Yahoo Groups archive

MOTM

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:35 UTC

Message

Re: More MOTM/Moog comparisons

2000-01-03 by Paul Schreiber

> I was quite suprised at how similar I could get these two filters to sound
> with low level inputs.

This is important to note! The '420 is designed *on purpose* to overload the
filter,
because that's what the MS-20 did (does).

> I just used the sawtooth output of the MOTM 300 as
> input to both filters.  With no resonance on either filter, the difference
> between the slopes was evident though.  I could hear more harmonics coming
> through on the MOTM.

Correct.

Now put *two* '420s in series, both on LP!

>
> Both filters seemed to have non-linearities as the resonance was cranked.
> I can't quite describe the character of each in words but both were very
> cool sounding.

The '420's Q is a function of the input level. High high input levels, the Q
is shifting
as the input waveform. Freaky!

>
> Maybe another way of describing the difference was
> that the MOTM sounded more "muscular" than the Moog when overloaded.
> Again, both were very musically useful and interesting.


Nice to hear that the humble '420 is holding it's own against Dr. Bob.

>
> I tried using a sample & hold with a slow sawtooth input on both filters
to
> get them jumping around the frequencies to hear differences.  I was again
> surprised at the similar sound I could get out of the MOTM at low input
> levels.  The Moog sounded a tad bit better in this situation wtih the
> resonance cranked getting just a bit more of the classic strong "beeoow"
> sweep sound.

The upcoming '440 will 'beeoooww' as well.

Paul S.

Attachments

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.