SOLARIS EXPANDER / EXPANSION - WISH :)

Discuss John Bowen Synths - Solaris
Hein Eken
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:45 am
Contact:

Re: SOLARIS EXPANDER / EXPANSION - WISH :)

Post by Hein Eken »

HUROLURA wrote:
4 part multimode is more important for me and would push me forward to order the Solaris.
This !!!
HUROLURA wrote: Regarding the Ribon made available as an external gear control signal, it could be a good idea to add it as an extra Midi message.
Yep.
It would be great it worked like the Kurzweil ribbon, w/ 3 zones and using the controller messages KURZ uses.
I type from my head here, so no details.
It´s reported in the PC3 user guide though.

I´m using the KURZ ribbons zones to control several parameters for SCOPE devices b.t.w. and the controller messages aren´t limited to the standard MIDI CCs which is a big advantage.
P.ex. they are using "aux-bend" messages being independent from the standard pitch bend message etc..
Nonetheless it exists in the MIDI protocol as standard, but not many manufacturers use these.
Once in use, they can be learned by a connected MIDI device supporting "MIDI learn".
HUROLURA wrote: Regarding the interest for a blind 1U rack unit, I think the people who could be interested would be:
- Solaris keyboard user to have access to more voices especially if multimode is available.
Is it confirmed, a Solaris rack connected to Solaris keyboard synth will double the polyphony of the Solaris keyboard instrument ?
In fact, that requires some MIDI implementation like "notemap parameters" (exists in KURZ PC3),- think Solaris keyboard plays even MIDI note numbers and the rack play odd MIDI note numbers and/or voice-spill-over parameter when Solaris runs out of voices on MIDI channel #n and the rack operates on MIDI channel #n+1 p.ex..

Connecting the rack to Solaris keyboard and operating on the same MIDI channel produces a physical layer of 2 synths,- not more.
HUROLURA wrote: - people owning a Solaris but in need for a compact way to take this one on the road while keeping the main keyboard for sound design in the studio or for bigger events
- people like me who wish they could afford a Solaris and would accept to compromise about the UI to be able to buy one ...
- people wanting the Solaris sound but already having more than needed keyboards and having no space left for an extra keyboard
- modular freaks who still wish a Modular G3 from Clavia which would probably never happen
Confirmed !
HUROLURA wrote: Regarding external hardware or software control elements to provide a smart alternate solution, third party could offer some solutions, not as smart as Solaris layout , but maybe cheaper or more versatile as it could be used to control other gears.
Multi purpose device usable for other gear too,-. that´s it !

Hein
Tak
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 7:07 am
Contact:

Re: SOLARIS EXPANDER / EXPANSION - WISH :)

Post by Tak »

Hello world! Another potential customer here!

How much processing power the multitimbrality costs?

If it costs a lot of power from the potential of the single voice, I would like to use that power to new features in the signal path instead, and increase the uniqueness of this instrument. I would perhaps use an expander or workstation to add multitimbrality, and keep this as a specialized, ultimate sound design tool.
Hein Eken
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:45 am
Contact:

Re: SOLARIS EXPANDER / EXPANSION - WISH :)

Post by Hein Eken »

Tak wrote:Hello world! Another potential customer here!

How much processing power the multitimbrality costs?

If it costs a lot of power from the potential of the single voice, I would like to use that power to new features in the signal path instead, and increase the uniqueness of this instrument. I would perhaps use an expander or workstation to add multitimbrality, and keep this as a specialized, ultimate sound design tool.
Hard to say how much DSP it will cost.
With Solaris´ 4 OSCs, 4 Filters and 4 mixers, you´re already able to create 4 different sounds, basicly.
But I doubt you´re able to adress these to different MIDI channels actually, - and that´s what MIDI multimode is.

Now it depends on what to expect from that.
Is it playing 4 complex patches from the preset banks polyphonic,- 1 patch on Solaris keyboard and 3 on different MIDI channels being controlled by other keyboard controllers ?
THIS is eventually not possible and depending on the type of patches.

I imagine it being possible creating a Jan Hammer Moog type lead patch (he often used 1 OSC only and played monophonic) and play it on a dedicated MIDI channel from a different keyboard controller ...
Then it could be possible to load a sample/Wavetable into the sample OSC, run this thru a separate filter and mixer and play it separately on another MIDI channel polyphonic,- if there were the possibility to load a multisample-file.
Now, if you need a fat polyphonic pad or stab patch, you´d probably need 2 OSCs for this.

