Page 1 of 15

Ideas for the Little Phatty Stage III?

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:44 am
by Voltor07
I was thinking about this today. What will the Stage III be like? Will it be case sensitive? More memory? Will it have flames painted on the back with black rubberized sides? That would be cool. What are your thoughts on this? :mrgreen:

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 7:18 am
by Khoral
A third oscillator :wink:
I don't know, it's hard to think of any addition that wouldn't deviate too much from the original formula
For instance, some additional knobs would be nice, like a separate one for cutoff and resonance, etc... but that would impact the price

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 8:13 am
by jamezdd73
This was mentioned recently, but a built in sequencer would be good.
Don't know about the third oscillator, it'd be nice, but it might be too far of a shift from the original LP. Maybe a few added CV outs and ins here and there. But what I'd really love (if it's not too much to ask) is a built in delay unit. That's the only effect I ever really add to the LP whilst playing it, and it would make it so much easier.

Oh... and is polyphony an option??

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 11:33 am
by MarkM
I too would love to see the step sequencer and more CV in/out options. How about a second filter that is not a ladder style lowpass variety? Perhaps it could be a formant or comb.

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:43 pm
by Assar
Some ideas:
- High pass filter and maybe a band pass filter (incl as LFO destination).
- Step sequenser (yes, mentioned before but worth to mention again).
- Stereo out with Pan as LFO destination.
- Glide speed mode - time or distance (or is that already in OS2.0? I haven't upgraded yet)
- Envelope hold (AHDSR).

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:54 pm
by Matt Friedman
So many of these suggestions can be implemented in software that there's no real need for a new LP model. I suspect that you'd see that for a hardware change. What that might be is anyone's guess. It's hard to think of what they could add to the LP that wouldn't completely alter its Little Phattyness... Maybe, as Assr suggests, stereo, HPF... maybe a vocoder [though I wonder if even that could be implemented in software].

... ANd of course, they'll probably release a LPIII when they run out of memory in the LP2... Won't be for a while, though.

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:37 pm
by Voltor07
Ok, cool! Sequencer and vocoder can most likely be implemented with software. Polyphony? Not on the LP, but Amos did an interview where he said he is expecting to work on a polybeast as a long term project. So patience! :lol: CV outs? Yes, it needs those something awful. However, as the cost of the Stage II is $1285, are people willing to spend, say, $1400 on an entry level synth? I don't know. Thanks for your replies! Another fun thread! :mrgreen:

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:25 pm
by earsmack
I think there is something to be said for keeping it "simple" - not to imply that the LP is a simple instrument - but lack of things that can easily be added separately via pedals, etc. is probably not in the best interest of the instrument. Imagine how unwieldy a guitar would be if it had every effect possible built in! :-)

Having said that, I also understand the need to optimize for the gigging musician - hauling one less pedal also means two less cables and one less power supply. However, it's a trade-off. You can always buy a Virus TI Polar and get a very good "analog" sound for live work and have a ton of effects built in.

It's all in choosing the right tool for the job. I vote for keeping the LP on the simple side (except for my suggestion in a previous thread that is ;-)

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:43 pm
by CTRLSHFT
I'd like to see a DB-25 port added to the phatty and a VX-353? unit for it that allows for the following:

- Keyboard Pitch (w/ internal trim to calibrate to 1 V/Octave)
- Keyboard Velocity
- Pitch Bend Wheel
- Mod Wheel
- OSC 1 OUT
- OSC 2 OUT
- LFO OUT (I know the 351 has outs for square and triangle, possibly all the others too somehow?)
- Filter Envelope
- Volume envelope
- Sample and Hold Step
- Sample and Hold Smooth
- Noise
- Keyboard Gate
(2) Attenuators

Sequencer sounds good too, I don't know if this could be implemented in software, but if so it'd be a fantastic addition. The SH-101 could do it, why not the Phatty?

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 6:44 pm
by Voltor07
CTRLSHFT wrote:I'd like to see a DB-25 port added to the phatty and a VX-353?
Great idea, but I just wonder what such an addition would cost to implement. I'd pay for such a feature, but would anyone else? I'm thinking perhaps a seperate box with a USB interface that would do the same thing. The hardware exists; Moog would just need to make the VX-353. I like where this thread is headed! Glad I thought of it! :mrgreen:

i

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 8:27 pm
by CRJ
i would like to be able to change arpeggiator settings easier, and maybe make it easier to access the noise.

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 8:35 pm
by Matt Friedman
I agree about having a more granular arpeggiator. But what I'd REALLY like is a MoogerFooger 16-step hardware sequencer for $250. I'd much prefer that to a software sequencer that you have to program in a two-line alpha numeric display.

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 9:16 pm
by Voltor07
If Moog makes a hardware sequencer you can be sure that it will cost MORE than $250. Think $500 plus. Components alone would run $100 or so for each unit, then there's R&D, marketing, hourly wages for putting the thing together, etc. Look at the MF-101, for example. That alone is over $250 and all it is is a low pass filter. :roll:

Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 12:13 pm
by Matt Friedman
Voltor07 wrote:If Moog makes a hardware sequencer you can be sure that it will cost MORE than $250.
Oh, of course! But a boy can dream.

The thing is, a MF sequencer released alongside the mythic Moog poly, and available as a bundle, would be a killer. Just sayin'.

Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 2:25 pm
by lovedroid
Aftertouch!
+ a 2nd modulation slot to be able to use the aftertouch to anything... :)