Monophonic synthesizers

[Erik Norlander]

I recently recorded a project with a friend in Holland who has a great collection of classic, vintage synthesizers.

 

As a fan and collector of these things myself, we had a lot to talk about. While I was promoting the virtues of my Yamaha CS-80 and Roland MKS synths, my Dutch friend made the simple statement:

 

"I don't really like polyphonic synthesizers."

 

Whoah. This statement completely blew my mind. Sure, I was well aware of the difference between poly and mono synths (duh...), but I never really considered the *aesthetic* difference, nor had I considered the idea that there was an *advantage* to monophony (is that a word?).

 

The way one arranges with a Minimoog, SEM, Odyssey, modular, etc. is clearly different than the way one arranges with a polysynth. I guess one could even argue that many of the great electronic performances (in all genres) from the 60s and 70s were the result of this limitation in polyphony. I am still moved by the ELP 'Pictures at an Exhibiton' album, for example.

 

In recent years, there has been a resurgence of mono synths, not wholly out of necessity perhaps (like the old days), but out of style. I can cite the Korg Prophecy, Yamaha VL stuff, the great gear from Studio Electronics, etc.

 

This may be a weird topic, but does anyone have thoughts on the matter?

 

Cheers,

 

Erik

 

PS - Please, nobody mention the 64-voice Alesis NanoBass.

[Pim]

I do not fully agree with my fellow countryman, but he has a point.

 

Using no analogue polyphonic chords, gives a lot of power in the mix. There is more "room" between events, just the thing a compressor likes to react to.

 

After discovering the Kawai K5000s, I started to listen in an other way to analogue polyphonic synths. The K5000s stands right up in the mix without filling the holes wich give music a "breath".

 

Since the K5000s I bought two digital synths: a Microwave XT and a Prophet VS.

It's no coincidence I seldom use my Jupiter for legato chords.

 

Listen to the music of Yazoo & Erasure. The Great God of Synths (and 3.5 minutes songs!), Vince Clarke, uses seldom any chords. Sometimes there is a chord, but it's played "broken", strummed like a guitar.

 

Maybe it is a nice experiment for us all: record a piece of music with monophonic notes only. It's allowed to use a degree of release in your sounds so harmonics are generated, but always play one key at the time.

I bet the outcome will sound very powerfull.

 

Pim.

 

 

 

------------------

www.dancewave.nl

[Peake]

Certain monosynths also have their own unique character that you might miss out on if you stuck to polysynths: the OSCar, the SH-5 (great filters, ultra-sweet square waves and hard sync), the CAT SRM, etc. Some of them also provide more sound-sculpting tools and routings than vintage polys (notably the SH-5). One monosynth even made the leap to polyphony: the mighty Oberheim SEM. I pity the fool, who hasn't played an SEM... And of course, the Minimoog and it's modular precursors were surely monophonic (unless you can afford enough modules to create multiple voices).

 

Best,

 

Mike

[Dave Bryce]

Originally posted by peake@pacificnet.net:

And of course, the Minimoog and it's modular precursors were surely monophonic (unless you can afford enough modules to create multiple voices).

I seem to recall that Gary Wright made a four voice synth out of Minimoogs a la Oberheim (except he stacked them vertically). Called the thing his MegaMoog, if memory serves.

 

Anybody else remember this?

 

dB

 

 

[This message has been edited by Dave Bryce (edited 10-17-2000).]

[Erik Norlander]

I seem to recall that Gary Wright made a four voice synth out of Minimoogs a la Oberheim (except he stacked them vertically). Called the thing his MegaMoog, if memory serves.

 

This seems like a great idea -- sort of like a Memorymoog with maximum huevos (but probably just as unreliable. Damn!)

 

However, I think the success of the Mini is in its application as a monophonic instrument. The ciruitry seems to be voiced in an ideal way for this application. I've done lots of samples of multiple detuned oscillator Minimoog sounds, and when you play them polyphonically, it just gets sludgy. Of course, with real oscillators you wouldn't get the weird distortions and non-irregularities (!) of samples, so maybe that extra life would counteract some of the sludginess.

 

Probably the best example of a super-huge-constantly-drifting-out-of-control POLYsynth is the Yamaha GX1. Dave Bryce, Mike Peake and I all had the unique privilege of working with Keith Emerson's unit for about two weeks while it was en route to Hans Zimmer's studio from Yamaha via our studio/lab for some sampling and circuit design research. On paper it's supposed to be 2-1/8 CS-80s, but it sounds much bigger than that. There is this constant phasing and chorusing from the oscillators themselves that is truly remarkable and surprisingly musical. What a beast!