All in all, this result would be a 3-part MIDI multitimbral patch.

I have no idea what can be done to spread the envelopes, LFOs and FX across these patches,- maybe John knows what the limits are.
The voice assignment routines for the patches played on different MIDI channels and local is also a unanswered question I think.

If you want to play 4 complex patches w/ separate envelopes, LFOs and FX assigned, you eventually run out of voices/DSP anyway, regardless of monophonic vs polyphonic and actually w/ the 10 voices at max..

If that cannot be changed by technical limits,- the rack will be very welcome because buying 2 racks is cheaper (and more portable) than buying 2 Solaris keyboards or 1 Solaris keyboard and a rack. :mrgreen:

And,- if the rack supports "spillover voices" or "note maps",- you could easily make a 20-voice Solaris out of 2 racks.

O.T.:

I could do that w/ my PC361 keyboard controller already now w/ 2 racks on 2 different MIDI channels.
It does it w/ almost any thinkable MIDI devices connected.

Hein
John Bowen
Site Admin
Posts: 2002
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:00 am
Contact:

Re: SOLARIS EXPANDER / EXPANSION - WISH :)

Post by John Bowen »

Of course I would do the "MIDI spillover" approach, since we did this at Sequential Circuits, and Dave Smith does now with his gear.
It makes more sense to me as a small expansion box for the keyboard, since you still have all of the control UI.
lotus-eater
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:43 am
Contact:

Re: SOLARIS EXPANDER / EXPANSION - WISH :)

Post by lotus-eater »

I really hope that this $4k DIGITAL synthesizer will eventually have a four part multitimbral mode (each part assignable to a separate midi channel) without the need for an expander module. I assume that's the plan given previous discussions on the forum and all of those individual outputs on the back of the instrument, but it's a little scary to see people post that they would be satisfied with a monotimbral, DIGITAL synthesizer that has this kind of price tag and physical footprint. There are already plenty of great options for sound design in the studio. As I see it, where the Solaris sets itself apart is as a source of extremely high quality pseudo-analogue, digital and hybrid sounds away from the computer.

For those needing 16 parts and 100+ voices of polyphony, I guess a rack expander makes sense. I just hope all available resources are going into making the Solaris keyboard the best it can be before essential features become relegated to costly peripherals.
HUROLURA
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 12:21 am
Location: France
Contact:

Re: SOLARIS EXPANDER / EXPANSION - WISH :)

Post by HUROLURA »

John, just correct me if I am wrong.
From what I understood, the Solaris main board include 6 big DSP chip (identical to the 12 big DSP found int the Xite -1:
- 1 of them is responsible for audio IO handling and FX
- each of 5 remaining DSP is responsible for generating 2 notes with possibly all modules available used. This leads to the current 10 notes polyphony

Beside these DSP, the board also integrate another Blackfin processor which handle MIDI, keyboard, displays, encoders, ... And so on.

1) First move towards multimode.
First step towards multimode would be to upgrade this Blackfin to allow it to handle multiple MIDI channel and split, load different presets to the different DSP and send them the 4 channel data flow. This would not have any impact on DSP power and I guess the Blackfin could handle that.

What I do not know is wether you could get two differents presets from a single DSP. If so one could allocate the notes to the 4 different parts up to 10 notes for all the parts. Only limitation I see there would be that they all share the same FX handled by the first DSP.

I think this si what the "Enable part" four switches were dedicated to rather than current mixer mute mode.

At this point, adding a 1U Solaris rack would also provide a first solution towards polyphony expansion.

2) Second move toward kind of polyphony expansion

If the Blackfin could handle more than 4 simultaneous MIDI channel, maybe it would be possible to send 2 MIDI channel to each Solaris note and decide which MIDI data flow should trigger which module. While programming a preset you would be able to program a combo synth using some of the modules for a first lighter apart only using some of the modules while the rest could be available for the second one. For example you could program a first Prophet 5 part like part using 2 Osc, 1 mixer, 1 filter, 1VCA, 2 EG, and 1 LFO which would be control from one MIDI channel while you would build a Waldorf Wave like patch using 2 Osc, 1 Mixer, 2 filters, 1 VCA, 4 EG and 4 LFO which would be controlled by the other MIDI channel. Such a trick would allow increasing available polyphony with some constraint regarding the features used and the fact that if one decide to set polyphony to 4 notes (using 2 DSP) the polyphony for both part would be the same (or maybe set to mono for one of the part by muting the 3 other notes, when "Prophet 5 patch" is used for pads while the "Wave patch" is used for a mono lead). The other contraint there would be that you would be limited in term of patch combo to what is possible with the set of module available in one normal Solaris voice: you wouldn't be able to use more than a total of 4 Osc in such a combo patch for example.

