If I am already paying a premium to get the LP (compared to a Moog Source, Rogue, or later model Prodigy), I don’t want to then pay extra for another piece of equipment.
In my opinion, I think that the LP is a flawed product because they chose to only allow CV ins. They rave about the keyboard action on the LP and say that it is a great keyboard to control other MIDI boards, but they did not allow it to have an interface so that it can control vintage Moog, Arp, Roland, etc… equipment.
I don’t see how you can consider the LP a “flawed” product.
According to every review, background articles, and interviews you can find on the LP, it was designed as an economical monophonic analog performance synth and not as a controller.
The fact that it performs well as a Midi controller I consider a happy accident. I use mine wth a Voyager RME and love the fact that so many of the front panel controls on the LP directly control my RME via MIDI.
Sure, I would like to see some CV outputs – even a Voyager style VX-351 accessory port – but I realize doing so would add some serious $$ to the cost of the synth.
-bruce
My only compaint is that other vintage Moog “economical” Monophonic synths such as the Micromoog and the Rogue had these type of outputs. Why would you go to the trouble of putting CV ins and not put in the outs? You could also use the LP to control some of the MFs, such as the 103, 104 and 107. I would actually pay a little more for an LP II that had the Voyager accessory port so that it is more flexible.
If I were buying a new LP, I would not even attempt to add CV outs, as it would void the warranty, which is probably the main reason to even buy the LP. The warrenty gives you the peace of mind that you would have that it would work correctly, unlike some of the vintage units on the market.
The fact that the LP has MIDI and the Rogue and Micro didn’t in my view makes it the Phatty way more versatile for controlling other instruments. Moog offers CV outs in the two Voyagers. Complaining about no CV outs is not unlike complaining that the LP only has 2 oscillators or that there aren’t enough pots. It is what it is: a great affordable analogue mono synth.
this is the ONLY reason I haven’t bought the LP
That’s cool. Just letting you know that there is a cheap and easy solution available that will allow you to add the functionality you desire.
The difference in price between a used source and a used LP are not that great. With the LP you get patch memory and a new, reliable synth (plus a few other thigns the source lacks). I can understand your desire but I don’t think most players view that as a top priority. A modern analog mono that sounds vintage, has patch memory, midi and some CV-in’s is hard to complain about. While I would welcome the CV-outs as well I think you are a minority in this concern and as others have stated there are external hardware options.
Is the arpeggiator still in the works for the OS update to the LP “1.0”'s? That would be fantastic!
Thanks for continuing to update existing products!
mmmmmmmmm… Arpeggiator! 
Heck yeah
I have always considered arpeggiators as a thing for people who doesn’t know how to program a sequenser. But maybe that’s not fair …
How about people who are so spontaneous and awesome they want to decide what they play when they want to play it? 
I agree, it’s just a different tool
Arps are a lot of hands-on, spontaneous fun, especially when there’s random mode
I never quite understood why some people today pretend that arpeggiator doesn’t belong on an analog synth, and stuff like that
Back in the days, there were arpeggiators on synths like the MonoPoly, SH-101, Jupiter-8, OB-8, Prophet 600, Arp Quadra… (I did my research, I don’t know this by heart;))
… and aren’t skilled enough to play it themselves.
Hey, just teasing you guys …
Eh, I know, I know
Wasn’t aiming at you specially;)
There is something special about mechanistic sequenced lines, locked exactly to tempo. Tangerine Dream and Kraftwerk would not have sounded the same if everything was played exclusively by hand (well maybe Kraftwerk would; they are inhuman… ).
I have not seen the 2.0 software yet but I am assured it is in progress.
They’re different animals. I have a Juno-60. And I have a Roland DCB-MIDI converter box. Sometimes I sequence the Juno. But sometimes I use the arpeggiator. They’re different flavors, to me. It takes less time to press down a chord with an arp. turned on that it does to punch in the notes on a sequencer. So if you want that arpeggiator sound, having an arp. is faster/easier.
Plus, if you turn their speed way up, they make fun video game sounds/weird leads. Actually, that’s one of my favorite things about the juno…playing a lead with the arpeggiator on, fast, and spanning three octaves. It’s like a C64 on crack is playing you lead line. And that would be obnoxious (but not impossible) to sequence.
I say, three cheers for simple arpeggiators! (as a different flavor of ice cream from the sequencer. Because, hey, I like sequenced stuff too.) Plus, without the arpeggiator, Grandaddy’s “The Crystal Lake” wouldn’t sound as cool.
Will the arpeggiator have a mode where it affects the LP, but not the note data transmitted via MIDI? This would allow you to have a sustained chord via MIDI, but yet have the LP arpeggiated on top of the chord.
Just food for thought.
Fnord
rachel
(there is no fnord)
Henfield: I hadn’t thought of that! Currently the arpeggiator sends arpeggiated MIDI notes - I thought that would be good, so that you could use it to arpeggiate your other synths or record the arpeggiated notes… however, I can see where you might want to send out held chords or the like as well. We’ll have to think on this and figure out what would be best. On a related note, how should the arpeggiator interact with Local Control On/Off? Any thoughts? Anyone is welcome to comment on this one; now is the time to figure it out, while we are defining things the first time.
Thanks!