Audiothingies Micromonsta

[AnX]

It's almost as if you don't understand how a discussion works. By examples, I meant from the individual I was responding to, which wasn't you - i.e. from the music he makes, an illustration of why every instrument he owns needs a minimum of 32 voices of polyphony - not just the name of a performer who may or may not require it, based on the style of music they make. Because I'd point out that Elton John's greatest success came in the days when pretty much every synth was monophonic and 32 voice polyphony was unheard of, so he is obviously a very, very poor example. That, in turn, puts your other example into doubt.
.

I believe sir elton plays an instrument called a piano. You may have heard of it. Apparently it has quite a lot of polyphony.

[AnX]

Honestly, anyone who needed 32 notes of polyphony would not have been able to make music with synths prior to the very late 1980s or maybe even later, without multiple studio overdubs. Even workstations synths like the KORG M1 only had 16 note polyphony and that was spread over 8 parts. So by suggesting every synth you own needs to have at least 32 voices tells me that you have absolutely no idea what you are doing. And as I said earlier, if you want to defend that position, you end up looking just as clueless as they do because a lot of the all-time great synth music was made with monosynths.

Analogue..... i specifically said, if i was too buy a new DIGITAL synth, it should have at least 32 voice polyphony. Let me know which part of that you find diffcult to understand.

[BONES]

Because piano. Not every synth user makes bleeps, bloops or grrrs. Some are players who play synthetic sounds, some with long release times, hence a need for less limited polyphony.

So why use him as an example? You are basically agreeing with me that he was a very poor example to use in this discussion. That, in turn, leads me to wonder if you are even capable of maintaining a rational train of thought. So no, there was no intended irony.

... So what? It's 2018 now.

Yes, which makes polyphony less of an issue than ever.

Are you replying to me in error? perhaps revisit your first point again. lol

You're the guy who jumped in to defend AnX when he said that, so it only makes sense that you agree with him. If not, why jump to his defence?

I agree, loads of it, but that's got f**k all to do with some people wanting a synth that has 16 or 32 note polyphony.

Go back and read the comment I originally responded to, the one you've since been defending. That's what it's ALL been about.

[Aliens]

At work so no time to quote each point you've erred, so just make do the guts of gathering matter.

Why do you have such a problem with people wanting a synth with more polyphony than you do? You've shifted the goal post so far and so frequently from that point it's almost laughable how aggressively you're defending your position.
I posit that it's not really about the debating point, because that argument has been had and won a few times alredy, but more about you playing the man or saving face.

End of the day no one cares, certainly not enough to get laughed at making failed logic straw man arguments due to pride.
If you can't accept the need exists for a 16 or 32 note poly synth, then no worries. Plenty do, other wise manufacturers wouldn't make them, but don't bust a gut over it.

[BONES]

I really don't know how many times I need to tell you this before it sinks in but I don't have any "problem" at all with the notion that some people might need a synth with lots of polyphony. But when some idiot says that 32 is the minimum polyphony they'll accept on any and every (digital) synth they look at, then that is clearly just plain f#@king stupid. As is using Elton John as an example to try and illustrate the point, then coming back a few days later to point out that he plays piano.

The reason I defend what's right and logical is because people come to places like this to learn stuff and there is so much complete and utter bullshit around here that I'm sure most people learn more bad lessons than useful things, which kind of defeats the purpose, don't you think? In this particular instance, anyone with little or no experience who read AnX's post might reasonably assume that he had a point if nobody else challenged it.

[Aliens]

This all too silly. The answers have all been given in previous posts.
Despite the intransigence, the insults and attempts to start/maintain a flame war, I'll try one more time with a recap of events thus far. What you chose to do with that is up to you. Hopefully seeing it all laid out again will curtail your bluster and disingenuous attack style.

You asked AnX for example of reasons to need higher polyphony.
He gave them, chords, pads with long release times, playing with two hands.
Then you asked for more examples because "I find the opposite".
I gave two examples of two handed chord players.
Then you went goalpost moving.
I further explained my example in how some players don't make bleeps, bloops and grrrrs, but actually play synthetic sounds.

Now it's not a stretch for you, surely, to imagine an e piano type sound played on a modern digital synthesiser is it? Or one with layers, maybe including a pad type sound with a long release?
That is the full extent of the original need for more than eight notes of poly by some players.
Every thing else is just you getting the hump, and deliberately being obtuse.
You did yourself like a kipper.

It's probably for the best you don't hold yourself up as some sort of authority or expert.

[AnX]

The reason I defend what's right and logical...

Oh wow, we have a new saviour. The second coming has happened!

Get a life Warren. Your opinion is diff to mine. Get over yourself.

