Polyphonic vs. monophonic

MC · Post by MC » Wed May 12, 2004 11:25 am

Yup the Minimoog is monophonic.

So is your singing voice.

And the trumpet, saxophone, clarinet, trombone...

Yup, can't play chords with those but in the right hands they are a hell of an expressive instrument

writeroxie · Post by **writeroxie** » Thu May 13, 2004 11:19 pm

Actually... sometimes when i have a cold, i can get a 2-note polyphony out of my 'singing voice'.

It's cool. I'm not knocking monophony.

THM · Post by **THM** » Fri May 14, 2004 4:23 am

writeroxie wrote:Actually... sometimes when i have a cold, i can get a 2-note polyphony out of my 'singing voice'. .

LOVL - That's right !!

jrlaudio · Post by **jrlaudio** » Sun May 16, 2004 6:36 am

Monophonic synths can be multitimbral and polyphonic.....

.... It's called multitrack recording. Or a whole bunch of oscillators!

Yeah .... I know .... lame comment!

Sorry,

JRL

ikazlar · Post by **ikazlar** » Mon May 24, 2004 5:27 am

Oftentimes, limitations in synthesizers push the limits in their PERFORMERS.

peter ripa · Post by **peter ripa** » Thu May 27, 2004 7:21 am

the aural cortex is very much tuned to perceive the nuances av the human voice which, as been pointed above, is monophonic

harmono · Post by **harmono** » Fri May 28, 2004 12:09 am

I'm surprised I dont' see my reason for liking monophonic so much. Obviously polyphonic has it's benefits, and is essential. You can't play piano style, or organ style with both hands on a monophonic synth can you?

The reason I like monophonic synths is because they are more forgiving than a polyphonic synth if you want to play a solo or a melody. If you goof on a polysynth, or are a sloppy Hammond Organ style player like I am, the monophonic synths prevent you from playing a flat and a sharp note at the same time, which really shows up as a boo boo when you are trying to solo. Of course on a Hammond organ that's sometimes desirable, but not on a synth solo, or a distinct melody.

I found another thing that's really cool about monophonic synths. I discovered this by accident, while I was testing some software I'm developing for playing music with a mouse instead of a keyboard. I wanted to use the shift key as a sustain pedal, and it works. I found out while running through patches on my synth, that if I use a monophonic patch (emulates a moog sound) I could go wild with my mouse and play some crazy solo which would otherwise be total noise if I held down the shift key for sustain. So I almost exclusively play my mouse instrument with the shift key down, and select a patch that sounds like Rick Wakeman. I then picture myself playing with Yes using only a mouse instead of a rack of keyboards I have a rack of mouses (Just kidding).
Unfortunately I'm not sure I can make it work on a SoundBlaster that way, I use a Roland JV-1010 Sound Module (I'd use a Voyager if I could afford one he he).

I think Geddy Lee used Taurus Bass pedals too. Aren't those Moog?

Boeing 737-400 · Post by **Boeing 737-400** » Sun May 30, 2004 7:32 pm

I think Geddy Lee used Taurus Bass pedals too. Aren't those Moog?

Indeed they are Moog!

THM · Post by **THM** » Mon May 31, 2004 5:34 am

That's correct.

MC · Post by MC » Tue Jun 01, 2004 12:32 am

Found this using moogle, I mean google

from http://www.tauruspedals.com/

ebg31 · Post by **ebg31** » Thu Jun 03, 2004 10:44 pm

I've gotta know something only losely connected to this thread.. I've only been in this game for 5 years. I've always been glad about the unison function on polysynths. To be honest, it is pretty sufficient.

A couple of years ago, one of the people I talk to about synthesizers told me that (in his opinion) it doesn't really pay to have more than one analog synth in your rig. I've been wondering about this. In your minds, is it worth it to have both a polysynth AND a monosynth?

This from a guy who's got a fantastic Roland JX 10 and is considering a MicroKorg and - POSSIBLY - a Moog of some kind.

MC · Post by MC » Fri Jun 04, 2004 9:23 am

I've been playing clubs for over twenty years and it is indeed practical to have both a polyphonic and a monophonic in your rig.

A polyphonic in unison mode makes not a monophonic - a Prophet-5 will have all five voices firing at once, or ten VCOs simultaneously. That's way too much phasing for lead playing. I find that most lead synth voices are effective on ONE VCO, not two.

Very few polysynths let you specify the number of voices in unison mode. The ones I know of are Memorymoog and Andromeda.

I have always resorted to monosynths for lead and bass lines - they work better.

While a good fat voice is effective for monophonic lead playing, the same voice can be too fat for polyphonic. The Memorymoog is a good example. It does great monosynth leads, but I actually have to THIN OUT a polyphonic patch so that it does not smother the mix.

The Andromeda is not as fat as the Memorymoog but its monosynth patches are effective. And it is multitimbral so you can split polyphonic and monophonic lines on the keyboard. But you quickly run out of room with its 61 note keyboard. That is another reason why a polyphonic synth and a monophonic synth are practical.

peter ripa · Post by **peter ripa** » Sun Jun 06, 2004 12:11 pm

agree. i mostly switch off all osc but one on all my synths

Boeing 737-400 · Post by **Boeing 737-400** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:55 pm

On a polysynth, isn't it possible to select a number of voices you want to use, then put it in unison? I do that on my Prophet-5 when playing lead sounds, it has an option to temporarily delete a voice.

little doodler · Post by **little doodler** » Mon Aug 09, 2004 4:23 am

"Very few polysynths let you specify the number of voices in unison mode. The ones I know of are Memorymoog and Andromeda."

Studio Electronics Omega 8 lets you specify 1,2,4,6 or 8 voices.

Moog Music Forum

Polyphonic vs. monophonic

2

Re: 2

Monophonic synths can be multitimbral and polyphonic.....

Poly vs Mono

Just One Analog?