Talk:Analog synthesizer

message: I'm pretty sure I found an opinion, but I want it talked about before I change anything. Does this Reverse engineering has also revealed the secrets of some synthesizer components, such as those from ARP Instruments, Inc, which were potted in epoxy cases to prevent inspections (although the official reason was to maintain temperature stability within the circuit to avoid drifting).
make an opinion? It sure sounds like it to me...at the least, it should have a reference...--67.60.9.85 (talk) 05:52, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opinion? 

message: The definition states that An analog synthesizer is a synthesizer that uses analog computer techniques to generate sound electronically. 
I'm adding analog electronics becouse, for example, the use of filters combined with ADSR envelopes is not encompassed by analog computer techniques (to the best of my knowledge). So, now the definition will sound 
:An analog synthesizer is a synthesizer that uses analog computer techniques and analog circuits to generate sound electronically
Alternatively, the following could suit well:
:An analog synthesizer is a synthesizer that uses analog circuits to generate sound electronically
--Doktor Who 04:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've changed computer to signals, there's nothing in the article for analog computers having anything to do with it. -- Rob Kam (talk) 19:09, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Analog electronics

message: The article states that digital synths and smaplers overtook analog in the "early-to-mid 1980s". This is not correct. the Yamaha DX7, the first mass market affordable digital synthesizer, was introduced in 1984, and the Ensoniq Mirage sampler in 1985. The analog synth manufacturers like Korg, Roland and Moog responded with hybrid digital synths like the Korg DW600 and DW8000 within the next year or so. Not until 1988, when Roland began shipping the D-50, did the old analog synths finally fall out of favor. So I've changed it to read "mid to late 1980s". JMax555 (talk) 06:42, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction of digital synthesizers 

message: I corrected the 1969 Bond film 'first use of synthesized' to 'of synthesizer' since (for example) Louis and Bebe Barron's 'Forbidden Planet' music was 'synthesized'. Quote from article: "Louis Barron constructed the electronic circuits which he used to generate the "bleeps, blurps, whirs, whines, throbs, hums and screeches." The Barrons also owned one of the first tape-recorders in New York, and (like many early ... synthesizerists??) their synthetic sounds were sometimes heavily manipulated after recording. (following Les Paul??) Twang (talk) 22:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Synthesizer vs. synthesized

message: Why does the picture say "Trautonium, 1928", while the same picture in Trautonium says "Mixtur-Trautonium, 1952"? Jariola (talk) 15:52, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: That last line (requiring citation) that says that many people prefer the analog controls such as rheostat knobs and faders might suggest reference to the new iOS app from Moog Music "Model 15" which reproduces the interface controls of the 1973 Moog Model 15 on an iPad or iPhone.Leeeoooooo (talk) 13:37, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Most people prefer "analog controls" but some '80s or '90 analog synthesizers have very few direct controls (Roland Alpha-Juno, JX8P/JX10, Akai AX80 or EWI3020, Korg Poly61) and many have menu diving, while many digital ones have direct controls (Nord Lead, Virus,…). Xavier-gl71 (talk) 10:08, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  preference of analog controls 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Analog synthesizer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080328012446/http://mixonline.com/TECnology-Hall-of-Fame/moog-music-minimoog-090106/ to http://mixonline.com/TECnology-Hall-of-Fame/moog-music-minimoog-090106/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:14, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It would be nice to show which artists still use analog synthesizers in their music today. Topics could be about how deadmau5 still uses modular analog synthesizers in his sound design, how the synthwave culture tries to replicate the sounds of 80's synthesizers, and maybe about Daft Punk and other EDM artists that used analog synthesizers.
Reuben S Fortushniak (talk) 15:28, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use In Modern Music Scene  

message: A lot of soundtracks implement the use of analog synthesizers because of their unique sound and tonal texture. Maybe talk about how the Netflix original Stranger Things uses analog synthesizers in its scores and how analog synthesizers were heavily popular in soundtracks from 80's movies such as Chariots of Fire.
Reuben S Fortushniak (talk) 15:35, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use in Movie and TV Show Soundtracks 

message: In the 45 years since I first owned both minimoog and ARP 2600 -- and having been an electronic music fan ever since, I never heard of a 'Buchla' until coming here today.  This article features the Buchla HEAVILY, listing it first among others and even going so far as to use a photo of the Buchla in the lead.
Compared to other synths from the 1970's and 1980's -- most notably Moog and ARP, the Buchla instruments have been virtually unknown, and the list of artists who actually used them to make records can be counted on the fingers of two hands.  As far as I know, no commercially successful artist except Susan Ciani ever recorded using Buchla.   
https://daily.bandcamp.com/lists/bandcamp-buchla-synths-music 
Probably more than all the others combined, the Minimoog is THE iconic analog synth.  I am starting by replacing the photo in the lead...
R.Giskard R. (talk) 16:06, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Like most articles about music gear on Wikipedia, this article is assembled mostly at the whim and reckonings of hobbyists rather than adhering to stuff covered by reliable sources. Anything you can do to address this by adding reliable sources (see Wikipedia:RSINSTRUMENT for a starting list) and editing the page to properly reflect the balance of those sources (see Wikipedia:DUE) is appreciated. Popcornfud (talk) 17:43, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undue weight/prominence given to obscure and/or 'boutique' synthesizers. 

message: It seems like there's been a lot of activity in analog synthesis since, let's say the mid-2000s that's not covered in this page.  I feel like in the past 10-15 years there's been a major resurgence in the use and production of analog and emulated-analog synthesis, as the vintage market couldn't keep up with demand.
This is backed by such things as the creation of the Eurorack standard, and its rapid uptake by virtually every major and minor manufacturer.  The analog synth marketplace is thriving like never before, compared with the desert wasteland of the 90s and early 2000s. Anotheral74 (talk) 18:59, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  More recent developments? 

message: Under the heading "History: 1960s-1970s" the third paragraph begins with the claim "Patch cords were expensive, could be damaged by use...and made complex patches difficult and time-consuming to recreate... The first part of this is is nonsensical. A patch cord is nothing but a pair of 2-contact plugs and a short length of 2-conductor wire. In the 1970 Radio Shack catalog, a 6-foot patch cord cost less than $1.00; sets of shorter ones brought the price down to about half of that. So outfitting an entire modular system with the requisite 25 or so patch cord was not an expensive proposition (perhaps $20), especially considering the synthesizer itself cost at least a few thousand dollars. It was not the price of patch cords, nor their relative frailty that led Moog, Perlman, et al, to find ways to obviate their necessity; it was the sheer kludginess of using them, and the time it took to switch patches (especially for live performers). So the final part of the sentence is accurate, but price was the least significant of the drivers away from patch cords, and should not be emphasized by being listed first (if at all). Bricology (talk) 21:11, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: That entire paragraph is uncited and is almost certainly generated from some editor's brain. As it has no citation it doesn't really matter if it's even true, so I've just removed it.. Popcornfud (talk) 11:15, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Patch cords were expensive"?