Oddity 2

[emdot_ambient]

Seriously doubt Oddity is using anywhere close to 10% of my acceptable CPU right not. And like I said, there are plenty of other soft synths already on the market that do have polyphony, multiple EG's, multi-staged EG's, multiple LFOs, more filters, more modulation capabilities, built-in FX, arps or sequencers, AND/OR multiple layers of presets...are you really telling me it would be impossible to add polyphony plus other nice things to Oddity? That seems daft to me.

[Dave Blakely]

Seriously doubt Oddity is using anywhere close to 10% of my acceptable CPU right not. And like I said, there are plenty of other soft synths already on the market that do have polyphony, multiple EG's, multi-staged EG's, multiple LFOs, more filters, more modulation capabilities, built-in FX, arps or sequencers, AND/OR multiple layers of presets...are you really telling me it would be impossible to add polyphony plus other nice things to Oddity? That seems daft to me.

It wouldnt be impossible at all to add these things to Oddity,but then what you'd be left with wouldn't be the same synth, it would be in danger of joining the rank of all the other homogenous vstis out there on the market with multiple this that and the other that 80% of the people using it would never touch, Albino being a case in point, its a beautiful synth but about 90% of the patches are mushy unremarkable pap, quite ideal i suppose for all the dance by numbers fraternity that wanna use the same 20% of presets, but wheres the character? To paraphrase Brian Eno "what we need are synths with less options and more heart" Bigger isnt always better

[MitchK1989]

Seriously doubt Oddity is using anywhere close to 10% of my acceptable CPU right not. And like I said, there are plenty of other soft synths already on the market that do have polyphony, multiple EG's, multi-staged EG's, multiple LFOs, more filters, more modulation capabilities, built-in FX, arps or sequencers, AND/OR multiple layers of presets...are you really telling me it would be impossible to add polyphony plus other nice things to Oddity? That seems daft to me.

Sure there are lots of synths with all that crap in it, but most of them have weak as hell oscillators and filters (and I don't mean I want "tarnce phat" oscillators and filters, which seems to mean MORE low quality oscillators in unison to make up for how weak each one is individually and bad waveshaping on both sides of the filter)...

I don't see the appeal in quantity if the quality isn't there.

[HunterKiller]

Since there's so much opposition to adding pretty much anything to Oddity, why don't you scrap the whole idea of a version 2 and just ask for an update of the current version 1 with an added capability for poly?

Nothing changes, people who know the history of the synth will be aware of the uses that its mono/duo feature provides and still use it and then you'd get many new people looking at the synth in a whole new light. If polyphony wasn't such an issue for synths back in the day, they would've all had them without question.

...... now an Arp/Rhodes Chroma would be a different matter

Hell yes, a very underrated kick ass synth, a monster in it's own right!

[Bruce Bartlett]

To paraphrase Brian Eno "what we need are synths with less options and more heart"

Fabfilter One.

[Howard]

To paraphrase Brian Eno "what we need are synths with less options and more heart"

Fabfilter One.

impOSCar.

[Uncle E]

I personally think it is one of the best analogue emulations out there, and am very pleased with my Oddity.

But it doesn't sound like an Odyssey.

[HunterKiller]

I personally think it is one of the best analogue emulations out there, and am very pleased with my Oddity.

But it doesn't sound like an Odyssey.

LOL, don't go there dude

[Mr Arkadin]

Since there's so much opposition to adding pretty much anything to Oddity, why don't you scrap the whole idea of a version 2 and just ask for an update of the current version 1 with an added capability for poly?

Nothing changes

OK people aren't getting this. i shall give an example. When Creamware (as it was then) created their emulation, the Prodyssey, they made it polyphonic. Great you think - except a number of features had to be changed to accommodate the polyphony so that things like Duo mode were now impossible, the architecture has to change, thereby changing the character of the synth. The only way to have a poly Oddity would be to have either two different versions (Mono/Duo and Poly) or one synth with two engines under the bonnet (hood to you Yanks). This might double (or worse) the CPU hit i imagine.

So if you have a polyphonic Oddity that can't sound like an Odyssey then what's the point?

[Dave Blakely]

Since there's so much opposition to adding pretty much anything to Oddity, why don't you scrap the whole idea of a version 2 and just ask for an update of the current version 1 with an added capability for poly?

Nothing changes

OK people aren't getting this. i shall give an example. When Creamware (as it was then) created their emulation, the Prodyssey, they made it polyphonic. Great you think - except a number of features had to be changed to accommodate the polyphony so that things like Duo mode were now impossible, the architecture has to change, thereby changing the character of the synth. The only way to have a poly Oddity would be to have either two different versions (Mono/Duo and Poly) or one synth with two engines under the bonnet (hood to you Yanks). This might double (or worse) the CPU hit i imagine.

So if you have a polyphonic Oddity that can't sound like an Odyssey then what's the point?

Thank you! At last someone that gets it, i might have known you'd be better at explaining it

[emdot_ambient]

OK people aren't getting this...to accommodate the polyphony so that things like Duo mode were now impossible...

I got what you said the first time, only I don't know that it's accurate. I'm not a synth programmer, maybe you are, but it seems to me you don't need an entirely different synth engine to do duophonic. Obviously you don't for mono/poly, as it's a standard feature on most synths. Duophonic mode to me doesn't sound like it would take a whole new synth archetecture, but rather just a script to tell the synth which oscillator to play at any given time.