3) Optimised polyphony
This would allow using the DSP in the same way as it is handled on the Xite-1, allowing DSP ressources to be allocated just for what is used. Much more flexible but this is probably handled from the PC host and would be much more complex to implement if at least possible

All in all, my feeling is one should think at the Solaris as a virtual hardware modular synth with a bunch of modules available where it you cannot replace an Osc by a Filter for example. Just check the spec and multiply the number of available modules by 10 and you would know what I mean...
CheerZ
Hein Eken
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:45 am
Contact:

Re: SOLARIS EXPANDER / EXPANSION - WISH :)

Post by Hein Eken »

lotus-eater wrote:I really hope that this $4k DIGITAL synthesizer will eventually have a four part multitimbral mode (each part assignable to a separate midi channel) without the need for an expander module.
Solaris keyboard synth doesn´t need a/the rack module for MIDI multi mode.
When Solaris becomes MIDI multitimbral, the Solaris rack will be too,- they would be both the same synth w/ the same features except the haptics, displays and physical controller units.
But,- a Solaris rack connected to Solaris keyboard would double polyphony by usage of "spillover voices".

You have to understand Solaris is designed by using S|C Scope SDK and there are the limits up to now.
Upcoming Scope SDK v6 might change that.
lotus-eater wrote: For those needing 16 parts and 100+ voices of polyphony, I guess a rack expander makes sense.
Sorry, but this line is NON-sense !

Who said, if Solaris keyboard will be 4-part MIDI multitimbral and if the rack version is connected, the system will be 16-part multitimbral then ?
By using "spillover voices" feature you only get twice the voices, not more slots for multitimbrality.
For 100 voices, actually you´d need 10 Solaris and for 16 MIDI channel usage you´d need actually 16 and if it will have 4-part MIDI multimode one day, you´ll need 1 keyboard Solaris plus 3 rack modules or 4 Keyboard Solaris or 4 rack modules.

Hein
Hein Eken
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:45 am
Contact:

Re: SOLARIS EXPANDER / EXPANSION - WISH :)

Post by Hein Eken »

HUROLURA wrote:John, just correct me if I am wrong.
From what I understood, the Solaris main board include 6 big DSP chip (identical to the 12 big DSP found int the Xite -1:
- 1 of them is responsible for audio IO handling and FX
- each of 5 remaining DSP is responsible for generating 2 notes with possibly all modules available used. This leads to the current 10 notes polyphony

Beside these DSP, the board also integrate another Blackfin processor which handle MIDI, keyboard, displays, encoders, ... And so on.
I´ve read all the other text of your post, but comment only on the stuff above and below.
What you describe above doesn´t lead urgently to 10 voice polyphony,- it just only does actually.

The Solaris offers a complex parameter set/ complex features and very high sonic quality, which all in all makes it a DSP hungry beast.
Also the ZARG Solaris is a very DSP hungry beast when used on Creamware DSP PCI cards, even it has less features than the hardware Solaris.
You end up w/ ~ 3 voices on 15 old SHARCS.

If you look at S|C XITE 1D and XITE-1,- all the new Sharc chips are organized in 4 slots and if you load a synth in SCOPE 5.x on XITE and max out polyphony for that synth, you´ll recognize the DSP loads spills over to the next chip when the 1st chip is at it´s limits.
But that only works for chips in the same slot,- not across slots up to now.

The hardware design of Solaris seems to be a bit different compared to a XITE box and John talked about a factor of 5 to increase polyphony,- so I assume Solaris has 5 DSP slots alone for the voices, each slot = 1 chip.

Another chip is for the I/Os (and FX in Solaris) which is similar to the XITE, it using 2 old SHARCs for that purpose (hardware I/Os, ASIO and MIDI on chip #1,- but also a bit more like the WAVE source and also VDATs go to DSP#2.

