Doepfer

>i've got a complete four voice architecture waiting for a  
polyphonic interface :(

To me at least,  just adding polyphonic MIDI to CV interface is not  
enough of an answer because you get such (imho) basic polyphony. It  
gives you a basic polysynth out of your well equipped modular. While  
perhaps what you do get can be quite usable at times, it really has a  
lot more disadvantages in terms of lack expression, speed, high price  
and sometimes even timbre. Some of the other alternative polyphonic  
options like a decent polysynth, or sampling your modular, or a  
virtual modular do seem to have a lot of major advantages, not just  
minor ones

Compared to working with a mono modular it is very limiting imho  
unless you have something very rare and customized going on. You  
might have something like an aux voltage for velocity but that just  
means there is a single parameter that is sent with the CV. Tasks  
like changing the envelope or resonance means you have to go over to  
each voice and change it for each voice, usually impossible in real  
time though I guess basically possible with a lot of aux channels.

It's fair enough to say some people like a polyphonic sound where the  
voices don't match. Just want to get that out, though some  
multitimbral polyphonic synths have that, (sometimes not even  
intentionally ;-)

But looking at a polyphonic modular where you can't quickly and  
uniformly change the timbre realtime reminds me that multi-sampling a  
modular patch not only may get you practically the same playable  
result but  it leaves you far more modules to work with per voice (=  
a more complex voice) since you don't need duplicates and then the  
sampler gives you far more voices of polyphony. I'd say the only  
thing you aren't getting with sampling is any randomization you might  
be patching in somehow.  If you could add all that extra expressive  
and timbre changing playability you have with a mono modular sound  
and make it poly then you'd have a clear advantage with hardware  
modules. But it's not so clear an advantage if your poly modular just  
has a very basic sound and no good way to change the timbre in realtime

nick

What about a manual cv source multed to all the parameters you want to
change?

Regards,
Robbert

On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 1:22 PM, zaum <zaum@optonline.net> wrote:

>
>
> >i've got a complete four voice architecture waiting for a
> polyphonic interface :(
>
> To me at least, just adding polyphonic MIDI to CV interface is not
> enough of an answer because you get such (imho) basic polyphony. It
> gives you a basic polysynth out of your well equipped modular. While
> perhaps what you do get can be quite usable at times, it really has a
> lot more disadvantages in terms of lack expression, speed, high price
> and sometimes even timbre. Some of the other alternative polyphonic
> options like a decent polysynth, or sampling your modular, or a
> virtual modular do seem to have a lot of major advantages, not just
> minor ones
>
> Compared to working with a mono modular it is very limiting imho
> unless you have something very rare and customized going on. You
> might have something like an aux voltage for velocity but that just
> means there is a single parameter that is sent with the CV. Tasks
> like changing the envelope or resonance means you have to go over to
> each voice and change it for each voice, usually impossible in real
> time though I guess basically possible with a lot of aux channels.
>
> It's fair enough to say some people like a polyphonic sound where the
> voices don't match. Just want to get that out, though some
> multitimbral polyphonic synths have that, (sometimes not even
> intentionally ;-)
>
> But looking at a polyphonic modular where you can't quickly and
> uniformly change the timbre realtime reminds me that multi-sampling a
> modular patch not only may get you practically the same playable
> result but it leaves you far more modules to work with per voice (=
> a more complex voice) since you don't need duplicates and then the
> sampler gives you far more voices of polyphony. I'd say the only
> thing you aren't getting with sampling is any randomization you might
> be patching in somehow. If you could add all that extra expressive
> and timbre changing playability you have with a mono modular sound
> and make it poly then you'd have a clear advantage with hardware
> modules. But it's not so clear an advantage if your poly modular just
> has a very basic sound and no good way to change the timbre in realtime
>
> nick
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]