Logan String Melody II

This will be a short review :)
very easy to use - plug in, switch on, select preset and playing.

full polyphone, but not the 16" mono bass.
onboard chorus in different configurations.

but i've to say - the keyboard / claviature is crappy, one of the worst plastic ones i played, and the black keys are a bit too wide for my fingers :(
In reference to the best - Vermona ET6-1; and worst - Elka Rhapsody 490 and maybe solina string...

sound is awesome :)
the special noise comes from the chorus effect semiconductors (bucket bridge device, S&H-delay-line) - has triple 256 steps.
best used for new age, or EBM :)

It's heavy - 23 kilos - built in wooden case.
for things i can't play i made a sampling 2xDVD, but w/o the solo preset (got lost cos chorus has external input) with 1-minute samples in 2496 each note and some effects.

mine is anno 1979 :)
and the big mainboard (100x30cm) is manual soldered.

i made a hommage for it:
http://www.musiczeit.com/album.php?album=664

(One of the previous reviewers has already given a brief description of the Logan?s controls; I?m going to give a more detailed account?)

There are two sets of controls: five circular push buttons and twelve large sliders (?plus a large illuminated on/off switch at the rear; I was interested to read that one reviewer has a SM II with no power switch).

The push buttons - which are exclusive, i.e. you can only engage one of them at a time - are for selecting the desired voice. They are labelled, from L to R: ?O?, ?ACC.?, ?SOLO?, ?ORCH.? and ?ORGAN?.

The sliders - which are coloured [as indicated] - are for controlling the timbre and envelope of the sound. The eight sliders to the left of the keyboard change the timbre by altering the levels of different harmonics, rather like the drawbars of an organ. They are labelled, from L to R:
(BASS Section)
?PERC? and ?BASS? [yellow]
?CELLO?, ?VIOLA? and ?VIOLIN? [red]
(TREBLE Section)
?CELLO?, ?VIOLA? and ?VIOLIN? [blue]
The four sliders on the metal panel above the keyboard are the EG controls: ?Attack? [red] and ?Sustain? [blue], one of each for both the BASS and TREBLE sections of the keyboard.

The SM II has a single keyboard with a four-octave (C to C) range split halfway into BASS and TREBLE sections. The split point is helpfully indicated by a large diamond-shaped symbol on the metal panel above the keyboard.

The SM II?s controls are simple, logically arranged and intuitive to use. To be honest, you?d have to be a bit of a dunce not to get the hang of it pretty quickly...:)

I was a bit surprised to discover that one reviewer had given the SM II ?10? for ?Features? ? since it dates from the late ?70s when MIDI wasn?t even a twinkle in Mr Kakehashi?s eye I think that?s rather generous, to be honest. You could always MIDI retrofit the thing, I guess, but I don?t know about that.

The SM II?s features are notably superior to those of many of it?s competitors since it?s fully polyphonic (it has a dedicated AR envelope generator for each note?s VCA); machines such as the Solina String Ensemble, in comparison, were merely quasi-polyphonic (i.e. ?paraphonic?).

I figure: minus 5 for no midi, plus 2 for full polyphony?equals ?7? overall for ?Features?.

As others have already noted, the Logan excels at lush string pads a la ?Oxygene? or ?Equinoxe?-era JMJ?but it?s equally good at a wide range of other sounds, too, from disembodied bass blips to smooth glassy organ. In fact, given the relative simplicity of the controls the degree of timbral variation that?s possible is quite surprising. It?s all usable, too; it?s actually quite hard to get a duff sound out of the SM II. Overall I?d say the sound is warm, rich and characterful; it stands up well on it?s own but responds pleasingly to external processing and FX, too.

So far, so great...so why not ?10? for ?Expressiveness/Sounds?? Well it is a bit noisy on certain settings, compared to modern gear. I don?t think it?s particularly off-putting, though. (Actually I?m with Mr Shelby on this one: it?s part of it?s charm). Come to think of it, some modern gear is pretty damn noisy, too: I?ve got a SidStation and that sounds like a load of bees without a noise gate...

I can endorse the other reviewers? comments about the SM II?s construction: it?s extremely well built, particularly by modern standards. I know this probably makes me sound old but they just don?t make ?em like this any more: most modern gear seems designed to break the day after the warranty expires (or, in the case of software, to be superseded by a new version featuring an extra bell/whistle within six months). Not the SM II, though: this thing was built to last. On the positive side this means it can withstand knocks that would mean ?game over? for less sturdy instruments. On the negative side, however, it weighs a ton: honestly, you?d think it was lead-lined or something! I?m damned if I?m lugging the bloody thing to gigs - it?s staying in the studio for the foreseeable.

