Very proud to announce the next Michigan Synth Works device:

Fall/Winter 2024

MSW-830 Analog Monosynth.





Specifications:

VCOs (3)
AS3340
Range: 16'/8'/4'/2'
Tune
Sync: Osc 2 can sync to osc 1 or osc 3. Osc 3 can sync to osc 1 or osc 2
per-oscillator glide/portamento amount with common legato switch.
Pulse Width Modulation: 50% to Min
PWM Modulation source switch(Available selections depewnd on osc#)
PW Modulation depth
Frequency Modulation source switch (available selections depend on osc#)
Frequency Modulation depth
common reset (on new note) switch

Source mixer
Level Control Sliders for:
Square, Saw, and PWM for all 3 oscillators
Sub-OSC (derived from Osc1) Waveforms: 1 oct down, 2 oct down, 2 oct down 75%,digital waveforms
4006 noise
external input (normalled to post filter feedback)

Drive
Drive amount
Drive modulation amount
Drive modulation source switch

VCF
AS3109 Based
Cutoff Frequency: 10Hz to 20kHz
Resonance: 0- Self Oscillation
ADSR 2 Depth
key Follow: 0-100%
Mod source switch x2 (different selections)
Mod amount x 2
Filter stage mixing
MODES: LP4, BP4, HP3, Phase

Output VCA
AD, ADSR 1, ADSR 1+external in envelope follower,Gate

ADSR Envelope x 2
Attack time: 1.5 ms to 2 s
Decay time: 2 ms to 10 s
Sustain Level: 0-100%
Release Time: 2 ms to 10 s
indicator

AD Envelope (digital)
shape selector switch
Attack time
Attack time modulation amount
Decay time
Decay time modulation amount
Modulation source selector switch
indicator
loop switch

LFO 1
Rate: 0.1Hz to 20 Hz
Delay Time: 20 ms to 0.7s
Rate Indicator

LFO 2 (digital)
type selector
shape
shape modulation amount
rate
rate modulation amount
modulation source selector
rate indicator
reset on new note switch

DM (extra digital modulator)
rate
type selector switch (envelope follower (from ext in) low frequency noise, chaos, more)

Jacks
Synth CV in: 1V/Oct, 0-7V, 3.5mm TS
Synth Gate in: 0-12V, On>2.5V, 3.5mm TS
modulation CV In: 3.5mm TS
external audio Input 1: Unbalanced 3.5mm" TS (with envelope follower)

Synth Out: Max -6 dBm, Unbalanced 1/4" TS

Headphone Out: Stereo, 9-150 ohm, 1/4" TRS
MIDI In: 5 pin DIN
MIDI Out 5 pin DIN
MIDI In: USB C (1.5m USB C-USB A included)

MIDI

Control of Note/Gate/velocity/pitch bend

USB C

<edited by moderator>

This looks great! My initial reaction was this is what three SH-101's in box would like if that "box" happened to be a nice metal enclosure to which you added extra envelopes, different filter modes, an additional LFO, and other goodies. Very cool!

One knob to rule them all...

Okay that’s boss. With regards to LFO 2, what exactly are the waveforms it generates? Is shape modulation adding in waveform characteristics, e.g. wavefolding sine or triangle waves, or is it acting as a modulation of the shape slider?

LFO 2 is a digital osc so it will be able to generate all sorts of different things and shapes. None of that has been finalized so i wont got further than that. LFO 1 is an analog LFO same as 810

Out of control! Looks incredible.

Looks fabulous and at a great price too.
Can each voice receive on it’s own midi channel for 3 independent mono voices ?
That would be an awesome feature !

$800?! So much for my 2024 no-more-mono-synths resolution.

Why did you choose to make it mono instead of poly?

I dont have the resources. an analog poly of this magnitude would take years to develop, MSW is 3 ppl

oh right so michigan synthworks is altitude909. excellent.

Just out of curiosity, how much more would the MSW-830 have cost to include a display, patch storage, and MIDI CC capabilities?

That's assuming you had the resources to actually develop a synth with a display, patch storage, and knobs that transmit CC messages (which sounds like you probably don't). But I'm curious nonetheless.

Even though one of my bandmates back in the day had an SH-101 and a Mono/Poly which I used extensively, my first two synths were a Juno 60 (which I still own believe it or not) and a JX-3P followed by a CZ101 and a DX100. So pretty much every synth I've ever owned has had the ability to store patches.

It's the reason I don't own any of the Behringer clones except for the Pro-800 because I just can't deal with synths without patch storage. I did own a Sequential Pro One for over 30 years but as soon as I got my first sampler I used the Pro One exclusively as a sampling sound design tool and not as a synth that I used regularly in my music production.

Long story short, I almost certainly won't buy an MSW-830 because I won't be able to store my patches. As great as it looks (and no doubt sounds,) the voice architecture is too complex to have to fiddle with reprogramming sounds on the fly. If it was a simpler $200 or $300 synth like the Behringer clones I might buy it just to sample sounds from it. But not at $800.

Anyway, I certainly don't want to rain on your parade. And I realize I'm probably in the minority by feeling that the lack of patch storage is a dealbreaker.

But like I said, I'm curious to know how much more a display, patch storage, and MIDI CC capability would have added to the cost. And I suppose I'm also wondering if you could even build this synth without compromising the sound by adding these modern conveniences.

Damn, apparently I'v read the panel totally wrong .
I assumed there were 3 filters ,etc..
Still looking mighty great

I guess its not the synth for you then

No probably not. In an ideal world, I would love to have the MSW-830 because I'm sure it will sound awesome. Plus, I really like the voice architecture - and the design and basically everything about it except for the lack of patch storage.

That's just my workflow. I'm sure there are WAY more people for whom that lack of patch storage will be seen as a asset.

Best of luck!

EDIT: I do plan to purchase two of your Xena modules. I currently own two Shruthis and have always wanted an Ambika. So when I recently discovered your Xena synth, I was over the moon. So thank you, thank you for that.

I dont see patch storage for a fairly simple monosynth as worth the effort. To add digital control and patch storage would result in a device that would be at least twice the cost and really not add anything IMO. I'd rather keep it simple and affordable and focus on the sound.

Cool. Thanks for your explanation.

Hey it's Paulee, I did a write up on sonicstate. This synth is exciting so happy to spread the word

https://sonicstate.com/news/2024/05/...desktop-synth/

Regarding presets, I find now that, later in life, I don’t really use them. I just make patches as I make the song. There’s a few exceptions, I have a JX/XV bank I made that I often use.

It looks great. I love synthesizers with sliders.Front panel just invite you to have crazy fun. More sound demos please

Very exciting. It looks great!

Can't find any fault with this line of reasoning. I would argue that the MSW-830 is at the upper limit of synth complexity (particularly in terms of number of panel controls) where patch storage does become quite valuable. That said, anyone should be able to dial in whatever they're after fairly quickly so the cost argument seems more relevant here, but that's just my opinion.

Speaking of cost, I'm surprised (but not doubting) the "twice the cost" claim. Where does most of that cost come from? Upgraded MCU (more I/O)? Additional software development? The additional circuitry to digitally control the analog circuits? I'm always curious about these things in the context of musical instruments.

Anyway. the MSW-830 looks like a winner! I will be highly tempted to add one to my studio despite already having entirely too many monosynths.

All those things more or less. Instead of having the knobs/sliders connected directly to the analog circuits they control, they have to be connected to a multi channel ADC or multiplexer, scanned by a CPU, and the CPU would have to generate the actual control voltages/signals that have to be run through a DAC and possibly a demultiplexer to the analog CV inputs. Firmware has to scan everything, store everything, manage patches, generate the signals going back to the analog bits, handle midi notes/CCs, etc. Way more complex than just having midi to CV/gate and some digital modulation bits in the box.

Most analog synths with patch storage cut costs by making things like envelopes, LFOs, and modulation paths digital, reducing the amount of DAC/ADC channels and analog circuits needed.

Why's everyone obsessed with patch storage? You can learn the synth well enough to make the sounds you want again.

Yeah, but there are A LOT of parameters to (re)adjust on the MSW-830 to get your sounds back. This isn't a simple Minimoog clone.

It just depends on how you like to work. My songs are always in a state of flux because I work with a songwriting partner who is the vocalist/lyricist and often record guitars and other acoustic instruments (that I don't play myself) in addition to the vocals. That process can take weeks if not months.

The song can evolve during that time where I might change a few notes in a bassline or lead part in response to what the vocalist and/or other instrumentalists are doing. Plus, I don't always have the "perfect" sound ready when I write a part. So it's not like I can just commit the part to audio and move on.

I'm not going to leave my complex synth without patch storage on the same settings during that entire time. I will be writing new songs and want to use the synth for new parts using different sounds.

The whole thing becomes a major pain in the ass, IMO. And I know my way around synths. It's not like I can't figure out how to reprogram a sound. But if there are 100 parameters to adjust, it becomes cumbersome and I'll just use a synth with patch storage at that point. Why waste 20 minutes trying to recreate a sound (that you are unlikely to ever get back perfectly given the number of parameters) when I can just select a patch that I've stored in memory in a second?

For me personally, the sound of the synth would have to be unbelievably special in order to justify the hassle. My Sequential Pro One certainly isn't which is why I use it only as a sound source to sample. And the Pro One is nowhere near as complex as the MSW-830.

YMMV.

Anyway, the Michigan Synth Works "Xena" is more up my alley. I plan to pick up a couple of those. So it's all good.

Just to understand you're point of view, have you ever tried playing live with a band, where you from song to song need to switch patches?

Here we go again, same discussion as every year.
»But muuuh, i won't buy it without patch storage«

Then just don't buy it? Get one of the myriads of alternatives that peacefully co-exist these days. Heck, you know what? There are even instruments built & intented for... stage! With preset switching!

How about just implementing it in the first place?

That's cause they are a lazy bunch of f***ers, i've gotten by with printed blank patch sheets and a pen for years.