Moog matriarch vs subsequent 37

[Michael Zacherl]

> On 11 Jun 2019, at 20:28, tom adam <tom.adam at thebigear.be> wrote:
> 
> I wonder, if one has a 'big' old-school (non eurorack) modular, what would the matriarch add to the lot?

maybe it’s paraphonic mode?

Soundwise it’s clearly leaning towards the old 60’s systems, what we probably perceive as “raw” - its circuits origins (904A, CP3, Minimoog VCOs etc) say it.
The Subsequent is much more sonically refined, it’s circuits more contemporarily sophisticated. 
Though having features to let it sound crunchy, if wanted (e.g. see gain staging in the filter section).
I like both concepts and was tempted to get me the limited edition of the Subsequent’s CV version.
(I talked me out of it, as I don’t have that kind of money anyway)
Since I’m not really into paraphonically playing a (semi-)modular synth and have a 5U system I get all the sounds already.

I’d be interested in the sound examples you guys have listened to?!

m.

> I do like the delay on the matriarch, especially since it's stereo...
> 
> thanks for the input!
> 
> On 10/06/2019 21:19, Andrew Tarpinian wrote:
>> I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say 37 and One represent “modern” moog (Amos Gaynes) and the others are taking cues from the modular and Model D reissues lineage. But I could be wrong.
>> 
>> I would get the matriarch, but I already have a Sub 37 & Model D
>> 
>>> On Jun 10, 2019, at 2:26 PM, tom adam <tom.adam at thebigear.be> wrote:
>>> 
>>> We were looking at some vid's from the grandmother, matriarch and subsequent 37 today and we were wondering about the difference in 'sound' between these machines.
>>> 
>>> Apparently my partner in crime is contemplating on a new moog ;-)
>>> As patch storage is not that important and patch points (to external eurorack) neither, it's all about the sound.
>>> 
>>> Anyone have an opinion on this?
>>> 
>>> our test was inconclusive... (blind listening test)

--
http://mz.klingt.org