Unlikely, methinks! Then again, why would you need it: it's built like a tank (see above), you can get replacement pots and faders from Maplin, and the circuit diagrams are available from http://web.telia.com/~u16105460/ampzilla/reg.htm? DIY forever!

In the era of virtual instruments machines like the SM II look positively prehistoric on paper. There are hundreds - maybe even thousands - of freeware soft synths online that leave them standing in terms of features; with an internet connection and a half-decent PC you can now download something offering far more functionality for free in less time than it takes to make a cup of tea. So why bother with the likes of the Logan?

These days you seem to hear the same sounds over and over again. I started to notice it a few years ago but things have got much worse of late. In the last decade computer processing power has gone through the roof: even a fairly basic PC running minimal software can now produce a staggering array of sounds. Get a decent machine and the sky?s the limit, really: you can create any sound you can imagine (and probably plenty you can?t). So how come everything sounds the same: why, if we?ve got all this power to play with, are most of us making the same noises?

There are more and more emulations, simulations and recreations (i.e. musical replicants) of ?classic? instruments than ever before, and some of them are amazingly good. But I wonder whether the world really NEEDS another virtual MiniMoog/B3/D6/303 etc.? Don?t get me wrong, I love all the classics, they?re great instruments?but they?ve been done to death now and things are starting to get pretty damn boring. I didn?t start making music just to sound like everybody else; people remember distinctive sounds and that?s why I prefer gear like the SM II.

There?s an irony at work here, I know. The SM II was itself intended as a kind of emulation: realistic keyboard-controlled string sounds for those who couldn?t afford a mellotron. The makers failed in that respect - it sounds nothing like a real string section - but they nevertheless succeeded in creating something that had a charm, a sonic integrity, and a distinctive character of it?s own (qualities often lacking in many modern instruments).

Then there?s the issue of interface. I use computers every day of my life, so I?m hardly an IT-illiterate Luddite, but I can?t stand using them to make music. Maybe there are people who find dragging a mouse across a desk to turn a virtual pot on a virtual instrument a life-affirming experience, but I?m not one of them: for me it?s virtually unbearable. It just doesn?t feel like a ?real? instrument ?cos it?s not hands-on. Yeah, yeah, I know: you can always buy an external controller to get knobs and faders if that?s what you want?but what?s the point when you can get something that sounds utterly distinctive and has all the knobs and faders you need already built in?

There are alternatives to the Logan, certainly: the Godwin String Concert, the Vox String Thing, the Farfisa Syntorchestra, the Crumars, the Rolands, the Solinas etc?but for me none of them really come close: the SM II is THE string machine. Apparently Logan made other models as well: the Mk I String Melody, the Big Band, the Piano Strings Synthesizer, the String Orchestra, the Vocal Synth and the Vocalist. I?ve no idea what they?re like, they might all be completely rubbish, but Logan got it right once, anyway.

(I'm a fan of this thing; can you tell?)

200 pounds used. You can probably pick ?em up for less, but it was in excellent nick and I?ve been after one for a long time. To be honest I?d have been willing to pay more. Worth every penny.

i own the hohner-licensed version that is identical except for the name.
very lush, beautiful, creamy, i totally agree with the other reviewers.

plug and play, really. if you want that 70?s lush lush stringpad sound, you get it here in perfect form.

i own or played other string machines from the period, so here?s a brief comparison..
crumar multiman, which has a sharper, more "defined" sound, but less creamy.
hohner string performer, which comes close but needs more eq-ing in the midrange, and doesn?t sound quite as "open" or well-balanced, but has slightly fuller bass.
the siel orchestra, which was much thinner.
the yamaha sk-15, which had more synth type options but never sounded this warm.

although i?ve never played a solina, i must say that the logan must be among the very best string machines built.

i don?t use it that much, but then sometimes you just want that retro string sound, and only the logan will do. a very inspiring machine and a joy to play.

A doddle, frankly: just pick a voice then move the (large, colour-coded) sliders around til you like what you hear. None of that "parameter 13b, page 384" malarkey.

Full polyphony (can't be bad), keyboard action is like an organ, not a piano.

Doesn't do MIDI or any of that new-fangled stuff...

YEAH, baby! Lovely, lovely, LOVELY warm rich analogue tones - the orchestra sounds are thick and plenty fat and the organ's cool, too(there's some kind of built-in chorus going on, I think). I've been playing it through a small valve amp but it's warm enough without, really. Doesn't sound anything like real strings, mind, but there you go. It's a "string machine", init, not a real violin!