Anyway,- see below ...
HUROLURA wrote: 3) Optimised polyphony
This would allow using the DSP in the same way as it is handled on the Xite-1, allowing DSP ressources to be allocated just for what is used.
No, actually and w/ SCOPE 5.1, also in XITE the DSP ressources aren´t allocated perfectly to what is really used.
The automatic DSP assignment is not perfect and you have to assign devices to DSPs manually sometimes when projects grow, then save and reload, to make it a permanent working project without running into SAT connection errors and similar issues.
Also when you remove devices from an already working project and load new/other devices into that project (means DSP load and SAT connections change) you might run into problems.
In addition, the load limit on XITE is actually ~60% (compared to the PCI cards allowing 85-90%, the project working as a Startup !!!).

There are workarounds for some of these issues on XITE, but for a hardware keyboard instrument you need perfect AUTOMATIC DSP assignment because every time you call up a patch, it will be different in complexity and needs different amount of overall ressources.
By nature, this increases w/ 4-part MIDI multitimbrality because you also change patches in MIDI multimode parts/slots !

There´s also another difference between Xite and Solaris.
Solaris uses 1(the same) chip for the FX always,- with XITE, loading FX devices works the same as loading mixers and /or synths and the FX go to any DSP being free automaticly or you assign ´em manually to DSPs.
As a result, the 6th DSP cannot be used to spread higher DSP load over/across this chip, so everything to be done increasing polyphony must be done w/ the other 5 chips,- which makes the "factor of 5".

I assume, these 5 chips are near their limits already and if we´ll see Solaris becoming 15 voice polyphonic, that means the software improvement squeezes out 1 voice more from each chip and that´s the end then.

Actually, the workaround for Solaris is fixed DSP assignment for 2 voices on 1 chip because you cannot assign any OSCs, mixers, filters, envelopes, VCAs and whatever it is, separately and manually to dedicated DSPs and depending on how you create your patch and how much ressources it will need.

So, live with that for the time being

All the other work for MIDI multimode (assignment of different MIDI channels p.ex.) must be don by using the 6th chip then.

That´s how I understand it.

Hein
HUROLURA
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 12:21 am
Location: France
Contact:

Re: SOLARIS EXPANDER / EXPANSION - WISH :)

Post by HUROLURA »

That's just what I meant: as it is now, each of the DSP is statically loaded with modules to perform 2 voices. But the Midi stuff doesn't have to be loaded on the 6th DSP. From what I understood, it is handled by the Blackfin which is the DSP master and tell them what to do. Regarding parameters, choice of Osc type, values, a.s.o., the Blackfin just load all the 5 DSP with the same settings for now, then it is also used to tell which DSP to play which note with given velocity, a.s.o.
Going to a 4 slots multimode would just mean handling notes comming from 4 Midi channel (including the one coming fom the keyboard) and route them to the different slots which would have been pre assigned to different sounds before.

The Solaris voice handling is quite different from the Xite but as you said it is much more predictable which is a good point. I would see a Solaris multimode being more like the one used on the Noah. Noah provided 2 old DSP for each of its slot and 3 extra used for other stuff: one was used to do what the Blackfin is doing in the Solaris and the 2 remaining were used for mixing the slots including an external signal path and provide resources to compute FX.
For that reason, the upgrade from the 2 slots standard Noah to he 4 slots Noah Ex is a board featuring 4 old DSP.

My guess is also that the Solaris is already organized hardware wise with 4 slots as are the Xite-1 and Xite-1D.

As John already told us getting more polyphony would mean getting 3 voices out of each of the 5 DSP by mean of optimization or code improvement. In case you program a patch using all the available modules and using the most DSP intensive modules, I guess the DSP load for 2 voices currently reach more than 2/3 of the available DSP power and memory so this is the reason why the polyphony for each DSP is limited to 2 voices. But maybe with some lighter DSP consuming modules, one could go beyond this by loading another set of module to the DSP. The difficulty there is you would need a kind of DSP load meter to help the user make is decision on the modules used or just informed him of the available polyphony for 1 DSP with the programmed settings.
Actually, several paths are possible on the way to increase polyphony.

What I just described is one way but not that easy to achieve especially while keeping the UI as smart as it is now.

The combo mode I talked about is another strategy keeping the same fixed number of modules handled by each chip but using them to produce more lighter voices. Would be not so straightforward to handle for user though.

