster factor.