I don't think it's as quiet as modern gear, to be honest, but I can't say it's a problem (...maybe even part of it's charm?)

After reading the review by the guy who uses his with a phaser pedal I'm going to see about trying the same thing.

It hasn't broken down so far but I've only had it for three weeks (so that's a qualified "10").

Dunno what could go wrong, really. It's a pretty solid piece of kit by the looks of things.

Weighs a ton, though: I use it at home and wouldn't dare lug it to a gig without putting in some serious time at the gym first :)

Do the makers even EXIST any more? No idea, frankly...

...And now the sickening part: I got this lovely chunk of retro-heaven for absolutely NOTHING! That's right: no pounds, no pence. Irritating, isn't it?

It was given to me by a mate helping his uncle clear out his loft. He figured it was junk and wanted to get rid of it, but he knew I played keys so he offered it to me. I nearly said no, too; I'd never even heard of the thing til I started asking around and looked it up online. Needless to say, I'm glad I didn't.

Isn't it nice when stuff like that happens...:)

It's not an analogue synthesizer in the traditional meaning with a lot of knobs to play around with. It's more like an organ with some drawbars and preset sounds. Turn it on and play!

It's built in a hardcase and it has got wooden panels on the top and the sides. Very vintage and very cool to look at! :D

The keyboard has full polyphony but doesn't feel very comfortable. It feels a little bit cheap... But it's vintage gear so I guess that I can't complain about it. After all it sounds great!

There are five preset sounds that range from typical stringmachine "orchestra" sounds to solo sounds and even an organ (which some people may find useful - I'm stucked with my Philips Philicorda).

Then there are eight sliders which are divided into bass section and treble section (this is were you're setting sounds for the lower and higher keyboard) The choices are two bass sliders and six string sliders (cello, viola and violin). There are also sliders for attack and sustain!

My Logan doesn't have any on/off button and I find that very odd. I'm not used to plug and unplug my gear but as with the keyboard it's nothing to nag about really...

My main reason to buy a Logan String Melody II was to get a sound similiar to that Jean Michel Jarre made famous on his early albums. The sweeping sound that comes from his Eminent 310 U! (An organ which also had a stringmachine section)
Well, together with a Electro Harmonix Smallstone Phaser you are as close as you can get with the Logan. To me it's heaven!

Logan is noisy but in a good way because it's a very special, soft noise. One have to hear it to understand. It's hard to explain it..
The sound is creamy and fat. To get an idea how it sounds listen to Jarres Oxygene 13 from the album Oxygene 7-13 from 1997.

I really like the sound and every feature that let me form it. The sustain option is great and it can make everything from drony bass sounds to sweet bleepy sounds.

If you're looking for a mellow string sound with a retro-feeling to it, then this is the real deal. Can't say it enough!

I think that I can depend on it. If not, I don't think that it will be a pain to fix. Old gear is unrealible but I can live with that.
A backup? Well, maybe if I'm lucky to find one.
My Logan is standing in my studio and it won't be moved or used on concerts or whatever anyway.

They're not around anymore and if they are, they've probably forgotten about the string synths...

I bought this together with a smallstone phaser and got exactly what I wanted. They're hard to track down so if you find one, buy it! I know that these babies can be used for more than sweeping stringpads.

In my opinon Logans are the best stringmachines ever and they sound more fat and creamy than ARP or Roland alternatives!

If mine was stolen I would try to find new. Nothing else could replace it (except for a real Eminent 310 U)

This machine is a very old analog Sting Synthesizer from the late seventis. It is very easy an efficient to use.

This String Synth is full polyphonic (!!!) and in unlike many
ohter string synthes this one has an VCA envelope for each
keyboard-key. A variety of faders allows some degree of variation in the sound and then a series of presets will bring in instantly repeatable sounds as well. The organ is very effective (apparently The Enid used their Logan just for that).

In my opinion the best sounding analog string ever build. This instrument also wins over the Solina in it's warmth and fullness. It is possible to make it sound very like the Eminent string sound that Jarre uses on say "Oxygene 13", but warmer and fuller. If you know the Jean Michelle Jarre phaser strings you know what i mean.

This synth build like an tank. It is is placed in a black leather case an has wooden top and side panels. It's made for giging.

I guess there is no more customer support today.

I love this machine. And tougether with my Yamaha CS-50, a Moog rodigy and an 808, it is the basis for my retrostyle music. If you like the JMJ Sound you will love the Logan String Mellody 2.
If ou can find one buy it, it is worth every cent.