[emdot_ambient]

It wouldnt be impossible at all to add these things to Oddity,but then what you'd be left with wouldn't be the same synth, it would be in danger of joining the rank of all the other homogenous vstis out there on the market with multiple this that and the other that 80% of the people using it would never touch, Albino being a case in point, its a beautiful synth but about 90% of the patches are mushy unremarkable pap

Ah, so a purist like yourself uses other people's presets? Ur Synth Powrz R Not Strongz!

But seriously, that's a weak example. BigTone's presets, for example, show that Albino can do incredibly sweet, expressive and deep sounds over a wide spectrum of sounds. Just because a lot of crappy presets have been made with a synth it doesn't make the synth crap. I had a friend who owned a Minimoog back in the 70s. All he ever got the thing to do was make space farts.

And as I said, ALL the factory presets for the DX7 were crap. Yet Eno and others showed it wasn't just a consumer grade piece of junk...incidentally most of the people who bought DX7s in the 80s were exactly "the dance by numbers fraternity that wanna use the same 20% of presets".

Bigger isnt always better

No, but more is always more.

[emdot_ambient]

Sure there are lots of synths with all that crap in it, but most of them have weak as hell oscillators and filters...

I don't see the appeal in quantity if the quality isn't there.

1) Oddity's oscillators and filters right now are not weak as hell. I quite like them. So they don't have to change a thing there when they add polyphony! No worries, mate!

2) Polyphony isn't about quantity over quality, it's about flexiblity over limitation.

[emdot_ambient]

Since there's so much opposition to adding pretty much anything to Oddity, why don't you scrap the whole idea of a version 2

Or if you don't like the additions they may put into a v2 (I've never seen anything to indicate they're even thinking about it--all I know is that it's a different design team than worked on the impOSCar 2), then just don't buy it and keep using the classic you already love!

If polyphony is possible/practical in the Oddity, I don't understand all this crying about how it'll destroy a classic. It smacks of elitism or some weird Luddite mentality. We're already hearing that with the impOSCar 2. But the fact there is that presets for the original impOSCar will work exaclty in v2 as they did before. People who want to use the additional features can. Those who want to restrict themselves (which I'm not saying is always bad) can restrict themselves all they want.

Nothing changes, people who know the history of the synth will be aware of the uses that its mono/duo feature provides and still use it and then you'd get many new people looking at the synth in a whole new light. If polyphony wasn't such an issue for synths back in the day, they would've all had them without question.

Amen

...... now an Arp/Rhodes Chroma would be a different matter

Hell yes, a very underrated kick ass synth, a monster in it's own right!

Double Amen!

[Dave Blakely]

It wouldnt be impossible at all to add these things to Oddity,but then what you'd be left with wouldn't be the same synth, it would be in danger of joining the rank of all the other homogenous vstis out there on the market with multiple this that and the other that 80% of the people using it would never touch, Albino being a case in point, its a beautiful synth but about 90% of the patches are mushy unremarkable pap

Ah, so a purist like yourself uses other people's presets? Ur Synth Powrz R Not Strongz!

But seriously, that's a weak example. BigTone's presets, for example, show that Albino can do incredibly sweet, expressive and deep sounds over a wide spectrum of sounds. Just because a lot of crappy presets have been made with a synth it doesn't make the synth crap. I had a friend who owned a Minimoog back in the 70s. All he ever got the thing to do was make space farts.

And as I said, ALL the factory presets for the DX7 were crap. Yet Eno and others showed it wasn't just a consumer grade piece of junk...incidentally most of the people who bought DX7s in the 80s were exactly "the dance by numbers fraternity that wanna use the same 20% of presets".

Bigger isnt always better

No, but more is always more.

I'm neither a synth purist or a preset user i never said i was either, i also never said Albino was crap, i said the majority of patches for it were, i also had several friends that bought Sh101's when they first came out and in all seriousness they should have been slapped because they would have been better off with a fuckin home organ or a Roland JV1080, but thats beside the point, nowadays more seems to be equated with better, i say thats shit, id rather have quality than quantity.
Oddity as it stands to me is quality, now i may be biassed as i was the sound programmer on it along with the mighty Spiers, but if it was shit i wouldn't have taken the gig...... so thats my personal opinion, i also stand by what i said about polyphony making it a different instrument, this all comes down to how you view synths, to me they fall into several categories, workhorses that try to cover all bases and specialise in none, specifics that specialise in several areas (i include Oddity in this category)and do it well and science projects where they tip in everything but the kitchen sink then wonder why the f**ker never sells but perversely generates a fanboy following of 20 rabid members.

Oddity can be improved don't get me wrong, the patch loading system for a start, but i know that would entail a major rewrite because its hooked into the morphing system, id also like to see an arp sequencer attached and maybe a switchable filter system between the first Moog style filter and the latter Arp one but i dont know how practicle that would be, you'd need to ask the Ohmmies about that, so yeah id like to see it evolve myself, but polyphony? i don't know, theres a lot of synths out there that do that well, why should every synth try to cover the same ground?

Oh yeah and that dance fraternity that bought Dx7's and never got to know them further than Lately Bass.......they should have been slapped as well