Oddity 2

[Dave Blakely]

...the point i was making is that its a synthesizer not a "keyboard" instrument...

So you're saying that any polyphonic synth isn't a synth but a "keyboard" instrument? Like the Matrix 12 wasn't a synth?

Polyphony would simply expand its synth abilities. I'm not a piano player and often use my other synths in mono mode...but believe it or not, even synthesists like to grab a handful of notes at one time every now and then. Why put an artificial restriction just for the sake of "purity"?

Other V2 features...an ARP Sequencer emulation...well I can dream, can't I?

No i'm saying the inclusion of polyphony would curtail the Oddity from being what it is, an emulation of a Monophonic/Duophonic lead synthesiser, i didn't comment on other synthesisers, thats your extrapolation of what i wrote, and watch who you're calling an idiot pal, grow up.

[Dave Blakely]

I wouldnt hold my breath for a polyphonic Oddity in the forseeable future, the original was developed as a Mono synth and thats where its strength lies

So why did they bother making a polyphonic Minimoog emulation?

Because Moog made the Memory Moog?.........how should i know

[Highvoltage]

load up 3 oddities, and there you go 6 voices

[emdot_ambient]

load up 3 oddities, and there you go 6 voices

At a cost of triple the CPU cost and 3 times the MIDI programming.

[Highvoltage]

but 3 times the notes also

[man-T]

i am still hoping for a monophonic roland xv-5080 emulation

[emdot_ambient]

...the inclusion of polyphony would curtail the Oddity from being what it is, an emulation of a Monophonic/Duophonic lead synthesiser...

Except that one would only have to avoid putting the synth into Poly mode in order for it to remain what it is, an emulation of a Monophonic/Duophonic lead synthesizer. Is that so hard to do? Having an option does not force you to use it.

The #1 selling point for the ARP Odyssey over the Minimoog was its inclusion of . . . duo-phonic mode. Do you really think if polyphony had been technically/economically feasible in 1972 that ARP would have chosen not to include it because it would "curtail" the Odyssey's roll as a monophonic/duophonic lead synth? No. Synth players everywhere would have flocked to it because they like the flexibility of polyphony and that has never changed. Mono/duo modes have their unique functions, obviously, or else synths would not now include those modes. But EXCLUDING polyphonic mode is an artificial limitation in software synths.

Incidentally, I wasn't calling you an idiot, so much as calling what you said idiotic. And you did seem to imply that because Oddity is mono/duo-phonic that it "is a synthesizer not a keyboard instrument" when obviously there no connection between an instrument's number of simultaneous voices and whether it's a synth or not.

[aMUSEd]

It's funny but when Creamware brought out a fully polyphonic version of the Odyssey (The PrOdyssey) they were derided by some for departing from the duophonic version. I can see both sides - personally regardless of authenticity I prefer the Creamware version but I also know that a mono version of a patch can sound very different from the same patch set to poly - it's more than number of voices per se but how they interact - so I presume a duophonic mode could also add something interesting to the palette of sounds available. I'm not bothered about authenticity for its own sake but it would be good for both options to be available as far as I'm concerned.

[emdot_ambient]

i am still hoping for a monophonic roland xv-5080 emulation

Now, that would be sweet. All you'd have to do is add 128 instances of it and you could re-create the original's 128 voices!

[Dave Blakely]

...the inclusion of polyphony would curtail the Oddity from being what it is, an emulation of a Monophonic/Duophonic lead synthesiser...

Except that one would only have to avoid putting the synth into Poly mode in order for it to remain what it is, an emulation of a Monophonic/Duophonic lead synthesizer. Is that so hard to do? Having an option does not force you to use it.

The #1 selling point for the ARP Odyssey over the Minimoog was its inclusion of . . . duo-phonic mode. Do you really think if polyphony had been technically/economically feasible in 1972 that ARP would have chosen not to include it because it would "curtail" the Odyssey's roll as a monophonic/duophonic lead synth? No. Synth players everywhere would have flocked to it because they like the flexibility of polyphony and that has never changed. Mono/duo modes have their unique functions, obviously, or else synths would not now include those modes. But EXCLUDING polyphonic mode is an artificial limitation in software synths.

Incidentally, I wasn't calling you an idiot, so much as calling what you said idiotic. And you did seem to imply that because Oddity is mono/duo-phonic that it "is a synthesizer not a keyboard instrument" when obviously there no connection between an instrument's number of simultaneous voices and whether it's a synth or not.

The number one selling point of the ARP Odyssey over the Minimoog was the fact that it offered more synthesis functions, that and the fact it was cheaper and aggresively marketed by the company. And there may be no connection between the number of notes playable on a synth defining it as a synth, but there is definately a connection on how its perceived and played by the vast majority of "keyboard" players ie: like a piano ....zzzzzzzzzz

Fair enough if you cant see that, i could care less, but like i said, don't hold yer breath..

[Howard]

EXCLUDING polyphonic mode is an artificial limitation in software synths.

This is not always true. Without unlimited CPU power, going poly means losing other qualities. FXpansion (for instance) will surely have been fighting with this problem...

[emdot_ambient]

Without unlimited CPU power, going poly means losing other qualities.

Like what?

I mean, Albino 3 has polyphony, built-in FX, a complex arp and tons of modulation options, plus up to 4 layers (presets) playing at one time and it runs fine on my 4 year old DAW. I've had probably up to 8 copies of it running at once without running out having to freeze the tracks. So how would putting poly on Oddity lose anything at all?

[emdot_ambient]

...there may be no connection between the number of notes playable on a synth defining it as a synth, but there is definately a connection on how its perceived and played by the vast majority of "keyboard" players ie: like a piano ...

I really don't care what the vast majority of keyboard players think about the synths I use or how they choose to use them. I hate all the factory DX7 presets and just because everyone in the 80s used them to death doesn't detract from it being an incredibly deep synth.

I simply believe that the more options a synth has, the more flexible it is for me. It's not like we're in some 1337 little clique because we use a dedicated mono synth.

[MitchK1989]

Without unlimited CPU power, going poly means losing other qualities.

Like what?

I mean, Albino 3 has polyphony, built-in FX, a complex arp and tons of modulation options, plus up to 4 layers (presets) playing at one time and it runs fine on my 4 year old DAW. I've had probably up to 8 copies of it running at once without running out having to freeze the tracks. So how would putting poly on Oddity lose anything at all?

Because you're currently using 10% of the "Acceptable" CPU use for a softsynth... do you add 9 more voices or do you keep it mono and make the filter sound way better, add some drive stages, instability, etc. etc. etc.?

But really, I'd be all for them adding poly mode as long as they kept duo. Just like no one bashed creamware for adding poly, they bashed them for getting rid of duo.

The duo mode on the oddy is NOT two voices. It is one voice where the high note and the low note on the keyboard each control different oscs, which is crazy because then you can have two notes FMing each other, ring mod between the notes, etc. etc. etc. Real awesome mad scientist stuff that no other synth I'm aware of can do.

[Howard]

Without unlimited CPU power, going poly means losing other qualities.

Like what?

Like what Mitch said.