Moog Sub 37

Discussions about anything analog, digital, MIDI, synth technology, techniques, theories and more.
User avatar
GuyaGuy
VSE Review Contributor
VSE Review Contributor
Posts: 1547
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:10 am
Gear: YES PLEASE!
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: Moog Sub 37, finaly a new poliphonic Moog?

Post by GuyaGuy » Thu Jan 30, 2014 5:43 am

Automatic Gainsay wrote:
smcumber wrote:That's "polyphonic" in the classical music sense. "Polyphonic" when referring to synthesizers means each voice runs through a separate envelope and filter, instead of sharing one. Both of these voices have the ability to have independent pitches but share the same envelope/filter, so it is paraphonic.
I'm sorry, but no.

"Polyphonic" in regard to synthesizers means multiple voices, and that's the end of it.

What you're talking about is our desire for each voice to have individual articulation... which is a different matter.
Polyfony?

zoomtheline
No Longer Registered

Re: Moog Sub 37

Post by zoomtheline » Wed Feb 12, 2014 8:42 pm

Ok, so I decided to look at some sub37 demo's to try and convince myself that it's not all that and I don't need it to save money. I came across this

While it is far from my style of playing, it does give us an idea of how it sounds. The different drives sound cool to me.
Sorry if it's already been posted.

smcumber
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 2:55 am

Re: Moog Sub 37

Post by smcumber » Wed Feb 12, 2014 8:50 pm

Haha I missed automatic gainsay with the vengeful paraphony rebuttal. I mean, s**t dawg, that's basically how everybody defines it in synths. The wikipedia article on paraphony (albeit a paragraph long and with no sources) says that and so does basically everything else on the internet, and Moog did in their naming this keyboard "paraphonic" too. Or how about the Roland RS-505 "Paraphonic".

smcumber
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 2:55 am

Re: Moog Sub 37

Post by smcumber » Wed Feb 12, 2014 8:53 pm

I want to get in a flame war over paraphonic synths.

zoomtheline
No Longer Registered

Re: Moog Sub 37

Post by zoomtheline » Wed Feb 12, 2014 8:57 pm

Paraphonic cannot be explained, it's paranormal.

smcumber
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 2:55 am

Re: Moog Sub 37

Post by smcumber » Wed Feb 12, 2014 9:00 pm

PARAPHONICPARAPHONICPARAPHONICPARAPHONICPARAPHONICPARAPHONICPARAPHONICPARAPHONICPARAPHONICPARAPHONICPARAPHONICPARAPHONICPARAPHONICPARAPHONICPARAPHONIC :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

User avatar
calaverasgrande
Expert Member
Expert Member
Posts: 1038
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 5:29 pm
Gear: MG1, MP201, MF101, MF102, Taurus 3, SH09, KPR-77, Streichfett, Dark Energy, X0Xb0x, Dronelab, Synsonics Drums, Machinedrum, Modular.
Band: N.S.V.
Location: New York
Contact:

Re: Moog Sub 37

Post by calaverasgrande » Wed Feb 12, 2014 9:16 pm

Moog is worse than Hitler for calling this Paraphonic.
:roll:
Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with all thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave

User avatar
CZ Rider
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 12:31 am
Location: The Edge of Space
Contact:

Re: Moog Sub 37

Post by CZ Rider » Wed Feb 12, 2014 10:52 pm

I was able to find the original Roland brochure where they claim to have made up the term "Paraphonic" and what it means. Nothing to do with a single filter, but mulit layered tones, and perhaps the seperate outputs for each section.
Image

The term Paraphonic is right up there with all the other Roland made up names like Compuphonic or CompuRhythm.


I do like the 16 preset buttons on the Sub37. Always liked that on the Korg MS2000. Very usefull on a live stage and a feature that was left out on many later preset synthesizers. Ever try to get from preset #1 to #16 back to #8 on a Voyager? Requires a lot of button pushes and menu browsing. The 16 bank/preset button feature is fast on stage.

knolan
Supporting Member!
Supporting Member!
Posts: 501
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 1:42 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Moog Sub 37

Post by knolan » Wed Feb 12, 2014 11:20 pm

Regarding the paraphonic issue - forget the name for a minute.

