Moog Music Forum

Sorry to be harsh but i'm gonna be. why do some people feel the need to start these ridiculous voyager versus every polyphonic synth in the world polls? its pointless. U CANT COMPARE A MONOSYNTH TO A POLYSYNTH. one plays one note at a time one plays several. its like comparing a piano with a flute. very silly. can we have some more intelligent debate?please???

goldphinga wrote: U CANT COMPARE A MONOSYNTH TO A POLYSYNTH.

Yes you can. Go back and read my reply.

Also, if you deem a thread to be useless, how does making ANOTHER thread about the manner not any less useless?

ok, by the way the voyager isnt discrete.

goldphinga wrote:ok, by the way the voyager isnt discrete.

Since when?

Will the Voyager play chords? No.
Pads? Naught.
Strings? 'Fraid not.
Horn sections? Uh-uh.
Piano arpeggios? Not likely.
Organ blasts? Sorry.

It's an irrelevant comparision - monophonic and polyphonic are two totally different animals.

You can't compare them.

You might as well compare a drum to a piano.

MC wrote:Will the Voyager play chords? No.
Pads? Naught.
Strings? 'Fraid not.
Horn sections? Uh-uh.
Piano arpeggios? Not likely.
Organ blasts? Sorry.

It's an irrelevant comparision - monophonic and polyphonic are two totally different animals.

You can't compare them.

You might as well compare a drum to a piano.

Why not compare them as 2 discrete synths?

Is it fair to compare an Access Virus TI to an Andromeda or an Omega 8 then? How about a Hammond B3 and an Andromeda? They ARE after all both polyphonic.

Lets start the analogue v digital debate again!

Why not compare them as 2 discrete synths?

No. You're just blurring the issue and attempting to legitimize the argument by introducing another grey area.

One is monophonic, one is polyphonic. There is no comparision. Period.

[quote="Array"][quote="MC"]Will the Voyager play chords? No.
Pads? Naught.
Strings? 'Fraid not.
Horn sections? Uh-uh.
Piano arpeggios? Not likely.
Organ blasts? Sorry.

Not to be so disagreeable here, but I've attained all the sounds you've mentioned up above. Pads, strings, horns and chords are especially convincing with the right settings. And given the limitless recording possibilities that most people are using these days, you can do all the multi-tracking required to have your 'chords' play throughout an entire track. Live is a different story, I'll grant you that.....but for me, playing a mono always leads to new sounds/methods because you're forced to create things due to the 'limitations' of playing one key. I don't even use poly's at all because of that reason.

MC wrote:

Why not compare them as 2 discrete synths?

No. You're just blurring the issue and attempting to legitimize the argument by introducing another grey area.

One is monophonic, one is polyphonic. There is no comparision. Period.

Thats ridiculous. You of all people, being an EE and all, should see how this is a valid comparison. The Omega 8 is like 8 discrete mono synths in 1 box (they even have their own dedicated outputs). The main differance that the polyphony introduces, in a studio environment, is that you need to do less multitracking with the Omega.

Would it make you happier if the comparison was between the Voyager and Omega 2? Or maybe between the Voyager and ATC-X (which is like a 1 voice omega)?

Lets say, hypothetically, that I go completely insane one day and decide to get a Motorola developer's kit for the sake of designing a digital monosynth. Would comparing the timbral qualities of said monosynth and the Access Virus TI be out of the question? Would it be valid to compare my digital monosynth with the Voyager? Also, would say say that comparing the Evolver (a CEM based monosynth) and the Voyager is more valid than comparing the Omege/ATC-X (discrete synths) to the Voyager?

Don't most polyphonic instruments have a monophonic mode? I mean why can't I compare my Voyager to my Access Virus C, with the Virus in monophonic mode? To me this is the same thing and fair game.

Don't most polyphonic instruments have a monophonic mode?

Yeah but most of them fire all the voices at once. I sold my Matrix 6R because there was no way to get unison/monophonic mode down to one voice - I don't want all six voices firing at once. The sound of 12 Matrix 6R VCOs sounding at once is nowhere near as effective as a pair of VCOs.

Thats ridiculous. You of all people, being an EE and all, should see how this is a valid comparison.

You don't need to be an EE to see how invalid that comparision is - any musician knows the difference. A monophonic demands a different playing style than a polyphonic. The phrasing and articulation you get on a monophonic is totally different and unobtainable on a polyphonic. You have to approach a monophonic like a trumpet or saxophone - while they only play one note at a time, you can get very expressive with that note. A polyphonic keyboard won't get that kind of expression.

monads wrote:Don't most polyphonic instruments have a monophonic mode? I mean why can't I compare my Voyager to my Access Virus C, with the Virus in monophonic mode? To me this is the same thing and fair game.

Ummm....why not compare a trumpet and a flute then? Just because 2 instruments share a similar interface, in this case knobs and keys, doesnt mean that the way they produce a sound is comprable.

The Virus C and the Moog Voyager have totaly differant methods for generating sound. The Virus uses various digital algorithms, where as the Voyager shapes an electric current in order to produce sound.

Furthermore, the Voyager generates signals which are in the inaudible range of the electro magnetic spectrum. The theory behind leaving the circuitry unlimited like this is that the inaudible frequencies will cause audible modulations down the line in the signal path. This is one reason why people speculate that the Moog sounds so full and warm.

Seriously, do you peopla arrange your studios and base your purchase decisions based on the polyphony of the instruments available to you? Do you think "hmmm, lets see, I already have a monophonic synth, next I need to buy a duophonic, and tetraphonic, etc. etc. etc."? You should be thinking more along the lines of "Hmmmm, I have the discrete spectrum of the timral gamut accounted for with this Voyager....Now maybe I'll get a Q or a Virus for my digital sounds...and then a Prophet 5.3 for my CEM needs, and then a Prophet 5.2 for my SSM needs, etc etc". The latter method seems so much more logical to me. Otherwise everyone would have the Omega 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, Q 16, Q 32, XT 10, XT 30, Supernova 24, Supernova 48, etc.

array-you are off your head and talk like an already insane person,but you are very entertaining to say they least,Remember though we are not laughing with you but at you for being so very silly.I think the Voyager is similar to moon cheese custard but the sound it makes is like a fine vintage toothpaste.remember eat your greens everday and your knees will fall off

i love my voyager and no one will ever split us up
apparently its now legal to marry a synthesiser in space so im off there right about now.

bye bye

Philbert.

goldphinga wrote:array-you are off your head and talk like an already insane person,but you are very entertaining to say they least,Remember though we are not laughing with you but at you for being so very silly.I think the Voyager is similar to moon cheese custard but the sound it makes is like a fine vintage toothpaste.remember eat your greens everday and your knees will fall off

i love my voyager and no one will ever split us up
apparently its now legal to marry a synthesiser in space so im off there right about now.

bye bye

Philbert.

Yeah, NOW you're talking my language!

Why not actually back up your arguement with some facts instead of resorting to personal attacks?