> I have a book on synthesizers somewhere around here which is a
compilation of
> articles from Keyboard. On chapter is called "The Most Dangerous
Synth in the
> World" and is about Keith Emerson's Moog. The extended frequency
range is
> explained to have resulted in the enormous sound he got. The author
quotes
> technicians who had to deal with blown tweeters and subs on a
regular basis.
I read somewhere in an analog vs. digital debate where someone
speculated that Bob Moog would have probably used brighter sounding
oscillators if it had been practical at the time; I don't know whether
that's true or not (and I'm definitely not an electrical engineer BTW
so take any of my theories with a grain of salt). Anyway, now we're
trying to imitate endearing analog imperfections with digital devices
but, in the day, the analog pioneers would have probably given their
right arms for some of the digital capabilities that exist today.
It's always fun to get sounds from your synth that go beyond the scope
of what you'd normally expect (e.g. analog-ish sounds from a DX7)but
there's also something to be said for using particular synths for what
they do best (or for what other synths can't do as well). Because of
that, I tend to think of analog/virtual analog for warm, soft, & murky
sounds.