!["Moog President Joe Richardson Reveals New Releases: Expect Two or Maybe Three Classic Synths in the Next Year – Exclusive Insights!"]](https://backingtracksfullcollection.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Moog-President-Joe-Richardson-Reveals-New-Releases-Expect-Two-or-758x426.png "\"Moog President Joe Richardson Reveals New Releases: Expect Two or Maybe Three Classic Synths in the Next Year – Exclusive Insights!\"] 1")
SYNTH WEEK 2026: It’s the legendary company that brought to the world the very idea that the synthesizer could actually be a viable commercial instrument – shepherded by their genius founder, Bob Moog. Ever since the brand’s early days the name Moog has been synonymous with sonically rich, hand-crafted analogue synthesis.
But, if you’ve been following the shifting sands of the music technology industry over the last few years, you’ll no doubt be aware of Moog’s shocking 2023 acquisition by the multi-brand owning corporation InMusic, which also owns Akai Professional, M-Audio, Alesis and a range of top-tier DJ brands.
For some passionate Moog fans, this acquisition was viewed as a portent of the very worst – that Moog would be sacrificing not just its manufacturing heartland (the Moog team were also simultaneously relocating from their historic Asheville, North Carolina headquarters) but was also inevitably going to have to shed its quintessential boutique design ethos – and its painstakingly hand-built credo – to suit the demands of a bigger, global market.
Article continues below
However, what has happened since this acquisition has largely put those fears to bed.
The extraordinary Muse was released in 2024 and was hailed instantly as a modern Moog flagship par excellence. Balancing advanced modern abilities with the heritage circuitry that Bob Moog himself pioneered, we said it was essentially, “the purest, most characterful poly that Moog has made in recent memory.”
Then there was last year’s Messenger, a more accessible monosynth that was capable of huge, sonically rich sounds at a much more affordable price than anything Moog had released previously. “Messenger is a definite success, and a worthy addition to Moog’s long history of analogue synths,” we said in our review.
Moog clearly had something to prove, and, as we delved into in our respective reviews, it rose from the ashes with a solid pair of post-acquisition releases.
So, where to next?
To answer that question – and to mark Synth Week 2026 here at MusicRadar – we caught up with Moog Music’s president Joe Richardson to talk through how the Moog team weathered the storm of the acquisition, the making of the Messenger and Muse and most tantalisingly of all… a trio of intriguing new products currently being shaped by Moog’s inner circle which could form the ultimate proof that Moog’s ability to create modern classics hasn’t been dented one iota.
A few weeks back, Moog released the Bob Moog Tribute Edition of the Model D, limited to just 500 units. We thought this would be the perfect place to start, as its release underscores how the current incarnation of Moog Music co-exists in symbiosis with the separate Bob Moog Foundation, which strives to educate the world on its legendary founder’s importance to the annals of music history…
MusicRadar: Hi Joe, thanks for speaking to us today. Firstly, we should ask why now was the time to launch the Bob Moog Tribute Edition of the Model D? How does this release tie in with supporting the Bob Moog Foundation itself?
Joe Richardson: “First, if you’ve not seen it, this thing is incredibly good looking – it’s a handsome instrument. It’s hard to get away from how beautiful it is.
“Going back just a little bit, it was 2016 when Moog brought the first [Model D] reissue back out. It wasn’t ideal, but it was a great advancement for that instrument that also stayed very much true to what the original Model D did. In 2022 they made some improvements to the design.
“So, [across this] ten-year period, we realised there’s only a finite amount of materials that you can actually draw from to make instruments like this, and still be true to where they come from. These Bob Moog Tribute Editions make use of the last of the supply [of internals] that we have. I think there should always be a Model D in the line-up but that won’t always be practical.
“If you look back at some of our classics, like the System 55, some of those parts you just can’t get. So we’re getting close to that category of not being able to get the things that we need to make it right. Making 500 of these was really, really important, while we still had access to the materials.
“And the relationship with the Bob Moog Foundation is incredibly important – because our roles aren’t the same in the industry. The Foundation’s role is centred on education. Not just on Moog and its instruments, but the part it played in music history. We believe it’s important for that storyline to continue in the hands of a trusted, credible source that we believe will continue telling that story. Michelle Moog-Koussa (Bob’s daughter and Executive Director of the Bob Moog Foundation) obviously has an interest in maintaining that storyline, and she’s become a great partner. It helps us to delineate our role as the instrument manufacturer and their role as the storytellers.