[IncarnateX]

I love to make strange and irrational demands to my gear solely for the purpose of not buying too much of it. The 32 polyphony minimum is a good one indeed, that leaves out a lot of stuff in both software and hardware domain. Thanks

[BONES]

Seriously? You can't make rational decisions about what may or may not be worth your money and time so you need to have arbitrary rules about it? That sounds like a seriously flawed way of going about things to me. e.g. What if Access created a $500 Virus synth that had all the features and legendary sound quality of their other synths but was restricted to, let's say, 6 voice polyphony - you wouldn't even consider it because of some completely arbitrary conditions you have placed on yourself?

You asked AnX for example of reasons to need higher polyphony.
He gave them, chords, pads with long release times, playing with two hands.
Then you asked for more examples because "I find the opposite".

Actually, I gave those reasons, he completely ignored the question. But yet again, if you don't understand why that is a reason to have one synth with lots of polyphony, not every synth, then you're a moron. I really can't put it any more plainly.

I gave two examples of two handed chord players.

Neither of whom have 16 fingers and one of whom doesn't even play synths, making your contribution about as relevant as listing tennis players who use a two-handed backhand would have been.

I further explained my example in how some players don't make bleeps, bloops and grrrrs, but actually play synthetic sounds.

Ah, yes, smug superiority of the wanker. I was happy to overlook it the first time but as you've brought it up again, I feel obliged to point out that not everyone restricts themselves to one thing or another and it is only those very narrow of mind who think like that. Truly creative minds embrace all of it and pick those parts that work towards realising their creative vision. For every bleep, bloop or grrrrr you hear in our music, for example, you will also hear a lush, often exotic progression of string or pad chords. It's about using what works, not dismissing anything because you think it's beneath you. Just last night, for example. I was previewing things in Arcade that I would normally run a mile from, like ukelele and banjo loops, and by doing so I discovered that run through the appropriate amp/cab simulation, they can be extremely useful in what we do. You just have to be open-minded enough to try all sorts of things and not dismiss anything arbitrarily.

Now it's not a stretch for you, surely, to imagine an e piano type sound played on a modern digital synthesiser is it? Or one with layers, maybe including a pad type sound with a long release?
That is the full extent of the original need for more than eight notes of poly by some players.

F@#k, you really are dumb, aren't you? For what is now the fifth time, I think, I will point out that your example holds true for needing one synth with lots of polyphony, but nowhere near 32 voices of it, not every synth you own. e.g. If you need a bassline for a song, you will almost certainly only need a monosynth. In fact, many people would actually prefer a monosynth for that so why pay for all that extra polyphony that you may never use? (Yes, I own synths that I only ever use for basslines and using something with ridiculous polyphony for that seems like stupid overkill to me.)

[Aliens]

I gave you a chronological breakdown of points made... And you still managed to blow it.

If you're that disingenuous then it's game over for you.

[IncarnateX]

Seriously?

Nope

..and if I really needed any irrational reasons, rest assured that I’d rather go for the color or weight of the synth than 32 voice polyphony. Even if I tried to play a synth with both my hands AND my Willy, I can only occopy 11 voices at a time. If I should occopy more, I need to play with my toes too and now things would get really complicated

[BONES]

Right, so I am speaking English. Good to know. Colour actually matters a bit to me, because we use them on stage. I reckon I would probably use the Ultranova more if it wasn't blue (my least favourite colour) and I definitely would have kept my Monologue if it had been a black one (which I couldn't get at the time I needed it). Of course, it doesn't matter at all what colour the MicroMonsta is as it's barely any bigger than a PSU and would be invisible from front of house. Best of all, it fits perfectly on the space in the top-right of my Analog Keys.

[IncarnateX]

Yeah, I hear you just fine, Bones. Here is my take on it all: You started out being very enthusiastic about Micromonsta. You took even time to deliver an in-debth review and then the whole deal was derailed by a couple of idiots acting about 42% less intelligent than a piece of plywood.

About colour: I hear that too. Not all musical motivation grows from logic and rationality. Actually we have already spoken a little about it in this thread:

viewtopic.php?f=102&t=464540

Imo, it is fair enough to have irrational motives as long as you don`t pretend that such preferences are based on universal laws that everyone has to comply with and annoy people accordingly by insisting.

Btw: Got myself an Analog Keys too this summer. It rocks my socks.

[AnX]

Right, so I am speaking English. Good to know. Colour actually matters a bit to me, because we use them on stage. I reckon I would probably use the Ultranova more if it wasn't blue (my least favourite colour) and I definitely would have kept my Monologue if it had been a black one (which I couldn't get at the time I needed it). .

And you wonder why nobody takes you seriously.... f**k polyphony, what colour is it?

[mickbenjamins]

Well, this thread derailed nicely