Deckerd's? Mmm...OK, having a CS-80 laying around the house gives me a bit of an insight there. Basically, you've got the basic voicing of a single CS-80 card there...but that's not the only aspect to that sound. Adding the Rachael "expander" would do a lot to remedy this, but then you're talking about 46 hp in cab space and a tab of $1048 for a monosynth that still won't approach the "playability" of the OG. TBH, given the prices I'm seeing on vintage Yamaha's CS-01 as of late, you could get TWO of the little Yammys for that and still have beer money left over. Things are changing, to be sure...
It would honestly be a better choice to get a patchable synth and then use that with the modular, then use the space gained from removing the Deckerd's for more modules. In fact, one combo I'm liking is a pairing with my other modular/patchable devices with one of Uli's 2600 "Xmas tree" clones. It's...well, it's an ARP 2600, a synth I've used off and on for some 40+ years now, made more compact (without becoming difficult to play!) and including the 3620 circuits, which Korg left off of their 2600M. Ergo, I look at Korg's available-to-everyone version as literal "crippleware", and the snarky SOB in Penang gets the win for creating the real Version 5. Plus, unlike the Deckard's, it's 100% complete...you can even cram it into an 8U road case (plus, you can even find 3rd party cases out there that emulate the original's form factor). And the fact that you can "break out" the modules via the patchpoints for full-on modular integration is the cherry on the cake.
And Jim's 100% on about that larger case. It's possible to do a build in 104 hp, sure...but 2 x 104 hp means more room for utilities and other "helpers" that make the spendy ones do what they oughta.