“This instrument is all about the overlap in the middle. Every Bob Moog Tribute Edition Model D that is sold, [InMusic Founder] Jack O’Donnell is donating $500 to the foundation. With over 500 units, that’s quite a sizeable donation to the Foundation to help them continue telling that story. It’s great to be able to do that. While it’s not inexpensive, it is actually a less expensive price than what a typical Model D would be sold at.”
MR: Obviously the acquisition of Moog by InMusic in 2023 was big news in the industry. Now the dust has settled somewhat, how do you reflect on some of the fearful stories around that time regarding the takeover?
JR: “I can tell you that sitting from the inside, which is where I sat, it was much more painful to endure that, knowing what I knew. I knew that Jack O’Donnell had a vision for helping the company succeed in preserving – but still enhancing – what the brand meant.
“I had confidence and certainty in what was next, but the strength of the [Moog] loyalist out there didn’t know that and had no reason to believe that yet. So to see that that outcry when it happened did two things. One, it was heartbreaking in one respect, because I didn’t believe it to be true. But it also showed how strongly people felt about Moog. In that respect, it was incredibly reassuring to know that the only reason these folks are as upset as they are is because they want so much to take hold of this thing that they love.
“They didn’t want to believe that the spirit of Bob Moog was under threat.
“The Muse and Messenger then came to market, and they could have been very different. But they’re instruments that are continuing a product path and bringing with them some reassurance.”
MR: It definitely feels like the Muse and Messenger allayed a lot of those fears, particularly over time as people realised that actually, these synths are extremely deep and characterful
JR: “I watched a video over the weekend, it was one of the creators who was quite vocal at the time [of the InMusic takeover] – my skin was much thinner then.
“This particular creator, whose name I won’t mention, actually referred to the Messenger and Muse as two of the greatest synths that Moog has ever made.
“Now, whether you agree with that or not is less important – what’s more important in this comment I’m making is this very creator was hyper-critical in predicting the downfall of Moog around the time of the takeover.
“12-24 months later, it’s now how the best has happened since it’s been in InMusic’s hands. What matters is that people are seeing through the cloud that existed around this acquisition and actually seeing the things we want to be known for – and that’s the instruments.
“Messenger is going to be around for a long time. As people spend more time with it, they experience more of what it’s got to offer. They start connecting dots between what Messenger does and what Muse has going on. It’s an inventive, creative feature set and it will expand with new instruments.
“So it’s getting the recognition that it didn’t get on day one – and I can understand why. A lot of people had an emotional reaction. But everyone has a process they go through as they come to terms with things.
“I am so glad to sit here now three years into it, being on the right side of the decisions that we made, and being proud of Jack O’Donnell and the decisions he continues to make. It would be easier to do something different with this brand, but he stuck to it. A lot of great musicians and producers and performers and artists are out there using this new gear, just like they used the old gear.”
MR: Indeed, and I suppose it ties back in with what you were talking about with regards the Bob Moog Foundation – connecting the product to the narrative of its history. It seems like InMusic is also keen to keep those bonds with company legacy tight across the board. Take Akai for example, the Akai MPC XL was the talk of this year’s NAMM, for example…
JR: “Yeah, and when the product wins, the brand gets all the credit. But if something goes wrong, it’s easy to blame InMusic. But in truth, they’re two and the same, there’s no separation between InMusic and Akai or Moog at this point.
“What InMusic’s commitment to making hardware has done is unbelievable. Muse would not have happened, but for InMusic. It’s a price point beyond what InMusic sells typically, it is a technology that up to that point InMusic wasn’t particularly versed in. The Moog engineers and designers brought their expertise in and now the entire organisation understands analogue better – its signal path and all the things that come with it.
“It would have been an easier decision not to commercialise Muse, it had been under development at the point of acquisition but there was no way that Moog could have brought it to market. It is a somewhat different instrument having gone through the acquisition.
“But Messenger – that had not been contemplated at all before InMusic acquired Moog.”
MR: So what was it that spurred Messenger’s development?
JR: “I think it was one thing – accessibility – the importance of having the Moog sound and having an effective monosynth available, but available more widely. The Subsequent 37 is an incredible instrument, but it’s not an inexpensive instrument. Not everyone can get their hands on it, and there are things it isn’t designed to do that the Messenger is. FM and wave-folding and other very special things.