Adding an external 1U unit should be more easy, and also good to bring founds to John team to go on development. And anybody acquiring a 1U unit on top of the keyboard would benefit from these later enhancements.

A simple multi mode just splitting the notes among the 4 slots with the current constraint should be the first. All the rest are probably just tricks which could be implemented later. Having this multi mode would make sense for people already having the keyboard to buy a 1U expansion. I wouldn't see much people buying a 3 1U units to get the 4 slots each with 10 notes...
In case of keyboard+rack combo, I would rather see the rack unit as an extra Solaris with 4 voices rather than just a polyphony expansion. Such a polyphony expansion mode could be useful but even in a just 4 part use, having 2 sounds from the keyboard an the 2 other from the 1U would make more sense as it would leave the FX section just used for 2 parts rather than 4 allowing more different settings on this FX part. Question is also there how loaded is already the 6th with FX. Is there room enough to provide individual FX for each of the 4 multimode slots ?

No multi mode is seen more and more in the current hardware synth available on the market. For example, I do not know what the Novation Ultranova 18 notes polyphony while being mono timbral is useful for...

That's also one of the thing which annoyed me on Creamware ASB compared to Noah Ex so that I decided to combine them... :D
CheerZ
Tak
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 7:07 am
Contact:

Re: SOLARIS EXPANDER / EXPANSION - WISH :)

Post by Tak »

Can John give us a rough estimation, how much DSP power the multitimbrality would eat. Because I would be more interested on having even more impossibly compllicated...ehm, versatile synth, instead of mundane multitimbrality, if it costs a lot of processing power. Even if it costs mere development time, I would vote for other features in signal path first.

The 4 oscillator scheme looks sufficent to me, if you could split the keyboard for driving them separately(don't remember if that was possible).

Not all synths need multitimbrality, thats why you have a lot of synths.

And never mind increasing polyphony.
Hein Eken
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:45 am
Contact:

Re: SOLARIS EXPANDER / EXPANSION - WISH :)

Post by Hein Eken »

HUROLURA wrote:That's just what I meant: as it is now, each of the DSP is statically loaded with modules to perform 2 voices. But the Midi stuff doesn't have to be loaded on the 6th DSP. From what I understood, it is handled by the Blackfin which is the DSP master and tell them what to do.
MIDI stuff doesn´t need much DSP, so where this goes is eventually 2nd row.

We know a lot about XITE but not Solaris hardware design,- so to me it appears, the Blackfin is the "communication chip" of Solaris,- similar to the DSPs # 3-6 in XITE,- each one controlling 1 of the DSP slots.
Can be, the MIDI would work on the Blackfin,- or on the 6th SHARC.
John knows.
HUROLURA wrote:
The Solaris voice handling is quite different from the Xite but as you said it is much more predictable which is a good point. I would see a Solaris multimode being more like the one used on the Noah. Noah provided 2 old DSP for each of its slot and 3 extra used for other stuff: one was used to do what the Blackfin is doing in the Solaris and the 2 remaining were used for mixing the slots including an external signal path and provide resources to compute FX.
For that reason, the upgrade from the 2 slots standard Noah to he 4 slots Noah Ex is a board featuring 4 old DSP.
There is a chance, Solaris has similarities w/ NOAH.
I don´t own a NOAH, but my friend, (service-) tech and sounddesigner/mixer has a NOAH EX.
I´ll meet him next week and will investigate more.
HUROLURA wrote: My guess is also that the Solaris is already organized hardware wise with 4 slots as are the Xite-1 and Xite-1D.
In fact, I thought about that too, because we have a "4-parts" architecture in Solaris already,- 4 OSCs, 4 mixers, 4 filters etc. and the block diagram indicates 4 slots too.
My "5-slot assumption" came only by the "factor of 5" mentioned,- so it´s a question of how the hardware design of Solaris really is in the end.
It could be 4 slots, but then, there must be 2 SHARC chips in 2 of the slots and only 1 in each of the 3rd and 4th slot.
I´d like to know how it´s been done.

