Someday a rackable approach to polyphony?

Everything Phatty.
Post Reply
nicholas d. kent
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 6:00 am
Location: NYC
Contact:

Someday a rackable approach to polyphony?

Post by nicholas d. kent » Sat Jun 30, 2007 5:54 am

It strikes me, especially with the Voyager, that there are all these "editions" of the same instrument with different cosmetic features coming out.

Looking at what a couple other companies have done I keep thinking it would be fantastic if Moog Music would make a one rack unit tall Little Phatty (or Voyager)slave that would be controlled by MIDI from the keyboard version. The cost of not having knobs and not taking up lots of rack space (like the RME arguably does) should make it more practical to have the number of voices you might want and can afford.

User avatar
MC
Posts: 2889
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 2:20 pm
Location: Secluded Tranquil Country

Post by MC » Sat Jun 30, 2007 7:07 pm

Except that the limited modulation of the LP does not make it ideal for polyphonic system.

The Vger would be better.

godzilla
Posts: 418
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 9:00 am
Location: Australia

Post by godzilla » Sun Jul 01, 2007 9:54 am

why do you say that MC?

generally poly synths have inferior modulation prospects than their mono counterparts.
when you can play chords you don't need to pimp out the sound as much IMO, just look at the junos, there's nothing to em mod wise, they don't even have a square LFO.

but yeah, a voyager poly could certainly do a lot more than an LP poly but it would also cost more.

they should just make both.

but how many added voices per unit? i reckon 3 is a good number, then you can choose 1,4,7,10,13 or 16 voices
they all seem to be nice roundish numbers, mixing all the voices would be interesting, the unit could have an input for the KB version (or RME) that mixes the 4 voices equally. they could even give you the options of mixing them so they sound like normal polys or like the thick memorymoog sound (not that i've ever played on a memorymoog, just remember someone on here saying it has that thick monosynth sound even though it's a poly). but mixing more than 4, i guess they'd have to stick on 3 individual outs for the voices.

User avatar
MC
Posts: 2889
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 2:20 pm
Location: Secluded Tranquil Country

Post by MC » Sun Jul 01, 2007 7:13 pm

You're confusing global LFO modulation with voice modulation. Voice modulation is widely misunderstood. In a Nth voice system, a global LFO affects all voices equally at the same time. Voice modulation is like having an independent LFO per voice (usually one of the VCOs in LFO mode) and that is where the real programming flexibility is.

I own a Memorymoog and Polymoog.

A polysynth built from LPs would sound like a Polymoog. The variety of sounds from a Polymoog are extremely limited - because of its architecture (TOS tone generation) voice modulation is impossible on a Polymoog. The source/routing options on an LP are more limited than the RME.

A polysynth built from RMEs would approach a Memorymoog which gets hundreds the variety of sounds than a Polymoog. The key is the voice modulation system, that's where you get maximum mileage.

The vintage polysynths that draw high market value - Memorymoog, P5, OB-Xa/8, Xpander, Jupiter-8, CS-80 - all have decent voice modulation capabilities.

Post Reply