Elektron Musical Instruments

"I wouldn't know. I'm not a DSP programmer and I really need to brush 
up
on my FFT theory anyway. but honestly, if you think it's so simple I
should have to ask you: where's the synth you designed? "

I don't have the time to design a synth, that's what it takes a lot

well if they spent a lot on the dsps, at least that much you can buy 
a lot now...then i DO definately believe they can fit more than an fx 
engine + 6 monosynths on 2 dsps.


I also think the higher price is because of sweden's ecnomoy in 
general.  things simply cost more there.  

it definately is solid built though i think a lot of money went into 
the look+the sturdiness of the unit.  I didn't expect it to be as 
heavy as it was for how small it was!!:)

The thing i ask about how much the DSP can do is, did elektron not 
start out as a student project of the sidstation that furthered 
itself to a fully sellable synth?  sweden might have very educational 
technical schools.  but to write really nice clean code  takes a lot 
of knowledge.   i'm curious to how many years the programmers have 
had experience.  


often you'll note that a programmer from the "old school" will write 
much more efficient programs utilizing cpu, than newer programmers.

think of how much they did with the proccesser cpaabiltiies of an NES 
or an atari even.  i don't think it's much to ask for polyphony when 
the programmming was much more condensed, no?(unlessi t's samples, 
then i want the nes samples on my monomachine!O_O),  if that 
technology was available back 10 and 20 years ago, to pretty much get 
the same soundn as the monomachine has, then i don't see why they 
couldn't make it polpyonic...do you now how much more dsp power there 
is more in the monomachine? heheh it's gotta be a crazy amount, or 
they'd be selling for $100-200 a pop...


perhaps because some of the synths are more emulation than doing the 
thing that the older synths did is the reason? hmmm:)

i'm not trying to bash elektron, i'm just curious and i think there 
can be a lot more done than there has been....:)
-ryan
 
--- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, Joe <jmelnyk@c...> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 15, 2004 at 08:41:01AM -0000, hal3001 wrote:
> >    hhaving multiple oscillators per synth  DOES NOT equate 
polyphony
> >    polyphony = seperate voice, seperate playable individual 
filter per
> >    voice...
> 
> yes I know. I'm only offering a possible explanation - I didn't say 
it
> was the best one or even accurate.  mail Elektron and ask them.
> 
> >    I don't really see them using any complex cpu stealing 
algorithms?
> >    the whole thing seems like some simple programming?(i could be 
wrong
> >    though?)
> 
> I wouldn't know. I'm not a DSP programmer and I really need to 
brush up
> on my FFT theory anyway. but honestly, if you think it's so simple I
> should have to ask you: where's the synth you designed?
> 
> >    i don't think adding polyphony would change the market of the
> >    synthesizer...nor take too much proccessing power!!!:)...come 
on for
> >    the price these are they gotta have some nice cpu in 
them!:)...i hope
> >    all the $ didn't go into marketing and cosmetics!!!:P (since 
they
> >    have a very good marketing and very good cosmetics for synth)
> 
> read back through the archives. it seems a lot of money went to DSP 
chips
> and excellent D/A converters.
> 
> Joe