But if it has 4 slots, I wonder where´s the factor of 5 for polyphony coming from,- mathematically and physically.
HUROLURA wrote: As John already told us getting more polyphony would mean getting 3 voices out of each of the 5 DSP by mean of optimization or code improvement.
That´s what I said, mentioning, they squeeze out 1 voice more per chip and then it´s the limit,- overall 15 voices.
But in former posts in different forums, John also mentioned 15 -20 voices,- and it seems, this isn´t possible now.
And the truth is, we´re stuck w/ 10 voices until the overall improvements for SCOPE will go into SCOPE SDK related developements.
HUROLURA wrote: I guess the DSP load for 2 voices currently reach more than 2/3 of the available DSP power and memory so this is the reason why the polyphony for each DSP is limited to 2 voices.
Yep, and that margin meets the experiences w/ XITE and it´s 60% DSP load at max. for the time being.
In fact, there´s a lot of up to now unusable DSP power hidden in these designs.
It can be, the very next updates for both, Solaris and XITE won´t bring everything we would like to see,- but sooner or later we´ll see more, depending on the evolution of developement of the software.
HUROLURA wrote: Actually, several paths are possible on the way to increase polyphony.
We´ll see.
It´s not just only a matter of possibilities, it´s also a matter of time investment, money and more.
S|C and J.B. Synth Design are small and enthusiastic companies which need more time and breaks to make progress.
We´re not talking about companies like UAD here, using a similar DSP design, but have more funds and coders.
And if you look at the price for a UAD Apollo incl. all 53 plugins, you´ll get pale.
It´s ~ EUR 5.000.- here and these devices have 4 SHARCs only and just only deliver FX plugins for a DAW host.
Compared to these,- Solaris and XITE are a steal,- even not being perfect.

I´m pretty sure we see improvements by the time and I wish John as also S|C the very best and lots of luck.

It´s also not too difficult to create a machine offering up to 80 voices and MIDI multi mode w/ only 2 of the new SHARCs,- that´s what a Access Virus TI is,- but I think the sonic quality of SCOPE/XITE and Solaris is top notch and has it´s price,- DSP power.
Doing compromizes in sonic quality would bring more voices for sure,- but wasn´t the target constructing XITE and/or Solaris.
HUROLURA wrote:
Adding an external 1U unit should be more easy, and also good to bring founds to John team to go on development. And anybody acquiring a 1U unit on top of the keyboard would benefit from these later enhancements.
That´s a important factor of a rack module,- they will probably sell good and make additional money for developement.
What these small companies need is sales,- that´s it.
I´d buy a rack also w/ 10 voices only and wait for the improvements,- but if I have to spend 4K$ for the keyboard, I´m eventually not that patient.
HUROLURA wrote: Having this multi mode would make sense for people already having the keyboard to buy a 1U expansion.
Well,- the question is "who is willing to buy a rack unit next future,- let´s say after Winter NAMM or Musikmesse 2013.
I´d do,- with or without MIDI multimode.
If we´re talking about all the features a rack device should have in addition and compared to Solaris keyboard, we don´t see the rack at all soon.
HUROLURA wrote: I wouldn't see much people buying a 3 1U units to get the 4 slots each with 10 notes...
Confirmed !
HUROLURA wrote: No multi mode is seen more and more in the current hardware synth available on the market. For example, I do not know what the Novation Ultranova 18 notes polyphony while being mono timbral is useful for...
Well, for the gigging keyboard player not only doing sequencing and pushing the play button, high voicecount is an advantage always.

Hein
lotus-eater
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:43 am
Contact:

Re: SOLARIS EXPANDER / EXPANSION - WISH :)

Post by lotus-eater »

Hein Eken wrote:
lotus-eater wrote:I really hope that this $4k DIGITAL synthesizer will eventually have a four part multitimbral mode (each part assignable to a separate midi channel) without the need for an expander module.
Solaris keyboard synth doesn´t need a/the rack module for MIDI multi mode.
When Solaris becomes MIDI multitimbral, the Solaris rack will be too,- they would be both the same synth w/ the same features except the haptics, displays and physical controller units.
But,- a Solaris rack connected to Solaris keyboard would double polyphony by usage of "spillover voices".

You have to understand Solaris is designed by using S|C Scope SDK and there are the limits up to now.
Upcoming Scope SDK v6 might change that.
lotus-eater wrote: For those needing 16 parts and 100+ voices of polyphony, I guess a rack expander makes sense.
Sorry, but this line is NON-sense !

