Moog Music Forum

If all four voices are dialed into the same patch, you can just play away. I won't matter that the first key down is played on the 3rd Phatty, etc. etc.

The trouble with the current Poly setup is that many of us want a 'split' and to be able to play a Taurus (for instance) with a low note and the Phatty itself with a high note. Well, it just doesn't work well because you must be very conscious that you are holding the low note so that the upper not is indeed the '2nd'.

But there is a way around this and I was successful (despite what appears to be firmware issues in the Taurus code that I am running).

It's to use Midi Mapping software (or built for purpose hardware midi device). For me, (I'm a MacPro), it's MidiPatchbay by Pete Yandell (freeware).

I turn local control off on the Phatty
Configure MidiPatchbay to take notes which are C#4-G9 and send them to back to the Phatty
Then add a 2nd patch in MidiPatchbay to take notes C1-C4, transpose by -24, and send to Taurus

Works like a charm. The only issue is that you may need to tweak the transpose and keyboard range depending on the patch but you can play freely otherwise.

Will see what Moog has cooked up soon enough. Am guessing they have an update to the web content that will show the Wood case and also a bunch of Videos as Amos suggested.

anoteoftruth wrote:
This is exactly what I had in mind... and what makes me excited about the SP... can't wait for that poly demo Amos mentioned.

I don't understand how you can assign notes to each SP (cold be my lack of knowledge on the subject).

If you press "C-E-G-Bb", what notes are sent to which SP?

In time order?
Then how do you set up that?

Are all notes sent to all SPs?
Then how do a SP know which note to play?

How can you make sure that not two SPs are playing the same note?

LP has a poly mode. Put each instrument in poly mode and assign it a voice number. That instruments sound based on how many of the total have been used. I am not sure how the LP handles voice stealing, blocked or steal from the furthest played time wise. I don't know if 2 LPs can be assigned the same voice number (with different patches).

anoteoftruth wrote: if you mean getting the audio "merged" or mixed together, thats easy... there are a few ways you could do it...
if you wanted you could put the audio out into the audio in's of each one, chaining the audio together and just using the last audio out at the end of the change...

Or most likely what I'll do because I have a lot of empty spaces in my mixer...

that it is what mean. If you put the audio out from LP1 to Audio in LP2, LP2 to LP3... then the LP2 sound twice..., it's own sound and the sound from the first via the filter. My understanding is, that it is not the same as you put each sound from each LP to a mixer for merging. Or am I wrong?

smut wrote:

anoteoftruth wrote: if you mean getting the audio "merged" or mixed together, thats easy... there are a few ways you could do it...
if you wanted you could put the audio out into the audio in's of each one, chaining the audio together and just using the last audio out at the end of the change...

Or most likely what I'll do because I have a lot of empty spaces in my mixer...

that it is what mean. If you put the audio out from LP1 to Audio in LP2, LP2 to LP3... then the LP2 sound twice..., it's own sound and the sound from the first via the filter. My understanding is, that it is not the same as you put each sound from each LP to a mixer for merging. Or am I wrong?

What you're describing would create less than desirable results since your LP going into the other would no longer have a seperate VCA/Filter. Using 2 channels on a mixer would be how to do it effectively.

smut wrote:

anoteoftruth wrote: if you mean getting the audio "merged" or mixed together, thats easy... there are a few ways you could do it...
if you wanted you could put the audio out into the audio in's of each one, chaining the audio together and just using the last audio out at the end of the change...

Or most likely what I'll do because I have a lot of empty spaces in my mixer...

that it is what mean. If you put the audio out from LP1 to Audio in LP2, LP2 to LP3... then the LP2 sound twice..., it's own sound and the sound from the first via the filter. My understanding is, that it is not the same as you put each sound from each LP to a mixer for merging. Or am I wrong?

It would be the least desirable way to do it. The best way imo would be to have a seperate channel on a mixer for each SP.

Assar wrote:

anoteoftruth wrote:
This is exactly what I had in mind... and what makes me excited about the SP... can't wait for that poly demo Amos mentioned.

I don't understand how you can assign notes to each SP (cold be my lack of knowledge on the subject).

If you press "C-E-G-Bb", what notes are sent to which SP?

In time order?
Then how do you set up that?

Are all notes sent to all SPs?
Then how do a SP know which note to play?

How can you make sure that not two SPs are playing the same note?

If you have a LP you can see it in the master menu's.. there is a polyphony mode... say you have 4 LP/SP's... you go to poly mood and for each one choose "1 of 4", next on "2 of 4", next one "3 of 4" etc etc for how many units you have..

Then when you play a chord, each unit will play their part... if you play a 4 note chord, the units will play in order of the keys that are pressed. Unless you have magic fingers that all play the notes at the mathematically exact second, you should never have a problem with 2 units playing the same note at the same time...

If all your units are on the same patch, it also shouldn't matter what is in what order...

It's only when you try to start experimenting with different patches in polyphony with eachother that you have to adjust your playing technique... but I do it duophonically with my LP and RME all the time and it's not bad at all.

anoteoftruth wrote:If you play a 4 note chord, the units will play in order of the keys that are pressed.
Unless you have magic fingers that all play the notes at the mathematically exact
second, you should never have a problem with 2 units playing the same note at
the same time.

Even then it wouldn't be a problem as MIDI is a "serial" interface. There can *never*
be two MIDI messages at exactly the same time down the same MIDI cable, even
if the keys were somehow played exactly at the same time.

_DemonDan_ wrote:

anoteoftruth wrote:If you play a 4 note chord, the units will play in order of the keys that are pressed.
Unless you have magic fingers that all play the notes at the mathematically exact
second, you should never have a problem with 2 units playing the same note at
the same time.

Even then it wouldn't be a problem as MIDI is a "serial" interface. There can *never*
be two MIDI messages at exactly the same time down the same MIDI cable, even
if the keys were somehow played exactly at the same time.

I did not know that. Well that would make this work even better than lol.

CTRLSHFT wrote:

Sir Nose wrote:Is the LP discrete? I thought there were lots of IC.

Some, but it's pretty much discrete (the Envelopes definitely are 100% as Amos confirmed it a while back on Gearslutz.)

You'd be surprised at how many much revered "discrete" analog synths use ICs. It is more about knowing the limitations of those components during design than anything else. Tom Oberheim's SEM uses a few ICs, despite being otherwise discrete. It sounds ridiculously great.

Would you happen to know anymore about the discrete nature of the LP? I always assumed it was 100% IC based. I am bit of nerd when it comes to this stuff, so I would be very interested to know more in this regard. Is there a link to what Amos said? Sorry, i just came across this, and it sparked my interest.

As far as the SP goes, i think it is a brilliant product that will satisfy a lot of people. Well done!

There are a few pictures in this thread: http://www.moogmusic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=9876 Not the best pics, but it's something to give you an idea. This is of a Tribute model which was the first generation. I can't see that they made any major overhaul of the design between then and the Stage II but I can't say for sure.

I've opened my stage 2, and there's definitely a whole bunch of discrete parts in there; however, they're all smd.

jeepo wrote:I've opened my stage 2, and there's definitely a whole bunch of discrete parts in there; however, they're all smd.

What is SMD?

surface mount devices, they're really small.

jeepo wrote:surface mount devices, they're really small.

Ah ok. Well thanks for the info. I do wonder what specific type of oscillators and filters are used...