mono synth: SH101 v DSI mopho keyboard

AK · Post by AK » Thu Dec 30, 2010 9:03 am

Why is the comparison between the mopho and the 101? They're not even in the same price range. (unless 101's are still going up?)

As you approach that money, why not look at a sequential pro one ?

I really like the 101 but not for the money they have exchanged hands for recently, dont care what anybody says, its too much.

oblioblioblio · Post by **oblioblioblio** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:04 pm

the prices that i saw for sh101 are somewhat comparable/competitive with newer analogue monosynths.

The thing I would be more worried about is the cost of service. If a filter chip, or oscillator chip dies, you're looking at £30 for the part alone, and then you need a skilled person to swap the new one in. I've heard that the capacitors in the circuit that deals with power regulation need replacing every 25 years approx.

If you buy a new synth, you can avoid these issues. And the manufacturer will be on hand (in most cases) to help with service.

SH101 is a fairly standard oscillator sound (the Curtis chip was very popular, and I believe is based on a design that almost every analogue VCO uses (no massive Moog deepness, but plenty of niceness in it's own right)). The suboscillator, which is a cheap way to get extra sound (voltage controlled oscillators are expensive components), puts some great creative limitations on the machine. You have to be creative with sequencing. The filter on the 101 is incredibly characterful.

You'll know the sound of an sh101 as soon as you hear it. Mathew Jonson uses it LOTS. Also Aphex Twin is a fan. Boards of Canada also if I'm not mistaken.

oblioblioblio · Post by **oblioblioblio** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:13 pm

Moogish is pretty strong word to throw around.

I didn't hear anything like a Moog Oscillator before.

steevio · Post by **steevio** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:18 pm

oblioblioblio wrote:Moogish is pretty strong word to throw around.

I didn't hear anything like a Moog Oscillator before.

it's meaningless unless describing a Moog.

even machines that were supposed to be designed around the Moog oscillators and filters like the Andromeda, sound nothing like a Moog.
its such an individual sound,

as is the Dave Smith sound for that matter.

AK · Post by AK » Thu Dec 30, 2010 2:21 pm

oblioblioblio wrote:the prices that i saw for sh101 are somewhat comparable/competitive with newer analogue monosynths.

But they always seem to be constantly rising. The 101 is no better now than it was several years ago when it was a lot cheaper, hell, even 3 years ago. You gotta decide when enough is enough. I don't get how people justify some of the inflated prices I see knocking about. £1500 for a TB-303. Pfffft!

You have to be creative with sequencing.
.

To do what? The majority of people would buy a 101 for its bass tones. I know I did.

steevio · Post by **steevio** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:25 pm

AK wrote: I don't get how people justify some of the inflated prices I see knocking about. £1500 for a TB-303. Pfffft!

.

its outrageous, and it wont make them better producers.

but if people are willing to pay it, then thats all there is to it. they are buying a piece of history. its their choice.

its the same with all vintage instruments, pre-CBS fender stratocasters, Gold top Gibsons etc. TB303s are no different.

some people have got money to burn.

::BLM:: · Post by **::BLM::** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:47 pm

I want an emu sp1200 but they are now £1200 on ebay.

oblioblioblio · Post by **oblioblioblio** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 5:05 pm

AK wrote:
You have to be creative with sequencing.
.
To do what? The majority of people would buy a 101 for its bass tones. I know I did.

I was meaning to get an equivalent of polyphony. You can make the machine 'fill' the track like a polyphonic machine would if you make use of sequencing, I would say.