Haven't managed to come across fully analog polyphonic synth myself I
wondered if anyone on here uses or has one and what sort of opinions people
have of them?



--
View this message in context: http://csound.1045644.n5.nabble.com/Polyphonic-Analog-Synths-tp5734964.html
Sent from the Csound - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

If by "fully analog" you mean no microprocessors anywhere in the instrument,
and if by "polyphonic" you mean "chords are playable from a conventional
black-and-white keyboard," I suspect you're out of luck. I'm not aware of
any technology (well, other than the duophonic ARP 2600) that combined those
features. The innovations that allowed polyphony in the Oberheim 4-Voice and
the Prophet-5 involved using a microprocessor to scan the keyboard.

If you don't need a keyboard, then any reasonably large analog modular synth
will do multiple voices at once.

So I guess you might want to be a bit more precise about what you're hoping
to learn.



--
View this message in context: http://csound.1045644.n5.nabble.com/Polyphonic-Analog-Synths-tp5734964p5734975.html
Sent from the Csound - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

On Tue, 6 May 2014, Jim Aikin wrote:
> If by "fully analog" you mean no microprocessors anywhere in the instrument,
> and if by "polyphonic" you mean "chords are playable from a conventional
> black-and-white keyboard," I suspect you're out of luck. I'm not aware of
> any technology (well, other than the duophonic ARP 2600) that combined those
> features. The innovations that allowed polyphony in the Oberheim 4-Voice and

A frequency-divider organ can do it without a microprocessor.  Lowrey is
one well-known name.

-- 
Matthew Skala
mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca                 People before principles.
http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/

I have used Moog synth in the past...what is tour question...what do you
want ot know. Now I use Arturia softsynths with Cubase...

Marc

-----Message d'origine-----
De : fauveboy [mailto:joel.ramsbottom@hotmail.co.uk] 
Envoyé : mardi 6 mai 2014 11:07
À : csound@lists.bath.ac.uk; csound@lists.bath.ac.uk
Objet : [Csnd] Polyphonic Analog Synths

Haven't managed to come across fully analog polyphonic synth myself I
wondered if anyone on here uses or has one and what sort of opinions people
have of them?



--
View this message in context:
http://csound.1045644.n5.nabble.com/Polyphonic-Analog-Synths-tp5734964.html
Sent from the Csound - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


Send bugs reports to
        https://github.com/csound/csound/issues
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here To unsubscribe, send
email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

I suspect you are refering to 80’s synths from the likes of Sequential Circuits, Roland (Jupter 8), Moog (polymoog I think it was called), Oberheim and Korg (Polysix) to name but a few.

Their frequency range was not so great. I find the polysix on my iPad has a better trebble and bass sound than the original. 

What I did like about those devices was that all the settings were on display. Today’s devices tend to have a small screen to access a vast array of different settings. I learnt the basics of audio synthesis on a Korg Mono/Poly, these days there are many more techniques (FM, sampling, granular….), if I can call them techniques, so I expect it’s a steeper learning curve.

All the best,

Jacques

On 6 May 2014, at 16:06, fauveboy  wrote:

> Haven't managed to come across fully analog polyphonic synth myself I
> wondered if anyone on here uses or has one and what sort of opinions people
> have of them?
> 
> 
> 
> --
> View this message in context: http://csound.1045644.n5.nabble.com/Polyphonic-Analog-Synths-tp5734964.html
> Sent from the Csound - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> 
> 
> Send bugs reports to
>        https://github.com/csound/csound/issues
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
> 
> 
> 

> A frequency-divider organ can do it without a microprocessor.  Lowrey is
> one well-known name. 

True enough. But he was asking about synthesizers. A Hammond drawbar organ
is technically an additive synthesizer (though very primitive), and it has
no digital components. Today, however, drawbar organs are mostly digital.
They emulate or model the original design, but not without microprocessors.



--
View this message in context: http://csound.1045644.n5.nabble.com/Polyphonic-Analog-Synths-tp5734964p5735000.html
Sent from the Csound - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

On Tue, 6 May 2014, Jim Aikin wrote:
> > A frequency-divider organ can do it without a microprocessor.  Lowrey is
> > one well-known name.
>
> True enough. But he was asking about synthesizers. A Hammond drawbar organ

Arguing about what counts as a "synthesizer" is as much fun as arguing
about what counts as "digital," but the Lowrey organ whose service
manual and schematics are at

   http://www.lowreyforum.com/manuals/E100_Carnival_Part1.pdf‎

is the kind of thing I had in mind.  That's a Lowrey frequency divider
organ (as I said), not a Hammond tonewheel organ.  It doesn't generate the
tones electromechanically like a Hammond, but it also doesn't use a
microprocessor nor a digital-analog converter.  It uses some digital logic
chips.  I would call it a synthesizer even though for marketing reasons it
doesn't say "synthesizer" on the front panel; whether it counts as "fully
analog" may be a trickier question, but if one goes back further in time,
frequency-divider organs have been around since the 1930s and some were
vacuum-tube based and very primitive.

-- 
Matthew Skala
mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca                 People before principles.
http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/