Synth Site: Waldorf: MicroQ: User reviews Add review
Average rating: 4.5 out of 5
page 3 of 13:   <<<  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  >>>
Funny enough, you have owned mQ for two years and don't know there is 3 stereo outs not four? Dance oriented? If you want yes but otherwise it's best at electro or whatever you find it for. Owning both MS and mQ I wouldn't even compare them. I think both has strenghts but I would take mq anyday. Interface is a bit confusing at first but soon many find it very simple. It could be must worse for 2Unit synth.. and for what price? If your budget allows, buy Q Rack but since owning both synths I found mQ fairly easy to use. But if you have used to use synths like MS or JP8k, editing is a bit slow. But then, MS and JP are very basic synths and mq can be very complex.

Rating: 0 out of 5 posted Friday-Mar-26-2004 at 02:18
ReLiCZ a hobbyist user from Canada writes:
One of the reviews sums it up nicely here: Misguided. I bought this box for it's polyphony. What's the point of polyphony if the sound isn't decent in the 1st place!

The arpeggio in this unit is good..better than most, once you figure out how to prgram it.

The filters on the microQ have no flavour at all in my opinion. on the BP's and HP's, high cuttoffs turn into digital static, and sound more like the noise generator.

The supposed vocoder in this thing is below's useless.

For general purpose, or usage, it's more like a insta trance box.

To get any thing remotely thick outa the machine, u gotta have the unison cranked to max.

Overall I bought this thing almost 2 years ago, and I still haven't bothered to learn all the features that it "could" do..however the interface is just not right...not simple enough.

Now my complaints are out, here are some pros:

It's a cut down version of the microwave series(dunno if that's a pro). Good enough wavetables for some decent pcm sound, 4 outs (stereo).

It CAN do some wacky sounds, though mostly unsable except for sound fx.

An in depth mod matrix, and the arp is really good on it.

The price I paid for it back when isn't worth it now for sure. I had a Korg ms2000r with less timbral, and it was thicker with only 2 osc.

Definitely a dance orientated box.

Rating: 2 out of 5 posted Thursday-Mar-25-2004 at 08:09
KZ a professional user from USA writes:
Well, It was a difficult decision getting the microQ since I already own the microwave 1 and 2 but the price of a used one was right so here we are. And how does it compare to other Waldorfs. Well, it doesn't. It is what it is. a VA synth. Better sounding than other VA's out there but it just doesn't have that something. If you think those 3 oscillators are a substitute for a fast envelope when it comes to bass sounds than you be wrong. I always had an issue with microwave2 because Waldorf never could fix the problem with clicking when envelopes are set to less than 5. In fact the problem was so bad in unison that to this day it can't be used. One of my main concerns was if that problem would still be in Q synths. Well it's not because instead of fixing the problem, I have to guess!! that they have internally set the envelope attack speed to something around 7 which makes this synth useless for true punchy bass sounds when compared to MINI MOOG, MKS80, or even microwave1. at least with microwave 2 you could play with the phase and mask the clicking and still have some punch. As for the rest. it can do a lot of weird interesting sounds but nothing more than other Waldorfs. String and brass are good but nowhere in the same league as D50/550 and nowhere close to MKS80. There you have it. Get a MKS80 and a microwave1 and you'll never need another synth. This thing is ok with lots of good sounds but you turn off the effects and all the sounds just loose it just like any other VA. If you got extra cash burning hole in your pocket get it otherwise it's just software in a rack.

Rating: 2 out of 5 posted Tuesday-Jul-22-2003 at 03:32
tim g. a hobbyist user from slc, ut, usa writes:
I got my hands on a microQ rack the other day and I'd have to say I am fairly pleased with it.

I am not exactly an analog purist, but I do certainly favor subtractive analog sounds. in this department, the mircroQ performs reasonably well, although it begins to sound quite digital when the resonance climbs above 90. the filters and their routing options are very flexible and are pretty easy to get around once understood. I haven't toyed with the comb filters much and don't imagine I ever will...

the oscillator models are very good as well, with waveforms that sound reasonably "classic" and certainly look vintage on an oscilloscope. the digital wavetables don't particularly interest me, but I suppose they would do well for atmospheric pads or for more obscure digital sounds.

the effects are fairly forgettable. the chorus sounds okay if it is used only slightly. the delay is pretty standard and the reverb I could probably do without. I don't think that mediocre effects are better than no effects. perhaps if waldorf had devoted a little more DSP to the filters things would have been a lot better.

the drum maps sound like shit, as far as I can tell. I don't think Attack sounds that great, eiter.

the interface is easy to navigate, although it becomes a bit busy with all of the options. the way that parameters are displayed on the LCD is a bit annoying, but it's no big deal. it's a lot faster to edit than a Matrix-6, but at least on that synth the parameters are layed out logically and linearly.

I also found that the keytracking in the filter section to be kind of quirky. if I low note is played legato after a high note, the filter won't track down, producing a timbre that is much brighter than if the note had been played on its own. is this a feature? no other synth I have played worked this way. I have found a solution using the mod matrix, so I guess it's not a problem...

the input and output scheme is also kind of bothersome with stereo jacks instead of individual outputs.

what attracted me to this synth was the polyphony and multitimbrality. now I realize that I was misguided, and I think the Waldorf design team was as well. I would have glady settled for 12 voices divided among four parts if it meant smoother filters with better resonance at the top-end. so, perhaps I would have been better off with a Nord Lead. the lack of an effects section is no problem; at least there is no illusion of useful onboard effects.

the microQ is certainly a high-quality synth that I'm sure I'll learn to get a lot more out of over time. the end

posted Friday-Jun-27-2003 at 19:18
DARKFACE a hobbyist user from LONDON writes:
Waldorf are the company who know what they are doing when it comes to synths. The Micro Q is fantastic, no problems updating the OS or loading sounds everything runs smooth. As far as sound quality goes.its best to just hear it to realise its top quality. You can programme the hell out of this synth, a never ending supply of sounds at your finger tips. With the fx and 6 outputs you cant go wrong, this synth can make a silly happy pad sound into a growling scary brain melter. Dont need to get anything else as far as synths go for a while now.

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Thursday-May-22-2003 at 21:16
page 3 of 13:   <<<  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  >>>