Memorymode 2 vs Arturia Memorymoog V: Full Comparison

Two software companies just released a Memorymoog emulation, and only one of them got Bill Wolfer to help voice it. That matters more than you might think if you have spent years chasing that specific 1980s polysynth growl in a plugin. Cherry Audio's Memorymode 2 and Arturia's Memorymoog V both promise the sound of Moog's fabled six-voice analog synth, but they arrive at it through different modeling philosophies, different CPU budgets, and very different price tags.

If you are trying to decide between them, or wondering whether to jump ship from one to the other, the answer depends less on brand loyalty and more on what you actually do with a synth once you own it. Here is how they stack up.

Oscillator and Filter Modeling Accuracy

The original Memorymoog ran three VCOs per voice through a Moog ladder filter. Its reputation rests on the way those oscillators drifted and beat against each other in a way that felt alive rather than sterile. Cherry Audio built Memorymode 2 with Bill Wolfer's direct involvement, and his fingerprints show up in how the low end behaves under sustained chords. The oscillator sync and cross-modulation options lean into that slightly unstable, breathing quality rather than smoothing it out.

Arturia's Memorymoog V takes a more controlled approach. Arturia has spent years refining its TAE (True Analog Emulation) engine across the V Collection, and that work shows in how consistently the filter tracks across the keyboard. The ladder filter emulation sounds clean and predictable, which is either a compliment or a criticism depending on what you want.

Producers chasing pristine bass patches or lead lines that sit reliably in a mix will appreciate that consistency. Producers chasing the specific grime of the hardware unit — the kind that made players like Wolfer lean on it for funk and R&B sessions — may find Memorymode 2's rougher edges closer to the source.

Neither plugin is a bit-for-bit circuit model in the way some boutique emulations claim to be, but both capture the character rather than just the frequency response. A well-maintained vintage Memorymoog still edges out both in unpredictable analog drift, and that same drift gave the hardware unit its well-earned reputation for going out of tune mid-set. Neither software version will strand you on stage.

Modulation Depth and Sound Design Flexibility

This is where the two plugins diverge most sharply. Memorymoog V includes Arturia's modern modulation matrix, the same flexible routing system found across much of the V Collection, letting you assign LFOs, envelopes, and even audio-rate modulation to nearly any parameter. If you want to push the Memorymoog sound into modern territory — wobbling filters, complex FM textures, generative modulation chains — Arturia gives you far more room to experiment than the original hardware ever offered. This pairs well with fender bass vi vs regular bass: what's the difference?.

Memorymode 2 stays closer to the original synth's modulation scheme, expanded modestly rather than overhauled. Cherry Audio added extra LFO shapes and a slightly deeper mod matrix compared to the first Memorymode release, but the plugin still wants you to work within the vocabulary of the original instrument rather than reinvent it. For sound designers building patches that need to sound authentically vintage rather than vintage-inspired, that restraint is a feature. For anyone treating the Memorymoog as a modulation playground, Memorymoog V's flexibility will feel less limiting.

This comes down to intent. If your reference points are period recordings, disco basslines, and early-80s funk keyboards — the textures Wolfer helped popularize — Memorymode 2's more faithful modulation set gets you there with fewer detours. If you want a Memorymoog-flavored synth that can also do things the original never could, Memorymoog V's deeper routing options are the better toolkit. We cover related ground in our guide to keyboard gig bag essentials every beginner needs.

CPU Load and System Performance

Both plugins run comfortably on current-generation DAW systems, but they don't demand the same resources. Memorymoog V, built on Arturia's mature TAE engine, tends to run efficiently even with several instances open, which matters when you're layering multiple synth tracks in a dense arrangement. Arturia has refined this engine across many V Collection releases, and that maturity shows in stable, predictable CPU usage.

Memorymode 2 carries a heavier modeling load per voice, particularly when you push the oscillator drift and filter character settings toward their most analog-accurate extremes. On modern multi-core systems this rarely becomes a dealbreaker, but producers working on older laptops or in sessions with dozens of tracks should budget more headroom than they would for Memorymoog V. Freezing tracks or bouncing to audio earlier in your workflow becomes more relevant with Memorymode 2 if you're stacking multiple instances alongside other CPU-hungry plugins like convolution reverbs or granular synths.

Neither plugin will bring a reasonably current system to its knees. But if your studio machine is already showing its age, Memorymoog V is the safer bet for keeping session load manageable.

Price to Feature Ratio

Cherry Audio has built its reputation on aggressive pricing, and Memorymode 2 continues that pattern. It typically costs noticeably less than Memorymoog V, and Cherry Audio frequently runs promotional pricing that widens the gap further. For producers on a budget who want a focused, characterful Memorymoog emulation without paying for extras they won't use, that price difference is hard to ignore.

Also read: see which boss katana amp should you buy? a buyer's guide

Memorymoog V's higher price reflects Arturia's engine quality and the fact that it typically arrives bundled within the larger V Collection ecosystem rather than as a pure standalone purchase, depending on current promotions. If you already own other Arturia instruments or plan to expand into their broader synth library, the value calculation shifts in Memorymoog V's favor, since you're buying into a shared interface and modulation philosophy across multiple instruments. If you want exactly one excellent Memorymoog emulation and nothing else, Memorymode 2 gives you more character per dollar.

Neither plugin is objectively overpriced. The real question is whether you're buying a single specialized instrument or investing in a platform.

The Bottom Line

If you want the closest thing to sitting behind the keyboard Bill Wolfer played on classic sessions — warts, drift, and all — Memorymode 2 is the more faithful and more affordable choice, built with direct input from someone who actually gigged on the original hardware. If you want a Memorymoog-inspired instrument with deeper modulation options, more predictable CPU behavior, and a place inside a larger synth collection you might already own, Arturia's Memorymoog V is the stronger long-term investment.

Producers currently using an older Memorymode version should weigh the upgrade against Memorymoog V's modulation flexibility before assuming a straight sequel purchase is the obvious move. Either way, you're getting meaningfully closer to that six-voice growl than most sample libraries will ever offer.