Talk:Moog synthesizer/Archive 2

TMI??
I've collected lists of what modules were sold with each model. I'm not sure if this information is helpful or just plain confusing. Maybe someone might want to format these a little better than I have and take it from there. Also, some of the lists are (I strongly believe) incomplete. My response is generally to not include information unless it is complete and accurate. -- Krash 20:12, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Merging?
It seems that this article should be merged into Moog synthesizer. While there is information here that is particular to the modular and not the minimoog, etc., the Moog is historically defined by the original modular unit, which could be covered in a separate section within the main article. Is there enough justification for a separate entry? algocu 02:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd say that the articles should remain seperate. To merge the bulk of the Modular article into the main Moog synthesizer article would create quite an unwieldy article - I think we're better off with one article which talks about the history and development and significance of Moog synths in general, and this article can deal with the specifics of the Modular. You could just as easily argue that the Moog is historically defined by the Minimoog, and argue for that to be merged, but again, that article is substantial and significant enough to warrant its own page.--Bwmodular 09:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with the opinion above. If you merge individual instruments, including Minimoog, Moog Taurus, Moog Liberation and any other of the instruments from the List of Moog synthesizers into the Moog synthesizer page, you're going to end up with a very unwieldy and overly long article. However, there is an overlapping of facts in the two articles. Maybe it should be sorted out where relevant facts for History should go so the two articles are distinct and not redundant. Maybe move History to the general Moog Synthesizer page, while keeping facts specific to the Moog modular synthesizer on this page? Dissolve 20:42, 9 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I question the validity of the Moog synthesizer article as it currently exists. Shouldn't each instrument, series, or system have its own dedicated article - otherwise, wouldn't there be/wouldn't we want "Roland synthesizer," "Oberheim synthesizer," etc. articles? Keeping this in mind while going back to the original question, I'm in favor of Merging the articles and even Splitting as needed for notable instruments, as I feel that information belongs in an article specific to a particular synthesizer model, series, or system, if not in the Moog Music or even Robert Moog articles. synthfiend (talk) 14:24, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Switched On Bach
I removed the image Switched On Bach.jpg because it is a fair use image of an album cover. Use in this article is not appropriate under our Non-free content guidelines. &mdash; scetoaux (T | C)  23:43, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

"original and definitive"
"The Moog modular synthesizer is considered by enthusiasts to be the original and definitive synthesizer. Although digital synthesizers and samplers are generally more user friendly than a modular synthesizer and available at a fraction of the price that it would take to acquire and maintain a modular system, modular Moogs continue to be valued by collectors and musicians."

I find this paragraph very arguable and the argument wrong. One should not compare Moog modular synthesizers to digital workstations but to other makers of modular synthesizers. Compared to Buchla it would be hard to argue that Moog is more original or definitive (there is no "definitive" in a modular" world). Defining modular synthesizers as being the opposite of digital synthesizers is wrong anyway considering that digital modules are common in modular synthesizers since the 1970s. (again Buchla, e.g. series 300.)77.180.67.182 (talk) 17:56, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I removed the passage, which strikes me as an editor publishing their own opinion. Wikipedia must maintain a neutral point of view by including only what is attributable to secondary reliable sources. dissolve  talk  21:55, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Moog modular synthesizer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100812075405/http://www.cantos.ca/explore/collection-checklist to http://www.cantos.ca/explore/collection-checklist

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:57, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

software &c
this- "VST software manufacturer Arturia has released Moog Modular V, a PC software version of the Moog modular system. It is currently the only software version of the instrument, and the first of Arturia's two Moog simulations to be approved by Moog"

is not just basically an advert for the arturia product, but is also wrong. there are iOS versions of various moog synthesizers now, made by the current incarnation of moog music.

duncanrmi (talk) 17:57, 6 November 2018 (UTC)