Who said, if Solaris keyboard will be 4-part MIDI multitimbral and if the rack version is connected, the system will be 16-part multitimbral then ?
Hein, there's no need to apologize. I think you just misunderstood my point. I was responding to an earlier comment where a potential buyer stated they'd be okay sacrificing multitimbrality for more features in the current, monotimbral, voice architecture, which I think would really limit the instrument's usefulness to performers. I am aware that the hypothetical expander you've been describing up to this point would have identical voice architecture to the keyboard version. That's why I think it's a little odd that someone would say yeah, sure, I'll drop $4k on a monotimbral synth (provided it's crammed to the gills with a range of oscillators, filters and whatever other modules JB can dream up) , and if I want more simultaneous parts I'll buy an expander for EACH additional part. So a modest (modest for a digital synthesizer in the year 2012) 4 part, multitimbral mode would require a keyboard plus three expanders!

Regarding the '16 part, 100+ voices' spec I threw out there, I don't actually expect such a giant leap in performance from a single expander module (nor would I require it for my own music), but at the same time I think such a device would need to appeal to the power user who is going to want a serious voice/part count. For me, the hypothetical box you're describing, which would offer an increase in performance of a single part doesn't make me reach for my wallet. And for the electronic music producer looking for a synth they can use in the studio and on the road, the monotrimbral, ten voice spec of the Solaris pales in comparison to its closest rivals, the Virus, Accelerator and Origin. I'm not saying the Solaris should strive to compete with these other instruments purely in voice/part count (we all know the these synths cut corners in individual voice performance), but I think 'monotimbral' is going to be a deal breaker for a lot of potential buyers with or without costly expanders. I could be completely wrong on this point, though. Maybe the demographic balance for the instrument has shifted more from live performer wanting premium synthesizer sounds to Hollywood sound designer wanting to ditch the mouse.

Anyway, I don't want to break up the expander love fest -- this is the most action the forum has seen in months! By all means, please keep up the speculation, as it's interesting reading if nothing else. I'm just sharing the opinion that, for me as a live performer, this keyboard is crippled at the moment because it still requires me to drag out other synths that I could leave at home if Solaris only offered a few more, midi assignable parts. I would prefer if this functionality was made a priority for the current instrument (pre-ordered in 2009) instead of future hardware releases -- which given the Solaris' track record might take a while. :wink:

Eric
lotus-eater
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:43 am
Contact:

Re: SOLARIS EXPANDER / EXPANSION - WISH :)

Post by lotus-eater »

Tak wrote:Can John give us a rough estimation, how much DSP power the multitimbrality would eat. Because I would be more interested on having even more impossibly compllicated...ehm, versatile synth, instead of mundane multitimbrality, if it costs a lot of processing power. Even if it costs mere development time, I would vote for other features in signal path first.

The 4 oscillator scheme looks sufficent to me, if you could split the keyboard for driving them separately(don't remember if that was possible).

Not all synths need multitimbrality, thats why you have a lot of synths.

And never mind increasing polyphony.
I too would be happy if elements of the single voice architecture could be assigned their own midi channels (and the current polyphony is fine for me as well), but John once explained to me that true multitimbrality in this way this was not possible due to the fact that (IIRC) all sound is eventually routed through a master 'VCA'. I appreciate that not everyone cares whether the synth can produce a handful of simultaneous patches sequenced by different sources and/or split across the keyboard. But why on earth build all those individual outputs into the hardware spec if all they can be used for is processing individual layers of the same patch? I mean this kind of spectral processing can already be achieved in so many ways (and more easily) on your DAW. Why force the end user to pay for this extra hardware if there's no plan for a multi-part 'combo' mode. It just seems really bizarre. Any Solaris owners care to comment on how you're using all of these outputs on single patches?

Not wanting to stray too far off topic, for those in favor of the expander, are all of these outputs desirable on the rack unit as well?
HUROLURA
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 12:21 am
Location: France
Contact:

Re: SOLARIS EXPANDER / EXPANSION - WISH :)

Post by HUROLURA »

Yes, for me, the rack unit should be exactly the same. Sharing the exact same hardware would mean ordering the same board for John, which allow him to get slightly better price on this part to earn some more money which would help further development of both keyboard and rack unit. Besides it would also mean one unique firmware for both unique leading to additional features being shared among the two hardware. Last but not least, having the same board would ease maintenance as John could keep in stock a set of the exact same parts for both units.

I think the multimode is the top of the todo list for the Solaris, anyway and I agree that leaving it mono timbral could make people hesitate to buy the Solaris even though the sound and features are just not found anywhere else.
Comparing Solaris sound to the competitors you list (maybe the best trio of VA you could find if you didn't know the Solaris).

