this thing is so sexy. i know i could never come close to fully utilizing it but goddamn do those aesthetics pull me in
2 Likes
I’m 100% in the same boat, but I desperately want to make noise with it. I’ve absolutely loved every video clip so far in terms of just raw sound.
3 Likes
They added some new features.
6 Likes
Does anyone understand how to switch to midi clock mode? The manual says there should be INT, MIDI, and MAN modes but I only see CLK and MAN modes…
Also, dumb question but anyone know how to delete notes from the internal step sequencer?
Edit: I figured it out. But to my benefit, it’s not really clear in the manual
I got the Buchla Easel. I just sent Robin from EMS my deposit for the Synthi A. It will be 4 years from now. As soon as a Syntrx II is available will grab one too.
How’s the SYNTRX original been treating you ?
1 Like
I’m loving it - it is fun to play with on its own in drone or rhythmic mode. It pairs well with the Minibrute 2s or OT or Keystep 37.
It would be tempting to fabricate new end cheeks to combine the Syntrx & MB2s into a franken-AKS, but they are easier to move around and store as separate units rather than one monster.
2 Likes
You’re one of the few synth collectors / players I trust. Looks like I’m getting the SYNTRX II then.
Drone on!
1 Like
What sold me was watching the Hainbach (very positive) videos and Shoebridge (either very negative, or very dry) back to back. Everything Shoebridge hated and Hainbach loved sounded good to me and I have not been disappointed.
Edit:
The only thing I find disappointing about the Mk1 Syntrx is the hysteresis / lag of the vernier dials. That is easily solved by using the dial to get close to what I want and then fine-tuning with the joystick. Mk2 obviously won’t suffer from this problem but also lacks the vernier dials.
From a sonic perspective, I love the noise and grit. I have a Spring King that I plan to mod after my summer vacation and will probably get a Moisturizer eventually, so the dirty-noisy spring in the Syntrx 1 is valuable for it’s character and limitations.
I spent some time thinking about whether the Syntrx is really worth 10x the SE-02. The two synths are different enough in UX and sonic character that I don’t see much point in comparing them. They play nicely together and each can stand alone. Software will always be cheaper but the Syntrx is a pleasure to play with and make music with.
4 Likes
I’d love to hear more about how you’re using the Syntrx and MB2S together.
1 Like
I’m mostly just running a single MIDI cable from the MB2s to the Syntrx and using the MB2 as a sequencer. There is a lot of opportunity to make use of the ins and outs and patch panel if you want to, but I haven’t really gone there.
1 Like
Having a lot of fun using the 2 modulation lanes on the Syntrx II sequencer. Using one to modulate filter and the other to modulate decay. But what is great is swapping back and forth which lane modulates which parameter. Happy accidents!
5 Likes
Anyone else get theirs yet? Curious about other folks experiences with it.
I posted this on the Lines forum but no one seems to know:
I’m wondering if anyone has had/tried both Syntrx I and II and can compare sound quality and/or interesting aspects.
I’ve borrowed the original Syntrx over the past few days and love it. I particularly like the warmth of the spring reverb and the feedback that you can get and the trapezoid module.
Before using it I was set on getting the mk2 version based on Loopop’s review and the many new features it has but now I’m not so sure. While I’d love to have the extra modules, recordable joystick, built in sequencer and all that, I’m afraid that the things I love about the mk1 (the aspects that go beyond the feature list) won’t be in the mk2.
Anyone with experience with both able to comment?
3 Likes
I used to very much not understand the appeal of the more expensive mono synths. And I’ve always thought I need a poly for pads and big chords and for the more ambient leaning stuff I do but this thing has been amazing
Most of the demos I’ve seen focus on the sort of glitchier, noisier, heavily modulated patches. Which u can get easily just by using the random patch mode. I haven’t really studied enough to create this patches on my own but it’s nice within seconds I can find some chaos. Very excited to play with this thing live. Can coax out sound efx stuff with ease.
But really this thing has surprised with all the beautiful leads and pad like sounds. The on board reverb is beautiful. And it can do really nice bread and butter stuff. Have been really enjoying it. It’s one of those synths u can really sink into and lose sense of time and all the good stuff.
Never thought I’d be the type to buy a 2k mono but first week with this thing has been blisssssful <3
12 Likes
I’ve just posted this on another forum but thought some people here might find it useful (and sort of a response to my question above):
So I purchased a Syntrx II. I’m still within my grace period to return it and so spent an hour or so A/Bing it against a Syntrx I to make up my mind.
I’m conflicted over which one I want but I think I’m going to keep the Syntrx II. Neither one is ‘better’ - they feel like different instruments, sonically as well as features on offer. To my ears, they sound quite different.
Anyone that has the I and thinks the II is better or vice versa, I would suggest they’re both really excellent and each has a lot to offer, enough that neither one is intrinsically ‘better’, rather they are different in very good ways.
My comparison isn’t objective or in anyway scientific, I didn’t have time for that. I did try to recreate a patch I had made on the MK1 on the MK2 but it wasn’t possible due to the different features on the MK1 (the fact that both sides of the Ring Mod are available on the patch matrix, that you can modulate the mix on the reverb, that some of the Osc waves are not available on the matrix on the MK1 like on the MK2 etc.)
