Home › Forums › Help/Technical Questions › MIcrosynth and XO version is there a difference?
- This topic has 8 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 5 months ago by julian.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 26, 2009 at 4:08 am #77965Punk FloydMember
Hello,
I’d like to know if besides aesthetics, is there any difference between the older micro synth and the XO version?
Thanks!
March 26, 2009 at 4:25 am #89147julianModeratorDifferent voltages.
March 26, 2009 at 8:03 am #94912John JMemberBent steel is 24v I believe, but that hardly matters. I have heard that the XO is somehow ‘cleaner’ but buddy couldn’t explain what he meant so I didn’t take his comment too seriously. I heard from someone else that that XO’s trigger slider / envelope response is a little easier to control: the trigger slider is a little more consistent with which notes START the filter sweep and which ones play through the sweep. Once again, I’m a bit skeptical but you never know. I wouldn’t mind giving the two an A/B to settle this once and for all, but I’ve only seen one XO Microsynth in Calgary and it was a bass version.
June 3, 2009 at 6:34 pm #97264andtreaParticipantI am very undecided on choosing between the old reissue and XO micro-synth.
Price is similar, probably RI is a little cheaper (they are already discontinued but still “findable”)
IMHO the pros:– Reissue: Mojo, 24v power (tone will be better than 9v), sustain (according to fishlog – TGP user), price, repairable (the other has smd construction)
– XO: smaller footprint, True-Bypass
comments and suggestion will be appreciated…
June 3, 2009 at 7:01 pm #97302electro-melxModeratorQuote:IMHO the pros:– Reissue: Mojo, 24v power (tone will be better than 9v), sustain (according to fishlog – TGP user), price, repairable (the other has smd construction)
– XO: smaller footprint, True-Bypass
comments and suggestion will be appreciated…
tone will be better than 9v
sustain (according to fishlog – TGP user)I’s like to see/hear some real evidence of this because I don’t really understand how that can be the case. It just sounds like internet nonsense to me but I would be happy to be proved wrong.
June 3, 2009 at 7:15 pm #97304andtreaParticipanttone will be better than 9v
sustain (according to fishlog – TGP user)About the 24v improvement that was only my supposition.
Usually old EHX has a “strong” preamp (I know the Deluxe memory Man) and the sustain difference could be believable.What’s the “bent steel” taht you talking about? Like an internal voltage multiplier?
June 3, 2009 at 10:14 pm #97309Ned FlandersModeratorIt refers to the trapezoidal enclosure.
June 4, 2009 at 8:22 am #97314electro-melxModeratorQuote:tone will be better than 9v
sustain (according to fishlog – TGP user)About the 24v improvement that was only my supposition.
Usually old EHX has a “strong” preamp (I know the Deluxe memory Man) and the sustain difference could be believable.What’s the “bent steel” taht you talking about? Like an internal voltage multiplier?
the reason I’m dubious about the voltage thing is that if it really made a difference I don’t think EHX would have changed it. They never changed the voltage of the worm when it went diecast, because it would have effected the performance of the unit (it’s still 24v) and the Frequency Analyzer is still 40v….presumably for the same reason, so EHX aren’t in the habit of making something run on 9v unless it makes no difference to the way the unit works….. and let’s face it, it would be easier to leave it how it was, so why would they change it if it was going to have a negative effect? It just doesn’t make any sense.
June 4, 2009 at 2:36 pm #97325julianModeratorYeah.
It probably just didn’t honestly need 24v because they found a work around.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
