MOTM

>All big poly-hogs.

I don't think the that they were poly was the reason they failed. The
polyphonic synthesiser was the next step in synthesisers. Musicians in
bands wanted polyphonics. And more importantly memory patches. And this
I think is the important point. The preset was the death knell of the
experimentalist. The P5 heralded the beginning and the end.

The fact that Japan started to produce cheaper keyboards which offered
more for less was the main reason for the demise of the UK and US based
keyboard industries. In the 1980s the monophonic was still around, but
we wanted chords as well. I sold my Moog to pay for my D-50!

Polyphonics are good for many reasons. If not only for there ability to
play chords, but for the fact that note decays are not truncated by the
arrival of a new note. Admittedly, monophonics will produce powerful
bass, but many leads are made more powerful when played on a fully
featured poly.

But Sequencers, midi and audio, have made our monos more useful gain. We
can be that orchestra of many monophonic lines. Digital effects can make
them sound fuller, and cover up the abrupt end to notes. We can use our
modulars because we have all the other stuff as well

But if I only could have just one keyboard, the CS-80 would be my
choice. Poly-hog it may be, but it is still a gorgeous piece of
equipment.

Regards,

Tony Allgood  Penrith, Cumbria, UK

http://www.techrepairs.freeserve.co.uk/projects.htm