I do not know about the access Virus TI as I only have the first Virus A model here and I guess it has probably been enhanced compared to this model and not only about polyphony. The synth architecture is by far not as rich as what is provided in the Solaris. And though the control elements available on the surface make it quite easy to tweak, as soon as you want to dive below the surface, the access to the modulation matrix parameters is not that straightforward as long as you do not use a computer.

I can talk about the Accelerator as I spent some time on it during the Musikmesse (easy as it was close to John Solaris) but though it is quite a good synth, it doesn't come close to the Solaris. There are some nice features inside it especially with its oscillators. Programming it comes closer to programming a Waldorf microQ with the column/row parameter access for main parameters, then menu oriented stuff when trying to get further.

I can also talk about the Origin as I've got one for a few weeks now. Soundwisingly, once again, not as good as what I remember from the Solaris. Programming sounds is also not as easy though quite flexible allowing in term of modules choice and number as long as you do not reach the total module number limit. The sequencer feature is the great feature of this one, with something this time more easy to use than what is available in the Solaris. For the rest of sound design interface, the Solaris is much more straightforward.
CheerZ
Hein Eken
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:45 am
Contact:

Re: SOLARIS EXPANDER / EXPANSION - WISH :)

Post by Hein Eken »

lotus-eater wrote: I am aware that the hypothetical expander you've been describing up to this point would have identical voice architecture to the keyboard version.
I´m not describing the hypotetical expander, I discuss it.
It wasn´t my idea,- the mockup is from a different poster.
Instead, I had the impression because John himself thought about a poll,- it isn´t hypothetical.
Why a poll if it isn´t basicly in the pipeline, even not realized yet ?
lotus-eater wrote: That's why I think it's a little odd that someone would say yeah, sure, I'll drop $4k on a monotimbral synth (provided it's crammed to the gills with a range of oscillators, filters and whatever other modules JB can dream up) , and if I want more simultaneous parts I'll buy an expander for EACH additional part. So a modest (modest for a digital synthesizer in the year 2012) 4 part, multitimbral mode would require a keyboard plus three expanders!
I see your point and it is in deed odd like you describe above.
lotus-eater wrote: For me, the hypothetical box you're describing, which would offer an increase in performance of a single part doesn't make me reach for my wallet.
We´re different.
I´d don´t need the rackmount Solaris as an "expander" (in the sense of expansion),- I´d want it as the rackmount Solaris.

For me, it´s a simple reality check, not more or less.
No 4-part MIDI multimode,- no keyboard Solaris for me. Simple as that.
Keyboard Solaris has a form factor and keys and as a performer, I don´t want another keyboard which doesn´t replace an existing one in the rig.
To replace an existing one, it has to be MIDI multitimbral.

But,- it´s not sure, Solaris will be MIDI multitimbral in future,- so the reality is and if Solaris keeps to be a 10 voice monotimbral synth,- I´d prefer and buy a rackmount version.
I´m fine w/ 10 voices for a 1HU rackmount,- my Oberheim Xpander offers 6 voices only and has larger footprint,- and for performances, I mostly play my Xpander in Single Patch Mode.
lotus-eater wrote: And for the electronic music producer ...
I don´t belong to that category.
lotus-eater wrote: I'm just sharing the opinion that, for me as a live performer, this keyboard is crippled at the moment because it still requires me to drag out other synths that I could leave at home if Solaris only offered a few more, midi assignable parts. I would prefer if this functionality was made a priority for the current instrument (pre-ordered in 2009) instead of future hardware releases -- which given the Solaris' track record might take a while. :wink:

Eric
Do you own a Solaris ? I don´t.
You cannot say it´s crippled just because it´s not MIDI multi timbral.
It probably wasn´t the intention to design it that way in 1st place.

So, the reality is, if you want a MIDI multitimbral synthesizer NOW,- you´d have to look elsewhere.
It´s idiotic buying something which doesn´t fit your needs now and waiting for additions.

I jumped in here for the Solaris rackmount idea and if it comes, I´ll buy it,- and I hope it comes.
The only improvements I´d really like to see would be a network connector for MIDI and AES/EBU to connect it directly to my XITE.
But these are wishes only and if these don´t come, I´ll find workarounds for these.

Hein
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests