MultiTImbrality in reality

[TOTAL]

HI

I am already aware these 1800 oscillators and 16-timbrality are marketing slogans. Only now I also know how it is explained to TI owners by Access team (the more oscillators and reverbs and delays the more DSP power utilized)

but

I'm curious how many parts you can use at once.

On my TI me it is usually with the 5th that problems start.
Hardware mode.

Has anyone tried 16 bare single osc parts at once?

[grs]

last I checked I got note stealing around the 7th part. Then I changed one part from unison 8 to unison 6 to stop the note stealing.

[DIGITAL SCREAMS]

16 part multitimbriality.......been around since the early 90's....but who in reality ever uses 16 parts from one synth? Sure, for workstations like the Kurzweil, Fantom, Motif....

I would think you might be able to squeeze upto 12 parts on the TI provided your not using unison mode. But your song would be way to midrangey....so what is exactly the benefit to you that you get all 16?

Im just wondering. Personally dual mode suffices.....

DS

[Khazul]

The biggest benefit of multi is reprocessing and stacking.

Stack a bunch of singles, output to a couple of output pairs and, loop one pair back in for addition fx processing etc - which is why I want the aux busses back - makes a *huge* diference to the utility of multi-mode + i can then still use the inputs for a real external sound source as well.

For even more fun - enable a part for send to midi, and stack with another synth via an input patch stacking perf mode on the TI and a Motif ES paino. Send the whole lot to a compressor for a nice smooth blend.

In terms of how many parts - erm I find I have to be careful with part priorities right from the start - input patches seem to consume way more resources than I expected, either that or the effect of note stealing is at midi level rather than synth level - either way - the effect is a total shutdown of even a static input patch - so I allwas set them as the only high priority part.

Typically Ill end up with 3 or so parts max, where 1 is a midi send + audio input and the others are stacked (pad+arp for eg). That sounds very low, but then unison and fx abuse soon takes its toll. Past experience with other synths meant I never exoect to get 16 parts (nor could I expec to want to, unless using the TI as a drum & bass machine).

[TOTAL]

Khazul
This jargon seems too advanced to me. No idea what you are talking about.

DIGITAL SCREAMS
There is a point in what u say. Yet, 4 seem a bit too few. I'v tried reducing the DSP usage by f.e. turning of 3rd osc, but it was then that it appeared this 3rd appeared quite beneficial for the sound.

I heard Nord 3 could handle all 4 declared parts at once.

[aisling]

Originally Posted by DIGITAL SCREAMS

16 part multitimbriality.......been around since the early 90's....but who in reality ever uses 16 parts from one synth? Sure, for workstations like the Kurzweil, Fantom, Motif....

I would think you might be able to squeeze upto 12 parts on the TI provided your not using unison mode. But your song would be way to midrangey....so what is exactly the benefit to you that you get all 16?

Im just wondering. Personally dual mode suffices.....

DS

May I ask your opinion on this matter.........(your reto/tech wisdon/and understanding of analog synthesis is quite valuable)

In reality...... The TI shines on stuff where you want/need filter automation, etc.....or any "real time modulation".......As you mention, this is less likely (99.9%) to use all the TI's 16 multitiberal parts (assuming you have more than 1 synth/soft synth).......

With out over stating and confusing, here is the nutshell.......Would 80 voices ever get used up in an analog modeling enviroment. I can see with a rompler as you mentioned......voices being needed for orkestrational programmming/film scoring, etc.......

but for us pop/electro/dance.......are we not more likley to stay closer to monophonic for those "sounds"........Even the "pad" layer, how many voices vould that eat up max?

I guess what I'm trying to say is the "consumer in me gets excited when I hear the marketing campaing saying 80 voices......
But the engineer/scientist (in me) is asking me to prove neccessary functionality........

(This is by no means an anti TI issue.........)

[Khazul]

I have used all of the TIs polyphony on a mono-synth patch
- I guess the answer is yes

It actually aint hard - full unison, full use of all osc and features, pile on some fx, sounds fat as hell of course, but polyphony available is about 4 (assuming short release).

In the above case, I had a slower release, reverb, delay and was aware of note stealing (ie delay/reverb tails cut - though that was with an early OS, so dont know if that was actualy stealing or a bug in CPU alllocation). Dont fret about it tho, I would be surprised if any other synth on the planet could take abuse and even make a noise.

As for general use of polyphony, I do tend to hit limits as I like to layer sounds, sometimes within one synth, often across synths.

The quote poly available on a TI should be interpreted differently to many synths as its a measure of CPU use rather than strict voices. The Nord 3 for eg (I beleive) can allways manage 24 voices. The V-Synth and TI dynamically allocate between voices depending upon voice complexity. Pile on the FX, use alot of V-Synth feature and the polyphony plumets from the quoted 24 to around 4 to 6 or so.

[aisling]

Originally Posted by Khazul

I have used all of the TIs polyphony on a mono-synth patch
- I guess the answer is yes

It actually aint hard - full unison, full use of all osc and features, pile on some fx, sounds fat as hell of course, but polyphony available is about 4 (assuming short release).

In the above case, I had a slower release, reverb, delay and was aware of note stealing (ie delay/reverb tails cut - though that was with an early OS, so dont know if that was actualy stealing or a bug in CPU alllocation). Dont fret about it tho, I would be surprised if any other synth on the planet could take abuse and even make a noise.

As for general use of polyphony, I do tend to hit limits as I like to layer sounds, sometimes within one synth, often across synths.

The quote poly available on a TI should be interpreted differently to many synths as its a measure of CPU use rather than strict voices. The Nord 3 for eg (I beleive) can allways manage 24 voices. The V-Synth and TI dynamically allocate between voices depending upon voice complexity. Pile on the FX, use alot of V-Synth feature and the polyphony plumets from the quoted 24 to around 4 to 6 or so.

Very cool, That explains why the TI takes it to another level(from that point of view).....
Now I see the logical superiority of TI over virus c......
Am i wrong to say that effected bass (due to wave size and time delay efx) would eat up voices quicker than "lead" tones?
I was spoiled with reason becuase you just go until cpu lags......SO re adjusting my thinking towards hardware has a slight learning curve....

[Khazul]

Originally Posted by aisling

Am i wrong to say that effected bass (due to wave size and time delay efx) would eat up voices quicker than "lead" tones?

I cant see any reason why this should be the case.

Originally Posted by aisling

I was spoiled with reason becuase you just go until cpu lags......SO re adjusting my thinking towards hardware has a slight learning curve....

The TI is basically no different - you have finite CPU, and it makes best use of it according to what you ask it to do.