New Taurus Bass Questions

[Voltor07]

Wait...Taurus Limited? Well its a Bass SYnth by nature so yeah its pretty limited. 2 oscs limited, but its increadible fat sound is unsurpassed as of yet.

I woudl prefer CV ins because of the possibillities.

THeres sequencing it, using it for Duophony via Midi. Destinations are better than sources in my opinion (because I have more sources)

I think the Taurus would be limited with CV outs only because youd have to play everything with your feet. I woudn't want to control a huge synth with my feet alone. I would want to suppliment my lead synth with the bass expansion.

Remember this was 1/3 or a major system.

I think that either way we go, we will be able to use it as a mater/slave via midi anyway. Id like to be able to have CV inputs for filter modulation, etc.

Eric

I STILL say that Osc out, Filter out, and Gate out would be much more functional than CV ins. BOTH would be ideal, but if cost is a factor, the outs would be more useful to me than CV inputs. Only because I have an inferior Little Phatty.

[Elhardt]

Wait...Taurus Limited? Well its a Bass SYnth by nature so yeah its pretty limited. 2 oscs limited, but its increadible fat sound is unsurpassed as of yet.

I woudl prefer CV ins because of the possibillities.

The main point of a bass pedal synth is the bass pedals! They're the controller. It's a specialized product and those are what differentiate it from everything else. That means a person is likely going to want to use pedals to play other synths or double them over the Taurus. Using the Taurus as a sound module controlled by something else seems like an awkward and expensive proposition. Might as well just buy a regular synth and learn how to program it to sound "fat".

Seems they don't know whether it's going to be 1 or 1.5 octaves. 1 octave is way too limiting. We'll see if this product is actually going to be for competent musicians (a vanishing market), or if it's just a novelty product for the non-musician to play that one overused Taurus sound and then invent 20 new genres of "music" that center around its use and then beat that sound to death for the next 20 years.

-Elhardt

[Voltor07]

Seems they don't know whether it's going to be 1 or 1.5 octaves. 1 octave is way too limiting. We'll see if this product is actually going to be for competent musicians (a vanishing market), or if it's just a novelty product for the non-musician to play that one overused Taurus sound and then invent 20 new genres of "music" that center around its use and then beat that sound to death for the next 20 years.

-Elhardt

Ohhh...like Techno! (Rock the house, too kool Kris)

I prefer the stylings of ELP, Pink Floyd, ELO, Jethro Tull. It's fun to play Abney Park, as well.

[Neekau]

Seems they don't know whether it's going to be 1 or 1.5 octaves. 1 octave is way too limiting.

Well, I was going to quote the website which used to say

"Taurus I" style (one and half octaves on the floor)

But obviously it was changed !

Basically I ordered for a 18 notes pedal controller, I hope that this will be the final specification

[EricK]

I think whether it had ins our outs, with the Midi, one would still be able to get the duophony from it with the Phatty or the Voyager.

I don't think you can make another synth sound quite like the taurus though. Ive gotten somt fat sounds out of the Voyager and the Micro, and even the rhodes has fat bass but not quite the "Heed to my will" bass that the taurus puts out lolol.

I can see why people want the CV outs seeing as how a lot of folks complain about the lack of outs on the LP. I think everyone agrees that they shoudl have both but costwise i can see why 1 option only is feasible.

CV outs only woudn't really be too useful for my sole putpose. I want to control the Taurus with other synths and then build up my foot chops.




I guess now Moog needs to make that polyphonic keyboard lol.

Eric

[Kevin Lightner]

One of the reasons the T1 isn't like the T2 or other synths is that the oscillators are not standard 1v/oct.
They're linear vcos. They have a different beat rate ratio and are limited in range.
This means they won't track by standard 1v/oct themselves.
Since the instrument is to have MIDI and an arpeggiator, they must be under CPU control too.
This means that to get 1v/oct output, there must be a separate DAC or other scaling circuit provided. Same for an input.
It isn't just like hooking up an additional jack and off you go.

For those that don't understand the difference between linear and log tracking:

In a 1v/oct synth, every additional volt input causes an octave rise in pitch.
ie: 1 volt= octave 1, 2 volts=octave 2, 3 volts=octave 3, 4 volts=octave 4.
For every volt in, the pitch doubles.

But in a linear tracking synth, every octave of pitch change requires DOUBLE the voltage in.
ie: 1 volt= octave 1, 2 volts = octave 2, 4 volts=octave 3, 8 volts=octave 4.

As you can see, this scheme quickly runs out of oscillator range.
If you wanted to track from oct 1 to oct 6, you'd need 1 to 32 volts. (!)
Most synths don't operate on power that high.
Octave 7 would be at 64 volts and octave 8 at 128 volts.
Way too high.

In order to deal with this, designers often fractionalize the input voltage.
Instead of octave 1 being 1 volt, octave 1 might be 1/4 volt.
Then octave 2 would be 1/2 volt, octave 3- 1 volt and so on.
It still requires doubling of the CV in for double the frequency, but the CV starts much lower.
This works, but makes the lower octaves require more accuracy for the CV than the higher ones.

To deal with this, limited range inputs and transpose functions are usually provided.
A CPU and DAC can help, but to get 1v/oct CV ins and outs requires more circuitry.
On a T2, CV in and out is easy. On a T1, it's quite difficult.
Possible, but not nearly as easy.

