Moog One Synthesizer In-Depth Demo

In this video, Moog product designer Amos Gaynes does an in-depth demo of the new Moog One polyphonic synthesizer.

Note: The video is from a live stream, and the presentation starts at about 34:30 in.

Part 2 of the live product demo is embedded below. The presentation starts at about 25 min  in:

Moog also shared this video with sound designer Gary Hull:

Sweetwater has also shared a livestreamed demo of the new Moog One, featuring synth guru Daniel Fisher:

21 thoughts on “Moog One Synthesizer In-Depth Demo

  1. “I’m not doing sound design here”.
    Thanks we’ve all noticed that raw sound is not mind blowing or anything special.

  2. Would like to have a review from Nick Batt. Also noticed a great deal of similarities in the general layout with the Alesis A6. With audio technology as advanced as it is, why couldn’t the polyphony be any higher? And I’m also curious as to whether each of these three layers that were demonstrated while stacked could be given an independent MIDI channel. It would make it quite a powerhouse synthesizer, despite the gargantuan price that’s so far out of reach for the majority of us financially feeble mortals.

    1. There’s a practical limitation to analog designs, because there are so many trimmers per voice to set and calibrate to get the voices to sound the same and be in tune.

      Not a problem with digital synths, of course, where 16 voice polyphony was state of the art in the 80s

  3. For those who wonder if this sounds like a Memorymoog, minus the pitch issues.
    It absolutely does and I can’t even believe it myself.
    Far out, this thing’s un-flippin’-believable.

  4. Soundwise not much different than my 300 euros Akai Miniak. Except Moog one has unlimited modmatrix with all the potentials from that and that Akai already supports Polyaftertouch via MIDI.

  5. One approach is to imagine we hear this without knowing what it is. Would it strike us as something novel, individual, and not heard before from many synths? In this case, it is interesting that the Moog start-studded demo has taken the approach e.g. Lamborghini would have taken by driving a new model in 2nd gear in a town centre and slowly parking it. Amazing how little or no emphasis is put at all on the sonic capabilities of it, and what we hear sounds incredibly familiar or downright banale (see the Chick Corea part of the demo clip – that lead sound…). Clearly the marketing campaign is not focusing on the synth’s amazing sonic capabilities but something else…

    1. Its Factory Part 2. I imagine more to come since these seem to me more interested in its features and answering questions. You have a guy here comparing it to the Akai mininak so clearly they understand that the sonic potential would be the focus of a small few synth heads. The rest are interested in how many features they packed into this thing to get such a high price tag.

      The effects and the sequencer alone has definitely peaked my interest and im no synth head. If he just started playing amazing sounds, I’d just wonder how it sounded compared to something cheaper. I think they know what they are doing and left room for the “No talking” videos shifting through presets.

      This was a look at the interior of a Lamborghini since asking “how fast does it go” “and how cool does it look going fast, is pretty null at this point. Its a lamborghini!!!!

  6. We don’t need a return to the 70s. We need a glimpse into the future. Not nostalgic hyperbole. The Quantum is a glimpse into the future of synthesis. This is regression.

      1. Not at all. This is being touted as innovation, but it isn’t. Moog should re-manufacture more voyagers, that more users could reasonably afford.

        Their eurorack desktop modulars and even their iPad apps are actually more innovative. But their strategy appears to be either bottom of the market or high end luxury. Nothing in the middle. More people will end up making more music using Behringer’s knockoffs or $300 guitars than this. Ultimately that’s more valuable.

        1. “This is being touted as innovation, but it isn’t. ”

          What analog poly synths do you see as more powerful or innovative than the Moog One?

          Its capabilities earn it a place on the list of all-time great poly synths.

          “Their strategy appears to be either bottom of the market or high end luxury.”

          Seems pretty obvious that they’re trying to have synths for any budget, but built to Moog’s standard. That’s a smart strategy, because it allows them to make money from you no matter what your budget is.

          People like to complain about their high-end stuff, but the Sub 37, the Sub Phatty and the Grandmother are all very nice mid-range synths, and the Minitaur, Werkstatt, Mother-32 & DFAM are all impressive entry-level synths.

          For them to put out an esoteric synth like the Subharmonicon, a quirky ‘first monosynth’ like the Grandmother and a high-end synth like the One – all this year – is as good a record as any company in the synth industry this year.

        2. Should we still build expensive guitars and drums since there are knockoffs and cheap ones that are available? Also how is the one regressive when it does have innovative aspects like the waveshaping and the effects per oscillator?

          > Moog should re-manufacture more voyagers, that more users could reasonably afford.

          I love the Voyager, but at $4000 its not exactly something that most users can afford.

  7. It’d be cool if they did a select series for this like they did for the Voyager .. I wouldn’t mind having a Tiger Oak cabinet to match my Voyager 🙂 Gonna wait and see how QC is on these before even considering it.

Leave a Reply