But also sonically, the sounds were different. The MK1 sounds more raw to me, more primitive in a GOOD way. I was able to get more ‘in between’, raw/primitive/elemental sounds. In fact, I was really confused at how much more richer the oscillators sounded on the MK1 as compared to the MK2 until I realized it was almost totally down to the spring reverb.
THE SPRING REVERB - this is such a big part of the MK1. With it on, the synth is wonderfully spungy, rich, organic and has great depth. On my unit it completely fails as a reverb unit but totally wins as a ‘better maker’ module.
So I was a bit disappointed with my purchase at this point but then I started to just improvise with one, then flip the fader on my mixer and improvise with the other, completely free without trying to recreate one patch or sound on the other, just allowing myself to find interesting sounds.
This was when the MK2 caught me. Yes, I really love the organic and primitive sounds of the MK1 but the MK2 allowed me to get some absolutely stunning sounds that lifted off into another space. Ethereal, subtle pulses; lovely high pitched sustained harmonics; raw noisy fizzy walls etc.
Going back and forth, I was completely stumped. Now the MK1 sounded limited and underdeveloped as compared to the MK2 (which has so many more features…like a lot, it feels more when you have both in front of you rather than just on paper).
The MK2 feels like a modern synth, sophisticated, accurate, well designed, feature rich, able to get refined and subtle sounds as well as really raw sounds too (though not as ‘elemental’ as the MK1, to my ears anyway). The MK1 feels straight out of the 60s/70s and sounds that way too, in a good way, but without all the refinement that has occurred in synth design since then.
In truth, they’re both excellent and I wish I could combine the best of each one, or accomplish the same sounds but I think they’re distinct. I will say that the MK1 feels / sounds more physical, not analogue but actually physical, like a guitar (including issues with self noise and feedback - which all are appealing to me tbh), where the the MK2 feels / sounds more polished and refined.
If I could choose one thing to include from the MK1 to MK2 it would be the spring reverb, but then I’m not sure it would fit the design of the instrument the way that it does the MK1…but it does add something that goes way beyond its use as a reverb which imo it completely fails at, lol.
Anyway, not much use I realize if you’re on the fence about which to get. They’re both great instruments and I want to compose and perform with both of them! I’m still conflicted about which to get but the extra features on the MK2 are a big draw for me and the more ethereal, refined sounds are superb and rich too. I’m in the fortunate position that I can always borrow the MK1 from work so it makes sense for me to get the MK2 for myself. That said, down the road i may end up selling it for the MK1.
Hope that helps others though I think it would do you good to A/B the units in real time to make your decision as it’s more qualitative than just a comparison of features.
14 Likes
I had planned on selling my MKI after getting the MKII, but i just can’t bring myself to part with it. As you said, it has a raw physicality that the MKII doesn’t have. They’re two different instruments that happen to be in the same form factor. Plus, the MKI is one of the most beautiful instruments out there. It’s a lovely creamy white elephant that roars.
8 Likes
@HotdogLothario - you’re muddying my decision, lol! What’s your feeling about the MKII? Do you use it often, find it engaging on its own terms? Any other thoughts. I like it but I do like the sounds of MKI, just wish it had some of the features of MKII! And I do like the refined sounds I was able to get, I want both sound worlds tbh but can’t afford both unfortunately.
2 Likes
Great write up!! Now I’m curious to try the 1.
3 Likes
When the Syntrx 2 was announced I felt a bit bummed out about all of the new features that are not present with the first one.
As Prof_lofi stated they are v different instruments and sound completely different.
Personally I think that the oscillators really make the Syntrx 1 what it is.
They just have a magical quality to them and they don’t remind me of any other synth I’ve ever played. Also the ring mod is a big part of it as well as the spring reverb of course.
I have sequenced it quite a bit with the A4 and had it modified by the folks at Erica Synths so that the inputs are now DC-coupled.
Still I think the best moments with it have been without any external control or sequencers, just the parts it has interacting with each other.
I really love the direction it steers me when using it stand-alone and feel like it’s one of it’s greatest qualities.
I know this is a thread about the version 2 but I decided to chime in just to state that the version 1 is probably the best example I’m aware of, of how certain limitations (the lack of a sequencer) combined with other kinds of creative options like the spring reverb as a sound and mod source for example really make the experience something special and surprising.
The joystick motion rec is the only thing I really wish would be on the version 1 too.
It would really benefit from that.
8 Likes
The thing I love most is what everyone loves: the recordable joystick motion. There are so many creative applications of this feature! I also love the modulation lanes in the sequencer. I was surprised at how different it sounded from the MKI (at least to my ears). It sounds good, but just not as raw. It does share the MKI’s trait of needing to keep levels low in order to get the most out of the filter resonance. But I think the resonance might sound a bit bubblier on the MKI.
It’s champagne problems that both models are so outstanding. I’d love to sell one and put that money to better use, but I just can’t do it yet. But it’s batshit crazy and indulgent to have both. When I talk about my gear to people I don’t admit to having both.
Synths are like cats. You always say you have fewer than you really do.
9 Likes