Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 15:43:48 -0700 From: Ken Balys To: analogue@hyperreal.org, paulsc@voicenet.com Subject: Re: SH 101 vs. SH 09 They are not really the same at all. The filters sound similar (ie Roland'y) but it breaks down like this: Feature SH-09 SH-101 ===================== ===== ====== Filter Input Yep Nope Invert EG Mod on VCF Yep Nope Battery Powered Nope Yep (way less noise on batteries) Noise LFO Wave Nope Yep (for aural head splitting) All VCO Waves Together Nope Yep (101 gives you a "mixer") LFO Mod Delay Yep Nope >Just how similiar are these synths sonically? Does the 09 share the same >rapid attack as its plastic brother? The SH-09 has a pretty good attack but you won't get the same punchy bass sounds out of it. Probably most people would not notics the difference though. You know Paul, you should just get both. K. Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:30:55 -0500 (CDT) From: "[22Hz] Productions" To: analogue@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: [AH] SH09 vs SH101 The difference between the SH-09 and the 101 is kinda like the difference between a BWM and a Ford, only a little more drastic. The 101 sounds like it is made of plastic; and it is. The SH-09 sounds like it is made of molasses, and while it's actually made of metal, this is still an improvement over the plastic. The basic differences, I guess, boil down to production years and target audience. The -09 was made in the late seventies, 76-78ish, and the 101 was more like 1982 or so. The 09 was intended as a sort of low-end professional-caliber synth for live performance, It's sturdy (!) and the keys are rather nice for a synth of its vintage. The 101 was part of the x0x line, intended mostly as semi-pro gear bordering on high-end toy. It was designed as part of the 101/202/303/606 'system'. (I think Hyperreal has pictures to prove it.) The net result of this total non-similarity of intent is that the sound of the two machines is as different as their other attributes. The 101 is a great synth for mid/high pitched resonant trancy craziness. The 09 is perfect if you would like basslines which knock you over. There is a certain 'grit' to the 101, while the 09 is total polished smoothness. The both, however, will do squelchy very well. I happen to prefer the 09's VCF (again, very smooth) for that task, but the 101's more 'raw' VCF may appeal to others more - I use it just as much as the 09. (Actually, I own a 202, not a 101, but the synth circuitry in the 2 is identical.) Hope that clears up a little of the murkiness. I'd vote for the 09 over the 101, if I had to make a choice, but I do like them both. Jason Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:28:20 -0700 From: Ken Balys To: analogue@hyperreal.org, aphex@ksu.edu Subject: Re: [AH] SH09 vs SH101 Wha? I've got both and had both for a while. There are a few differences between them but they are pretty similar in many respects. The construction of both is excellent. The difference in the sound of the filters is subtle. The SH-101 can be powered from batteries and you can mix the oscillator waves, the SH-09 has an audio in to VCF and you can negate the envelope to VCF. Thats it. Just about every sound you can make on a SH-09 you can make on a 101. Cheers, Kenny B. > The difference between the SH-09 and the 101 is kinda like the >difference between a BWM and a Ford, only a little more drastic. The 101 >sounds like it is made of plastic; and it is. The SH-09 sounds like it is >made of molasses, and while it's actually made of metal, this is still an >improvement over the plastic. Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:37:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Troy Sheets To: Ken Balys Cc: analogue@hyperreal.org, aphex@ksu.edu Subject: Re: [AH] SH09 vs SH101 Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the 09 have a filter built out of discrete parts (acutally, i know that... I opened it up)... but I think the 101 uses an intigrated filter. I always thought the 09 sounded more vintage and liquidy than the 101... but maybe that was just becuase the 09 is older and the componts have drifted further out of tolerence... :) I like the sound of the 09 better. But it is all about personal taste... -troy > > > Wha? I've got both and had both for a while. There are > a few differences between them but they are pretty > similar in many respects. The construction > of both is excellent. The difference in the sound of > the filters is subtle. The SH-101 can be powered from > batteries and you can mix the oscillator waves, > the SH-09 has an audio in to VCF and you can negate > the envelope to VCF. Thats it. Just about every > sound you can make on a SH-09 you can make on a 101. > > Cheers, > Kenny B. > > > The difference between the SH-09 and the 101 is kinda like the > >difference between a BWM and a Ford, only a little more drastic. The 101 > >sounds like it is made of plastic; and it is. The SH-09 sounds like it is > >made of molasses, and while it's actually made of metal, this is still an > >improvement over the plastic. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ tsheets@saturn5.com <- You have found me http://www.saturn5.com/tsheets/audio <- my .mp3 tracks http://www.saturn5.com/tsheets/Casey3.wav <- Casey Kasem in rare form Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 20:59:01 -0500 (CDT) From: "[22Hz] Productions" To: Ken Balys Cc: analogue@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: [AH] SH09 vs SH101 On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Ken Balys wrote: > > Wha? I've got both and had both for a while. There are > a few differences between them but they are pretty > similar in many respects. The construction > of both is excellent. The difference in the sound of > the filters is subtle. The SH-101 can be powered from > batteries and you can mix the oscillator waves, > the SH-09 has an audio in to VCF and you can negate > the envelope to VCF. Thats it. Just about every > sound you can make on a SH-09 you can make on a 101. I can make every sound on every instrument, as long as they all have a VCO, VCF, LFO, ADSR and a VCA. The difference is for those who can tell the difference between the sound of synths. If you can't tell that the difference between the 101/202 and 09 is drastic (or at least worth fessing up to) then I worry. The VCF in the 101/202 is a proprietary Roland chip. (IR3109) The VCF in the 09 is totally discreet, based on (if I remember correctly) a CA3080 OTA. The VCO in the 101/202 is a (shitty) CEM3340 - harsh, unmusical, and very ... not smooth. The VCO in the SH-09, is, again, totally discreet. As are the rest of the 'modules.' from each. At one level, any monosynth sounds the same. My odyssey, -09, 202, Sonic 6, and OB-1 can all make basically the same sounds. On another level, though, each has its own distinct character. (This is, in essence, why we all love these beasts in the first place.) I've owned both my 202 and my 09 for nearly 3 years, and they were the first 2 analog synths (which weren't Junos) I ever played. I consider myself intimately familiar with their differences, because all the music I made for nearly 2 years was made using these 2 machines. I only call it how I hear it. Jason