[Amos]

Regarding gate/CV input and output, and which would be better...
This is still in development, so it's not clear what the final specs on CV will be. Kevin is right about the oscillators themselves running on a Hz/V rather than V/Octave standard, which means you'd either have an odd-format CV input and output, or you would need to add circuitry to convert. We'll see how this comes together.
The new Taurus will also have full MIDI in and out, which should give plenty of options whether you want to use the Taurus pedals to control other synths, or other interfaces to control the Taurus sound. There are several good Midi to CV converters if you need one. No matter what we do, it can't be optimally convenient for everybody, but I think that the MIDI I/O will allow all the bases to be covered, with more or less work depending on what you are trying to do.

Regarding the number of notes on the pedalboard, the original info posted on the website was unclear. We are still looking at our options regarding number of pedals.

I have seen one or two opinions in this thread in favor of 1.5 octaves; does anyone else have a strong opinion either way? Strongly prefer one-octave? Strongly prefer 1.5 octaves? Please post here and let me know.

Thanks!

-Amos

PS) Voltor07: you know Abney Park? Cool! My sister-in-law used to play flute in that band, a couple of years ago.

[willi]

I strongly prefer 1.5 octaves. 1 octave would be far too limiting and rather frustrating.

Thanks!

[ColorForm2113]

thanks kevin and amos for clearing that up. i can understand why it would be more difficult to have the cv outs. midi seems to be the best solution, with out having to jack the price up to much

[Argyle]

As I mentioned before, I have played the Taurus II 1.5 octave pedals and found the extra range a mixed blessing. It's great covering a full octave E-E, but the width of the pedal board makes you have to hop around. I got rid of it and I stuck with the Taurus I's and 1-octave MIDI pedals, which I still play today. I guess all I would really want is 1-octave but starting at E, not C. That might sound weird at first, but what percentage of songs are written in C?

Also, I am not a huge fan of actual organ pedals. There must be something better, smaller, and cheaper ... like those footswitches on the top of the Roland PK5 or other Boss guitar pedals. An array of those, set up like a keyboard with "white" and "black" notes in the right spots, should be all you need (& please space them apart for my EE-width feet).

[Kevin Lightner]

My 2 cents...

If it was mine, it would be 1.5 octaves.
While I agree it makes the pedals wider, it helps eliminate some of the "start on this note" issues.
Keyboardists often write in C and F.
Guitarists in A and E.
Either way, a player should be provided a full octave of keys from either tonic.
That is, they should be able to hit an A0 then A1 or F0 then F1, etc.
ie: octaves played by your feet.
A HI/LO priority switch would be helpful here too when holding a pedal down.

While I haven't played the PK5 and don't know what height it's at, foot pedals should be playable with the heel on the floor as a pivot.
If a player must lift their foot to land on a pedal, it makes playing much more difficult.
Standard pedal technique dictates that the heel is a reference point for pivoting the foot.
If an entire foot is in the air, one has to usually look to see where they're landing.
For me anyways, I'd therefore prefer the same pedal board width and height as a T1, but with shorter pedals (front to back.)
A smaller overall footprint, but standard spacing and travel.

Related to the ins and outs issue, how about this...?
Make it have just basic MIDI in and out as a base unit.
Leave room, connectors and panel accomodations for an optional CV I/O board.
That way the price could be lower for the largest audience of buyers, but still retain an upgradeable option for those wanting interfacing with the CV/Gate world.

[Voltor07]

I have long legs, so I vote very strongly for 1.5 octaves. Amos, your sister-in-law was the flautist in Abney Park? That's awesome! I would also like to vote for wood side panels. In light of the CV issue, I would be quite happy with CV ins, and perhaps a Gate out. Thanks, Amos!

[nicholas d. kent]

makes sense if the first bank is ROM presets.

OK, It makes sense but may I ask what is ROM preset? Sorry, I am bass player...

That's when you have some permanent sound patch settings that you can recall any time but can't re-write with your own programmed sound. The original had 4 recallable preset sounds built in and a set of sliders to create one's own sound. No way of storing a second of your own sounds.

Clearly the new one will have memory for more than one user sound but the idea of permanent (un-erasable) sounds is sort of a 1970s or 80s concept - an era where battery backed memory for storage was either unfeasible (original Taurus) or cost a substantial amount for a tiny amount.

An instrument with a presumably not that complex a series of settings per patch wouldn't use much memory per voice. So if one has memory, I doubt the cost between 48, 64 or 127 voices would be a big difference or any difference in cost, but perhaps they worked it out and it does.

Then again maybe I'm wrong or I'm right and maybe they will realize the disadvantage of trying to explain a potentially obsolete concept might be more effort than benefit. Since it's a given that it has user memories, the only advantage of ROM presets I can think of is if you show up for a gig and it's someone else's Taurus you'll know those factory ROM presets will still be in every unit.

[Paul Norheim]

Definitely 1.5!

[latigid on]

Also, I am not a huge fan of actual organ pedals. There must be something better, smaller, and cheaper ... like those footswitches on the top of the Roland PK5 or other Boss guitar pedals. An array of those, set up like a keyboard with "white" and "black" notes in the right spots, should be all you need (& please space them apart for my EE-width feet).

There is something like this called "Bassyn" (maybe it has three "s"s). I can't find the website, and don't have mine with me to take a picture, but it is a one octave pedal synth, with buttons. You know the buttons on arcade games like "Street Fighter"? Like them, in baby blue. The case is about two feet long. No presets, just controls for tuning and filter.

They're pretty cool, but not a Taurus