“There’s been [some criticism] that it looks cheap, or that it feels cheap – no it doesn’t. It’s the sort of thing that, at birth, was an easy target, because it was different to a standard Moog profile. But is not only incredible in terms of its looks and its intuitive nature, but it’s solid.
“These things are on the biggest stages in the world right now, played by the biggest names. I’ll admit, I don’t think it was designed to account for that. But when you see them being played by artists on stage, it’s very rewarding to know that they belong anywhere than an artist wants to take them.”
MR: So the affordability angle was important too – was that a choice that came from an awareness of the ever-growing budget-end of the synth market, which other companies had been dominating?
JR: “I don’t know that we’ve ever really referred to Messenger as cheap in price, but more access to the instrument was definitely important for us. One of InMusic’s superpowers is because of all the products it makes, it’s got incredible relationships [and resources] to build them. At scale you can do things a lot more efficiently.
“Before the acquisition all the costs that go into that couldn’t be spread across multiple categories, or multiple locations and distributorships. Now it can – so just by efficiency and scale, you can make more affordable instruments.
“[Before the acquisition] Moog prioritised quality of instrument, but wasn’t able to prioritise speed to market or efficiency. It was much more boutique. We were not small, but I would still put us in the boutique category.
“Every instrument was built from scratch (design-wise) so there was never the option of bringing technology from one instrument to the other instrument. Between Muse and Messenger you start to see that idea come alive. It allows you to invest less in the development because you’re re-using some of the development that you developed before in a very tasteful way.”
MR: So are you essentially saying that the Messenger was impossible for the Moog of old to create, and was only made possible because of the InMusic infrastructure?
JR: “Yeah, I think that’s true. We would have done it a very different way and it would have been a lot shallower in terms of the features. It would have been a pleasure to play and would have sounded great, but it would have been designed from scratch – then the next instrument would have been designed from scratch. That takes time and money. And the time to get to market would have been longer than it has to be.
“The time between Muse and Messenger, that’s a reasonably rapid progression when compared to typical Moog launch timelines. Messenger was May 2025 and I know that in the next 12 months there are going to be two, possibly three more Moog synthesizers, all of which are unique to themselves and unique to anything we’ve done in the past.
“The fact that we can address different player types and different inventive ways to control sound and express sound – and that we have, over the course of 36 months, five new synthesizers is pretty exciting. There’s room for any one of these in the market right now. But I can’t just reveal it all…”
MR: Well, we’re obviously curious to hear more about these upcoming Moog synths, which reminds me, I was going to ask about the potential of future synths sharing components and technologies, not just from other Moog products. With the wider InMusic ecosystem encompassing so many different types of music technology, could we potentially see crossovers? Moog synths with MPC-style pads etc?
JR: “Yes, I think that can realistically happen, but that’s not what any of these next three synthesizers will have.
“But these types of things can happen concurrently – brands that belong together can come together, but those brands can still stand alone simultaneously. That is reasonably expected.
“Another factor is when you take into account the costs that get in the way of logistics – the tariffs for example, you can do a lot of things [at InMusic] that can help to minimise the impact. I think what you can look forward to is further innovation, much more expressive creativity at the fingertips of artists, but done in a way that is additive to what’s already in place.”
MR: Despite its sounds, one of the Muse’s standout features is the generative sequencing, which was quite innovative for Moog. I guess it must be tricky to balance out the more 21st century-angled additions with that expectation from Moog loyalists, who might see that as anathema to the purity of Moog’s analogue heritage
JR: “It is tricky. It’s a social study really isn’t it? The same voices that are going to be critical that you deviated from what they think your centre is, are the same ones asking ‘why doesn’t this synth have this, or this or this?’ So there’s no way to make them all happy.
“Our objective is to put products in the hands of artists and then listen really carefully to what they have to say about it or with it.
“I’ll tell you a bit about Muse, and the probability and generative sequencing – when we were on the West Coast, we did a couple of tours with that instrument long before it was released. We spent time with Trent Reznor, Mike Dean and Flying Lotus, and listened incredibly carefully to their feedback in the same way that Bob listened to artists decades ago.
“Trent Reznor was quite specific about the sequencer part of this instrument, he said; ‘Don’t make an instrument unless it gives me a reason to take something else out of my studio – and put this in the studio’.
“[Trent] was very generous, he gave us some examples of real boutique sequencers he loved, and told us why he loved them. We went back and got that gear – and some of it is pretty esoteric. But we studied it and understood how we could put it together and make it workable in a performance synth. I don’t know that we would have got there were it not for Trent.