 

But I digress...

 

Cheers,

 

Erik

[Dave Bryce]

Originally posted by eriknorlander@thetank.com:

Probably the best example of a super-huge-constantly-drifting-out-of-control POLYsynth is the Yamaha GX1. Dave Bryce, Mike Peake and I all had the unique privilege of working with Keith Emerson's unit for about two weeks while it was en route to Hans Zimmer's studio from Yamaha via our studio/lab for some sampling and circuit design research. On paper it's supposed to be 2-1/8 CS-80s, but it sounds much bigger than that. There is this constant phasing and chorusing from the oscillators themselves that is truly remarkable and surprisingly musical. What a beast!

 

A spectacular, huge, awesome machine - weighed a ton. We had the best time playing with that synth. The topmost of the three keybeds was a mini keyboard that varied the pitch of the note if you wiggled it from side to side. The thing's size kinda gave it an almost Hammond-esque vibe, too, if you know what I mean - actually, it's look is more Yamaha Electone organ than synth, right down to the cheesy little rhythm section.

 

Erik, of course, used it on an album he was doing at the time. Can you blame him? http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/cool.gif

 

dB

[Erik Norlander]

... the Yamaha GX1 ...

 

Originally posted by Dave Bryce:

Erik, of course, used it on an album he was doing at the time. Can you blame him? http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/cool.gif

 

Yes, the album is called "Threshold" and can be purchased at http://www.thetank.com. If you like keyboard oriented instrumental prog rock, check it out. Keith Emerson even wrote liner notes for me. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif

 

Sorry for the gratuitous plug. Dave, censor this one if you want.

 

Cheers,

 

Erik

[Dave Bryce]

Here's a waaaaaay old topic from the back pages. Anyone want to throw in their $.02?

 

dB

[Bobro]

Monophonic synths are great for a number of reasons. For one thing, with only one voice at a time, you'd better be cooking up a good melody, or else. Another aspect of course is the real-time timbre control of that voice. Another advantage is that with a monophonic synth, there is no illusion that a synth, which is a noble instrument in its own right, is just a substitute piano or organ.

 

But IMO the most important thing about monophonic synths is that they encourage a melody-based approach to compostion, to contrapuntal writing and strong voice-leading. A vertical coincidence of homogenous-sounding tones can by arrived at by sloppy means (although the silkiest string patch in the world isn't going to get that 19th-century romantic smooooov sound without good voice leading), but a chord formed by distinct monophonic lines fairly screams for those lines to be true to themselves as well as part of the chord. As far as broadening the harmonic pallette, to my ears you can purposefully or accidently create new harmonic progressions without the piece falling apart as long as the individual melodies are cohesive, and for example if each melody "candences" logically, the final vertical coincidence of several melodies can be very far from a traditional major triad yet still have a feeling of resolution/release.

 

There are social and political implications here, too, but best stay away from that one. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif Ayn Rand would certainly have played a monosynth....

 

-CB

 

%5C

[Sharon]

Hi

Just wanted to know how many YAMAHA GX1 is out there?

Is it really only one?

If any one have some photos and featers of this "beast"

[Dave Bryce]

I have heard that they built between seven and ten of them.

 

Here's a photo and some more info.

 

dB

[joegerardi]

Hans Zimmer's GX-1 was actually Keith's second incarnation of the instrument. Keith's first GX-1 was killed in the infamous "tractor death" incident. A runaway tractor crashed through the barn Keith had his studio in, and dragged the poor GX-1 to its death.

 

Keith bought the second one from John Paul Jones of Led Zeppelin fame.

 

Hans' beast has quite the pedigree.

 

This raises an interesting question: What would that instrument cost today, were it made the same way? It was 50 grand back then, but I wonder what the price would be now?

 

This message has been edited by joegerardi on 06-23-2001 at 05:33 PM

[Raymar]

I've got a Yamaha CS01(battery operated) mono synth and did an ambient space tune called Unus Mundus with it by running it through a DOD chorus pedal and a Boss DDL pedal(both battery operated) and then into an old Tascam Porta One(ten batteries!) and recorded it at the beach at sunset on four seperate tracks. It was an interesting experience.

 

I've also got VAZ plus and SimSynth(both mono soft synths) which I like to double with a polyphonic synth which makes for interesting effects too.

[Sharon]

Thanks For the infomation Dave

[coyote]

A legato switch turns a poly to a mono, but there's no way to turn a true mono to a poly! So I'd take the polyphony any day, unless the mono synth did something really special, incredible, & dazzling....