
Korg Monologue – Monophonic Analogue Synthesizer - Socketubs
http://www.korg.com/us/products/synthesizers/monologue/
======
cJ0th
Korg 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.

~~~
baldfat
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.

~~~
filoeleven
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.

~~~
gtani
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.

------
gravitronic
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)

~~~
6stringmerc
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.

~~~
coldtea
> _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.

~~~
6stringmerc
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.

------
6stringmerc
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...](http://cdm.link/2016/11/gallery-korgs-synth-line-gets-refresh-
including-new-monologue/)

------
pmoriarty
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

~~~
joemi
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.

~~~
pmoriarty
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.

------
thedjinn
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.

~~~
zinkem
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.

[1]
[http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/MonologueBK](http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/MonologueBK)

[2]
[http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/microKorg](http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/microKorg)

~~~
thedjinn
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!

------
evo_9
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/](http://www.korg.com/us/products/synthesizers/minilogue/)

Edit: type-o on # of voices.

~~~
frankhorrigan
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.

------
fluxsauce
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](https://www.arturia.com/products)

~~~
disease
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.

~~~
strictnein
> "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?

~~~
disease
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.

------
rplnt
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.

~~~
6stringmerc
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.

~~~
return0
> $300 to never have to deal with a bassist again

Are bassists dysfunctional or sth?

~~~
6stringmerc
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.

------
woofyman
I'm glad to see the move back to fully analog synths.

~~~
elcct
I see it as a move forward :)

------
ddingus
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.

------
pervycreeper
I don't understand the point of this, aside from the hipster factor.

