The flip side to the above for me is the Gotharman gear.
Sounds pretty good but just couldn’t part with that much money for gear with those looks. I totally understand people digging his gear though.
Strangely due to the looks of the Gotharman gear I think it subconsciously effects the way I hear it also. If it looked like the above I am quite sure I would think it sounded better 
It’s like art though, we all see and hear differently
1 Like
Yeah the Elements…5000€ though…
Aesthetics ist important. Boy look at those Odyssey Desktop Models. The Rev 1 Looks fantastic.
1 Like
I hope keys are real gold 
1 Like
For me I got into Eurorack as much for the aesthetic, as for the innovative diverse sound possibilities.
All those coloured flashing lights, switches, knobs and sliders was just way too much to resist as an electronic musician, and just begged to be tweaked
Yes I think aesthetics are important, and very often aesthetically pleasing gear has a nicer user interface which of course reinforces the aesthetics. I suppose there is also the psychological element that if something looks nice it is better quality, but more importantly if something looks ugly then it can negatively impact perceived quality, care and attention to detail.
It is well known that attractive people have numerous societal advantages over less attractive people, so it seems that humans for the most part, value aesthetics highly when making choices, probably coded in our DNA for evolutionary reasons.
1 Like
Hmmm what about Roland Aira stuff? I think that Design is a fail. Or is it, that i am Not in their target group? I Like the system 1m Interface, but Boy that Green light…
Funny that when I think of eurorack in gemeral, the opposite comes to mind - fugly, hodge-podge UIs, mismatching looks of buttons and designs, ugly cable spaghetti…
I do admit some modular manufs are on point, and systems like buchlas can look good. But modular in general…?
That’s a hard question, isn’t it?
Generally I agree that esthetics of environment and tools influence what we do and achieve. But I fear, the opinion of what is esthetical or not, is different for every single person 
Now my two cents … for me esthetics of a working environment and tools is not beauty … it is “form follows function”.
If a designer understands the workflow of a musician and how a human beeing interacts with an instrument, he may come up with an elegant-efficient design or layout, which is easy to understand, easy to use, and supposed to become a physical-extention of the musician, who will use it like an arm, a foot, his fingers. I am lucky to have a few instruments like this and they are esthetical for me and beautiful too
But … we can put paint and embellishments to even a crappy device to make it beautiful, but it would stay to be a crappy device.
Totally depends on the manufacturer and the individual modules.
Some are absolutely amazing both in looks, function and quality, others are utter shite
Yes, and when I look at peoples rigs, that’s where the hodgepodge comes from… A few good looking modules, and fugly modules next to em spoiling the look. I have no doubt that those fugly modules are essential for the rigs wrt functionality and sound, otherwise they wouldn’t be there…
1 Like
Aira is hideous to my eyes. Oh my that green 
V-Synth, but nothing since unfortunately.
Debatable aesthetics, looked quite futuristic, but wow what an amazing forward thinking instrument
In Case of the JD-xa what were they thinking regarding the glossy Finish? Very fingerprint sensitive. It Looks the Designer ignored the design rules Rayray listed above. Which brings me to the thought that the design process from drawing Board until the finished product must be well designed too.
Oh yes what on earth was Roland thinking with the gloss finish? Totally impractical in both aesthetics and function. Not to mention the terrible red rather than green this time.
And there are some fine instruments out there … designed by Axel Hartmann … which became a success (or will become)
AFAIK he took part in the design of
- Moog Minimoog Voyager
- Alesis Andromeda
- Access Virus TI
- Arturia MiniBrute & MatrixBrute
- Waldorf Wave, Quantum
and I know by heart some more synths …
Fun fact … when I recognised this some time ago, it was an eureca moment … that seemed to be one reason, why I got along so easy using them
1 Like
Hmm yes the Aira green LEDs are a horrible tone of green, reminiscent of some sort of cheap space toy. I don’t like the look of any of the Aira gear except the MX-1 which came later, lost the green stripe and toned down the LEDs a little, I’d say it looks ok.
But for me anything with BRIGHT BLUE retina burning LEDs is terrible design, Behringer are particularly prone to using them but sadly so are many other manufacturers. I’d go so far as to say no matter how gorgeous a synth looked and sounded if it has overly bright blue LEDs I won’t buy it, I don’t like blue light anyway so any blue LEDs are generally something I try to avoid where possible.
1 Like
Korg Minilogue i find also very pleasing Design, matches well with the Monomachine and my MacBook.
Speaking of Roland, their Boutique range being so small and toy like, are aesthetically terrible in my eyes.
Psychologically I can’t shake these preconceived negative thoughts, regardless of how good or how bad they may sound. I just can’t take them seriously at all unfortunately.
But this is the thing, people seem to love them, which makes me think maybe I have a problem and need psychiatric help
If an instrument looks really good, it somehow makes me feel proud about owning one. It also makes me feel like a dork sometimes, especially when hanging around with talented musicians who use more ghetto equipment for their shows 
Not sure if the looks affect what I’ll use it for… I’m too old to learn nu trixx eh
1 Like