Rack Mount Sub Phatty? (poll)

Everything Sub.
Post Reply

Should we have a Rack Mount Sub Phatty?

Yes, and it will be cheaper than the standard version!
13
65%
No, the slim phatty is fine...
7
35%
 
Total votes: 20

voguemachine
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 1:23 pm

Rack Mount Sub Phatty? (poll)

Post by voguemachine » Sat Apr 26, 2014 12:03 pm

I have to say that adding 3 rack mount subphattys to my set up would make it complete.
I'm not interested in polyphonic moogs, I use other synthesizers for that, I just want a mean bank of sub phatties
to control via Midi!

I hope they introduce one soon!

T7
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:58 pm

Re: Rack Mount Sub Phatty? (poll)

Post by T7 » Mon May 12, 2014 2:47 am

Image

User avatar
JuanSOLO
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed May 01, 2013 12:27 pm

Re: Rack Mount Sub Phatty? (poll)

Post by JuanSOLO » Sun May 25, 2014 2:19 pm

I love my Slim Phatty, I'll probably get another one.
I'd LOVE to have a rackable Sub Phatty, but I'd rather it be like the 37 with all the params on the surface.

EMwhite
Posts: 1649
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 12:22 pm
Location: Middlesex

Re: Rack Mount Sub Phatty? (poll)

Post by EMwhite » Sun May 25, 2014 8:06 pm

Zero interest in Sub Phatty rack... U N L E S S they nail and I mean NAIL the polyphonic implementation.

So go ahead and make it and also make the be-all and end-all Midi Router box that takes output from any midi controller and allow for:

- simple upper/lower split
- voice assignment for left/right (aka 1 / 3, or 2 / 2, or 2 / 4) or whatever, maybe up to 8 voices
- A small handful of Little Phatty style LED wheel pots assignably to absolute 14 bit Midi CC for
. - Cutoff
. - Envelope parameter 'x'
. - etc

The Access programmers were always super special but these days, very pricey and they were/are primitive by today's standards but in order to make any Poly gang of modules usable (yes, I'm stuck on Poly), you need a) way to distribute Midi notes in round robin and/or note stealing fashion according to split and b) a way to be master controller for the common analog synth voicing parameters as above.

And be smart so you define whether or not the Modulation or Pitch bend of the master keyboard will be attached to the upper or lower half of the split.

Yes, I'm on a bit of a rant. While I think that a module is a fine idea, squeezing all of the controls into a rack footprint is somewhat difficult (personally, I'm not in love with the Sub Phatty engine but that's me); why not go even slimmer and have just some of the controls up front with a master controller module that may also be rack mountable but also does the distribution and splitting, etc.

If it's possible to cram this into the Sub37 and Moog already had plans for this, then that's awesome; but the panel is jammed up with all of the useful controls and the whole philosophy behind it was to have zero menu diving.

Having said all of this, I still want a rank of 4 Slim Phatty synths. Never had a chance to play one and while I do understand that there are some flaws like not having a master vibrato (as far as I know), or not having good control over Poly glide (e.g. the master doesn't know which note was played on which voice, it's just doing round robin), I'll live with that until the ultimate comes along.

//rant off
'76 Minimoog, Taurus 3, Oberheim FVS + Son of 2-voice; Sequential ProOne; Juno 106; Moog Model 15; Kurzweil 250; Hammond M3; and a handful of Fender Basses Flickr!

User avatar
Bald Eagle
Posts: 349
Joined: Wed May 22, 2013 11:25 am
Location: Long Island, NY

Re: Rack Mount Sub Phatty? (poll)

Post by Bald Eagle » Sun May 25, 2014 8:38 pm

That's quite a feature list ... and there will be a price tag to go along with all that.

A rack might be nice but I would prefer a Sub-44. And of course more features on the control surface to go along with those extra inches.

EMwhite
Posts: 1649
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 12:22 pm
Location: Middlesex

Re: Rack Mount Sub Phatty? (poll)

Post by EMwhite » Mon May 26, 2014 10:09 am

No clue what a Sub Phatty rack might cost; I could guess but it will just be a guess.

As for a controller/distributor box maybe $399; nothing in it but a pot board wired to a Ti micro controller connected to Midi; no Coolaudio, LM13700 or opamps, no matched transistor ICs, no audio output, analog circuitry except for minimal power supply... Just controls and code and Midi input/output. Will cost a fraction of that to manufacture, I would think.

There are already devices like MidiPal and some older midi split hardware devices around; it's not hard work. I wired my MidiPal (Mutable Instruments) to a 2 space panel and wired in 8 pots to the unpopulated pads; I use it as a CC controller for OP-X (OBX clone). Moog would just have to make it Moog-ey looking and write a stub of code for each device being controlled (Sub, Slim, or Little or dare I suggest Voyager).

With a split configured for a single key in a zone, obviously any keyboard could be the voice/engine, so Voyager unmodified or Minitaur, even.

But back on topic, the market for a Sub Phatty engine might need all controls up front, might be better or more loved as a desktop module (somewhere between size of Minitaur and the old Access Virus) but I could see it being useful as an OB-SX type of product with some really good presets built in, and controls for common functions but not everything, then a full featured editor or the ability to control from outside. Shedding the keyed, large/stylish case and some of the other bits typically only saves $200-$300 retail; I can't see it being any less than a Minitaur. (??)
'76 Minimoog, Taurus 3, Oberheim FVS + Son of 2-voice; Sequential ProOne; Juno 106; Moog Model 15; Kurzweil 250; Hammond M3; and a handful of Fender Basses Flickr!

Post Reply