“The thing I’m most proud of with the Muse is that very thing. Not just because it’s inventive and useful, but because it came the same way that Bob would have [listened to musicians] decades ago. I’m proud of that still being ever-present in the design of instruments for Moog, the listening part. It’s giving back the artists’ generosity by delivering and giving them the reason to take something out of the studio to put this in.
“Another thing is that I talked to Steve Dunnington, who’s our lead engineer and was a student of Bob’s from 30 years ago. He’s touched every instrument Moog has made since he joined. I asked him, ‘What’s informing what you’re doing on the instruments you design?’ He said, ‘It’s the music-makers that are out there’”.
MR: Of course Moog has the heritage and now the international logistical strength of InMusic, but would you say the current situation with regard to tariffs (and other geopolitical issues) makes this the most difficult time to start making boutique synths?
JR: “I would say it’s the hardest time. But I’m spoiled. I’m in a place where a lot of that hard work’s already done.
“If I was trying to start my thing, I would say it is the most complicated time to start a business like that if you don’t have access to the resources. It’s very difficult to comb through what’s going on.
“It would also come down to your objectives. There’s synth designers and manufacturers in Europe that are unencumbered by tariffs into the US, because their ambition isn’t to be present in the US.
“If I were to start a synth company today, that followed a vision of my own, that behaved a certain way, yeah, there’s room for that. Those [kinds of companies] take a lot of the risks that a lot of the bigger brands benefit from.
“So, I think that’s good for us all. If your vision of success is to, out-Moog Moog or out-Roland Roland, that’s a tough thing to do – we’ve got decades of a head start. But the boutique companies also have an agility that allows them to be in places we might not be.
“The Eurorack market is a great example of a footprint where there’s room to innovate. We’re not playing in that arena and maybe we shouldn’t – maybe our place is exactly where we are. Let’s let them own that spot.
“So, is it a complicated time? Yes, Is it challenging? Yes, Is legislation making it easier? No, so in that respect it’s difficult. I would hate to discourage anybody from trying though. There’s a lot of sensational things that are happening out there.
“With regard to the tariffs, what makes it most difficult isn’t just the practical impact that a tariff might have, it’s the uncertainty around it. It’s difficult to plan a business and start designing a synth today that is going to market in 24 months.
“How do you plan for a price-point or plan a feature set if it could be encumbered by a 35-100% tariff between now and then? It’s just very difficult to predict that.
“Being part of InMusic helps because there are people here with a history of looking at that thing, they’ve dealt with it – not just in the synth category but consumer electronics and other types of electronics. They know what to look at and they know what to be nervous about. That allows our designers of instruments to focus on that and not have to worry about the tariff part of it. From a business standpoint, it’s in good hands. That’s an incredible benefit that InMusic brought just having that expertise already in place.”
MR: You’ve obviously witnessed a lot of changes at Moog since taking on the role of President in 2022, Joe, but what would you say has been your proudest moment?
JR: “The proudest part for me I think, is being able to be a part of what could have been the last chapter of Moog. That would have been devastating for everybody. But going through that and feeling it – the stress, the pressure and the fatigue that came with all that. But then, having the certainty of knowing we’re going to come out of it, and then actually coming out of it – that arc is something that I’m most proud of.
“I should say I feel most privileged for being part of it. If it wasn’t me in this seat it was somebody else, so I’m proud of being able to hang in. [The team at Moog] has gotten closer, gotten more dependent on each other and we’ve got lifelong relationships.
“The folks who made Moog what it is are stronger than they’ve ever been. The hope we carry together is brighter than it’s ever been.”
MR: And just turning back to what’s coming up next if we may… you mentioned you have three new synths coming out in the next 12 months?
JR: “We do, we have a trio of upcoming instruments, and the next 12 months is when we’ll see that trio come alive. I’ll tell you that there will be surprises. They have all in their own way improved, enhanced and added to the musician’s ability to express themselves through the instrument. I realise that sounds like a canned response, but I’ll encourage you to be as patient as you can – and that comment will make a ton of sense!
“There will be a lot of enthusiasm with how accessible these instruments are. There will be a lot of people scratching their heads and wondering ‘how can they do that?’ [in terms of] the quality, price and time – all those things are solved. Now we’re just waiting for the clock to continue ticking until we can release these things.
“If they hit with even a fraction of the energy that I think they will, we’re going to have some more instant classics added to our roster.”
