Solaris keyboard - specifications

Discuss John Bowen Synths - Solaris
Shroomz
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 8:55 am
Location: Blue Leg Valley

Post by Shroomz »

Maybe multitimbrality could be added at the expense of polyphony? I wonder how much poly the majority of users need on a 4 osc synth with the depth of Solaris. Just for talking's sake, if it was 4 part multitimbral & the available voice count per part was dependant on how many parts were switched on, (just like the Noah) would that not be an ideal solution? It certainly wouldn't need more horsepower to provide the multi mode if going down that route was possible.

faxinadu
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:25 pm
Location: israel
Contact:

Post by faxinadu »

midiwhale wrote:Sure!

Bi-Timberal (Dual tone - split/layer) would be great

(if possible)


I guess the other question might be;

if it's $3000~$3500 now, would you pay $3500~4500 for a (4~8 part??) multitimberal version ?

$3000 is already out of my league, so I'd be well happy with zoned oscillators or bi-timberal if either of those were pheasible.

The other thing is if there was a Klang box type multitimberal expansion ?
As these would be knobless, presumably they could be a fair bit cheaper.
I presume you'd edit it from the keyboard (or a computer).
I'm not sure what other integration (other than patch changing) would need to be included in any link between them ?

The reasons I like this idea are;
1) it wouldn't hold up the keyboard version and keep its price same.
2) as knobless and cheaper, cheapskates like me could edit it from a computer (like a dedicated scope card I guess) or a knob box (i.e. behringer bcr).

WDYT?

Is a keyboard and rack of klang boxes unmanageable for live ?

Still means the keyboard (actual mother key part) would need to be able to split/layer and zone key ranges to send out on the correct channels to the klangs...

WDYT?
that sounds like an awsome idea to me.

also shroomz's idea is good imo.
in 1861
we licked the yankees at bull run
www.faxinadu.net

polardark
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 10:46 am

Post by polardark »

After all this, i'd just like to say that the Solaris specs (as far as i understand them) look good enough as they are. I'm getting one regardless.

Analog Kid
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 9:38 am
Location: Savannah
Contact:

Post by Analog Kid »

i would like to know how much horsepower the new sharcs give it. what is the dsp unit equivalent compared to the scope boards?

John Bowen
Site Admin
Posts: 1898
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:00 am

Post by John Bowen »

The hardware Solaris has the equivalent of approximately 6 Scope boards (the 14 DSP cards), so 6 x 14 = 84 Scope generation DSPs - but remember, you would have to be running your Scope Project at 96 kHz as well...

regards,
john b.

faxinadu
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:25 pm
Location: israel
Contact:

Post by faxinadu »

John Bowen wrote:The hardware Solaris has the equivalent of approximately 6 Scope boards (the 14 DSP cards), so 6 x 14 = 84 Scope generation DSPs - but remember, you would have to be running your Scope Project at 96 kHz as well...

regards,
john b.
incredible!!!
in 1861
we licked the yankees at bull run
www.faxinadu.net

midiwhale
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 5:41 pm

Post by midiwhale »

Blimey !

That's a lot of DSP power ;-)
Proud owner of Scope Solaris, Orion and RD Drums.

strav100
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 10:05 am

Post by strav100 »

Hi John,
I am in the UK - do I buy from US or buy from dealer in the UK (which will prob be dearer :( ) i.e euro/pound exchange ??

What expansions are planned/possible in the future?

How far can the hardware be pushed - perhaps even another synth engine? if the hardware can be so radically altered by an OS patch?

Looking forward to the update - I will be posting my Solaris presets soon on planet z :)
Scotland, UK

shaynewhite
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 3:25 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Post by shaynewhite »

I have one question: on the software Solaris, many of the controls (such as Pulse Width for instance) were not smooth/interpolated and sounded bad when manipulated. Will they be smooth on the hardware Solaris?

(For that matter, when you do an upgrade for the software version, could you add the Interpolate module to some of the controls?) :D

It's looking really cool!

Shayne

John Bowen
Site Admin
Posts: 1898
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:00 am

Post by John Bowen »

Hi Shayne,

Hmmm, this is the first time anyone has commented on this! I can certainly add interpolation to the PWM section, but I've never heard anyone saying it sounded 'bad' in the plug-in. Are you talking about just the front panel knobs? Any control signals normally shouldn't be a problem.

cheers,
john b.

p.s. Did you check the RDX oscillators for this behavior?

John Bowen
Site Admin
Posts: 1898
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:00 am

Post by John Bowen »

Shayne,

I checked the last released version of Solaris, and the only pulse width/waveshape controls that did NOT have interpolation were the MM Osc 1 and the two CEM oscs. (Also the Modular Windows didn't have anything.) I guess I inadvertently overlooked these.

All fixed now....
regards,
john b.

shaynewhite
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 3:25 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Post by shaynewhite »

OK, those controls were probably the ones I've been using. :) I was in a hurry when I wrote that post...I should have been more specific and said "zippy." Yes, it was only the actual knob controls that had a problem, not any internal modulation AFAIK.

The version of Solaris I have is v3, I never got the latest version...I don't know when I'll have money to upgrade. Maybe soon....

I'm assuming, then, that the hardware Solaris is going to have smooth knob controls. :D

Shayne

Spygyzy
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 6:21 pm
Location: Fife, Scotland

Post by Spygyzy »

Hopefully this is not too much off-topic, but one area often overlooked or complained about is that of patches. Most complaints in forums are that the hardware is very capable but the factory set is, well ... lacking.

Almost every synth I own has a Moog this or an ARP that. I know designers are proud to show off the capabilities of their new synth in its ability to emulate everything on the planet.

I would be very impressed by a synth that cannot be emulated by anything else on the planet.

I know a lot of us are on the lookout for something new, not a general purpose, all singing, all dancing jack-of-all-trades, by the sounds of it (no pun intended yet!) I am looking forward to the Solaris being the Master.

Thank you for taking the risk (financially and professionally) to bring this exiting new product to the market. It is the first synth in a long time to actually get me interested in synthesis again.

John Bowen
Site Admin
Posts: 1898
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:00 am

Post by John Bowen »

strav100 wrote:Hi John,
I am in the UK - do I buy from US or buy from dealer in the UK (which will prob be dearer :( ) i.e euro/pound exchange ??
Initially sales will be done from this Website only.
What expansions are planned/possible in the future?
Well, this is difficult to say exactly, but one of the first algorithm expansions I hope to have would incorporate a number of the Flexor modules (modules originally made for the Creamware Modular system ). Other expansions discussed involve adding more DSP or RAM, but all this is still in discussion.
How far can the hardware be pushed - perhaps even another synth engine? if the hardware can be so radically altered by an OS patch?
Theorectically I suppose you could write any number of synth engine types - you would just have to figure out how to best adapt the User Interface to your new engine.

regards,
john b.

faxinadu
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:25 pm
Location: israel
Contact:

Post by faxinadu »

What expansions are planned/possible in the future?
Well, this is difficult to say exactly, but one of the first algorithm expansions I hope to have would incorporate a number of the Flexor modules (modules originally made for the Creamware Modular system ).
YES!!!! WOW!
I can't believe you just said that! ok so i now went from a slight drool to extensive foaming :0 :D
in 1861
we licked the yankees at bull run
www.faxinadu.net

Post Reply