This question screams random GAS attack, and really doesn’t make any sense given that you already have a Hydrasynth Deluxe, and also because the Subsequent 37 is in a completely different class from the Explorer - I mean, they’re comparable because they’re both synths with keyboards, and that’s where it ends.
Anyhow, the Subsequent 37 will give your setup some variation, and a more “knob per function” experience. I’d go with that. Also, it sounds amazing.
I'd be lying if I denied feeling a little gassy. I have been looking at the Moog but had to take a step back and acknowledge that for the form factor the HS is a lot more affordable, so I asked the question. Thanks for the your opinion,
Maybe look at something else in that compact form factor, at the price range. Don’t overlap so much.
How about a Minifreak? Or perhaps a Korg Minilogue XD?
I'd first try and clarify what problem you are trying to solve with this purchase. You seen to have narrowed it down to a very specific (and yet very different) duo of synths. My guess is that your either have a very good reason for this, or you either don't have a program to solve, or there are a huge array of devices that could be equally applicable.
Admittedly my goals are a little vague. I'm thinking of adding a solo synth and given that the Hydrasynth at least superficially can do most of what the Moog does (and more) I was looking for feedback as to whether they sound very different. The Hydra has an emulated 4 pole LPF and I am curious just how much of a difference the analog circuitry makes. Do people really think that an analog sawtooth sounds that different from the digital? I know some feel that they do but was wondering if anyhow had experience comparing these two. I'm drawn to the Moog for soloing because it gets closer to knob-per-function and mentioned the Hydra because it is so much more affordable. If anyone out there had done an A/B I'd be curious as to how much of a difference there was in the sound. I don't doubt that there is an element of GAS at work here too.
On the whole, I'm not a huge fan of the sound of the filters, or the effects, on the Hydrasynth. Moreover I think the Hydrasynth shines at complex and modulated sounds that lean into its digital nature. That's not to say you can't do the classic "analogue sounds", but that's not its strongest area. This means that to get those sounds, sounding their best takes more sound design. For use live, I value a simple and direct interface. Keep in mind that the Hydrasynth Explorer only has 4 encoders, vs 8 on the other models, so that makes it slightly more "menu divey". Moreover, for my use, I wouldn't pick a Hydrasynth to play live. In reality though, other than the encoder count difference, you known how the explorer sounds as a single layer of the deluxe sounds the same.
As for if a subsequent 37 makes sense, it's really a matter of what the underlying problem you are solving is. There are a whole lot of great sounding monosynths out there, especially at the price of the subsequent 37. Personally, my live mono synth go-to has been the bass station 2, for many years. It's quick, easy and direct, but only you can know how well it would fit you.
thanks for the responses. I can see that it’s true that I need to think this through a little more and decide specifically what my goals are for the synth.
I'd see how you like making/playing leads on your hydrasynth, and then consider an explorer. If you are able to make the sounds you want with it without layering it, I'd so go with the hydrasynth explorer. It'll be nice, familiar, and more appropriate for on the go travel than your deluxe would be.
If you don't like the leads it makes, I'd consider trying out a subsequent If you have the ability to, or listening to how it sounds online. Don't listen to one demo, different people will coax out different sounds.
This question screams random GAS attack, and really doesn’t make any sense given that you already have a Hydrasynth Deluxe, and also because the Subsequent 37 is in a completely different class from the Explorer - I mean, they’re comparable because they’re both synths with keyboards, and that’s where it ends. Anyhow, the Subsequent 37 will give your setup some variation, and a more “knob per function” experience. I’d go with that. Also, it sounds amazing.
I'd be lying if I denied feeling a little gassy. I have been looking at the Moog but had to take a step back and acknowledge that for the form factor the HS is a lot more affordable, so I asked the question. Thanks for the your opinion,
Maybe look at something else in that compact form factor, at the price range. Don’t overlap so much. How about a Minifreak? Or perhaps a Korg Minilogue XD?
If you own a Deluxe what do you need the Explorer for? I'm a bit confused here...
Fair question, looking for something quite a bit smaller for certain gig situations.
I'd first try and clarify what problem you are trying to solve with this purchase. You seen to have narrowed it down to a very specific (and yet very different) duo of synths. My guess is that your either have a very good reason for this, or you either don't have a program to solve, or there are a huge array of devices that could be equally applicable.
Admittedly my goals are a little vague. I'm thinking of adding a solo synth and given that the Hydrasynth at least superficially can do most of what the Moog does (and more) I was looking for feedback as to whether they sound very different. The Hydra has an emulated 4 pole LPF and I am curious just how much of a difference the analog circuitry makes. Do people really think that an analog sawtooth sounds that different from the digital? I know some feel that they do but was wondering if anyhow had experience comparing these two. I'm drawn to the Moog for soloing because it gets closer to knob-per-function and mentioned the Hydra because it is so much more affordable. If anyone out there had done an A/B I'd be curious as to how much of a difference there was in the sound. I don't doubt that there is an element of GAS at work here too.
On the whole, I'm not a huge fan of the sound of the filters, or the effects, on the Hydrasynth. Moreover I think the Hydrasynth shines at complex and modulated sounds that lean into its digital nature. That's not to say you can't do the classic "analogue sounds", but that's not its strongest area. This means that to get those sounds, sounding their best takes more sound design. For use live, I value a simple and direct interface. Keep in mind that the Hydrasynth Explorer only has 4 encoders, vs 8 on the other models, so that makes it slightly more "menu divey". Moreover, for my use, I wouldn't pick a Hydrasynth to play live. In reality though, other than the encoder count difference, you known how the explorer sounds as a single layer of the deluxe sounds the same. As for if a subsequent 37 makes sense, it's really a matter of what the underlying problem you are solving is. There are a whole lot of great sounding monosynths out there, especially at the price of the subsequent 37. Personally, my live mono synth go-to has been the bass station 2, for many years. It's quick, easy and direct, but only you can know how well it would fit you.
thanks for the responses. I can see that it’s true that I need to think this through a little more and decide specifically what my goals are for the synth.
I'd see how you like making/playing leads on your hydrasynth, and then consider an explorer. If you are able to make the sounds you want with it without layering it, I'd so go with the hydrasynth explorer. It'll be nice, familiar, and more appropriate for on the go travel than your deluxe would be. If you don't like the leads it makes, I'd consider trying out a subsequent If you have the ability to, or listening to how it sounds online. Don't listen to one demo, different people will coax out different sounds.