Duelling synths-moog Vs. korg?

Moog's frying frog splash would be too much for the Korg.

Pah. PS3300. Korg's great leveller

http://img.synthetiseur.net/img/010199.jpg

NORD!!

http://www.crmav.com/i/3/9379987591194.jpg

it looks like one problem with the Nord is that the higher E, D, F, G, A, B, C, are actually all the same note

oberheim obx!

SCHREDDD

moog is most favored by young japanese girls--who will always have the last word when it comes to matters of taste

yeah, last word in TASTES LIKE CRAP maybe!

oops that didn't even make sense.

technically, korg came to the party late (1978) and learnt from all the mistakes moog made, instead producing cheap and flexible consumer models -- so you have a cheap modular synth (sort'a)

VCOs on moog/arp/oberheim/roland go out of tune because their VCOs require exponential conversion in voltage to pitch conversion, making them inherently unstable

korg and yamaha avoid this by simply using a linear pitch/voltage scheme -- this cunningly made them semi-compatibale with the arp/moog/roland cartel models that cost 10x as much to consumers. so there are 10x as many very flexible korgs out there simply because price + reliability meant they sold more -- moogs (esp. mini-moog) are priced for your average rock star snob, as with arp and oberheim, whereas roland introduced the first viable consumer synths, that were more stable even given the flawed pitch/voltage model

the late '70s japanese more stable linear voltage scheme allowed korg and yamaha to form their own competing cartel locking you into their pitch/voltage cv. and take on japanese rivals and the only serious competition, roland

so, 10 times as many, much cheaper, as functional if slightly less outwardly slick, you can buy a secondhand korg ms-20 today that is completely stable and easy to get parts for (cf: expensive constant upkeep unreliable moogs etc.) so moog now runs a small "elite" company whereas korg now produces the most popular current workstation in the world (now outselling roland) while oberheim and arp are all twenty years out of business with "collectors" paying top dollar at ebay for rare fully working models and parts

William Orbit prefers the soft filters on the readily portable and patchable korgs, stereolab use korg ms-20 filters for their sounds (plus one old ems vcs3 that pink floyd and eno used in the '70s) -- keith emerson's famous gigantic portable touring moog was almost never played in concert because of the painful telephone station centric patching -- it looked mad scientist but it was a stage giimick -- it was famously left out in the rain after one open air gig -- neither the crew or emerson gave a damn

just like buying an early '80s japanesw car might mean enduring quality and less rust than later models, a late '70s korg will maintain reliaility and stability for many years (these synths have been working fine for the last 25 years, with the pitch stability _never_ an issue)

so these days rock stars like to acknowledge these rugged reliable tanks because they've stood the distance, whereas only Maurice Jarre's estranged son had the sort of money to use the other stuff (oberheim, ems, roland, arp) but even he shied away from the troublesome unreiable inflexible moogs which might be fat etc., but ultimately are built with unintentional hardwired limitatations, as if (dr) robert under-estimated the iq of your average synth user and produce what become just the next hammond organ compared to the competition

cf: korg or most other brands, moogs are the most over-piced statis symbol switched-off sounding lemons of the whole integrated circuit fueled synth explosion of the '70s

I agree with all your practical reasoning.
But I still think Moogs sound better.