The Sub37 is a single voice synth comprising two oscillators, one VCF and one VCA. So - every time any key is played, the sound is retriggered. To add something extra, Moog allow you to allocate the two VCO's to two pitches on the keyboard (that's the paraphonic bit) - but every time any key is played, they both retrigger.

Here' s a practical example of the consequence of that: Imagine you have VCF Cutoff quite low but VCF Envelope Amount very high and a VCF ADSR setting with fast attack and decay, and no sustain or release. When you hold two notes, they will sound sharp and bright, but fade immediately. Subsequently, if you replay _either_ of the two held notes, BOTH will retrigger and you will hear both of them again - because the VCF Envelope will be retriggered and it affects the entire oscillator block.

From the internals of the synth there's no real difference between playing two pitches from the keyboard, or paying one note with both oscillators set at different pitches via there pitch dial. Of course it offers an advantage performance wise because you can play two note 'chords'.

Why they call this paraphonic is because there's really only one 'Voice' even when more than one pitch is being heard. This is exactly how the Roland 505 and even VP330 work: Though on the VP330 I can play 48 notes simultaneously, they all come from one voice, so any time I replay any note, ALL held notes retrigger. It offers less flexibility in playing. For example - if on the VP330 I set the strings Attach to be slow and hold a chord, the chord enters slowly. But while sustaining it, if I play any other note, all notes are retriggered and it sounds like I've lifted all fingers and replayed them. This doe NOT happen on the CS40M - it has two independent voices meaning two VCFs, two VCA's and two trigger sources (there are even two trigger ports on the back to trigger the voices independently say from one or more sequencers). It's basically two monophonic units in the one package; so if one note is held, playing the 2nd note has no affect on the first - it does not retrigger.

So paraphonic instruments are really a one-voice instrument from the perspective of the triggering - there's only on VCA and trigger, even if more than one pitch can be sounded from the keyboard - they all respond to the one VCA trigger and VCA configured characteristics.

Apart from owning a VP330 I also own a MonoPoly which can be configure in various modes including in 'paraphonic' mode - and it provides a host of exquisite options that a monophonic or duophonic synth can't provide. For example. if you hold one note and then play a host of other notes, both retigger, and it can produce a very rhythmic effect, often sounding quite ethnic (for example like the drone of Uilleann pipes or bagpiles, plus its melody note).

Because the Monopoly has 4 oscillators each with a wide number of octave feet settings and detune by half a tone up or down, and because it has a mode that can trigger the four oscillators one after the other via its arpeggiator, it can produce a virtually infinite variety of arpeggiated patterns. Since each oscillator can be adjusted in level, and because you can add in noise independently, further coupled by excellent filter keyboard tracking capabilities, you can push the monopoly to produce patterns and sequences of extraordinary complexity and variety that go way beyond ordinary arpeggiation.

I wonder if the sub37 will allow its two oscillators to be similarly played independently (one after the other) via its arpeggiator / step sequencer?
Last edited by knolan on Wed Feb 12, 2014 11:28 pm, edited 6 times in total.

User avatar
calaverasgrande
Expert Member
Expert Member
Posts: 1038
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 5:29 pm
Gear: MG1, MP201, MF101, MF102, Taurus 3, SH09, KPR-77, Streichfett, Dark Energy, X0Xb0x, Dronelab, Synsonics Drums, Machinedrum, Modular.
Band: N.S.V.
Location: New York
Contact:

Re: Moog Sub 37

Post by calaverasgrande » Wed Feb 12, 2014 11:24 pm

CZ Rider wrote: I do like the 16 preset buttons on the Sub37. Always liked that on the Korg MS2000. Very usefull on a live stage and a feature that was left out on many later preset synthesizers. Ever try to get from preset #1 to #16 back to #8 on a Voyager? Requires a lot of button pushes and menu browsing. The 16 bank/preset button feature is fast on stage.
That is a very good point. When I think of the synths I no longer own, quite a few had really annoying patch access.
Such that if you don't hit enter it wont load the next patch (or if you don't hit enter soon enough!).
Honestly, patches are only starting points for me anyway so I'd rather 8 or 16 dedicated patches with buttons, over 256 patches three menus deep.

But yeah, if Steve Jobs were still around he wouldn't have allowed the Sub 37 to be made.
Plus they stole it from windows.
Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with all thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave

Aaron2
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 720
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 5:18 am
Real name: Aaron
Gear: Pioneer: Toraiz SP-16
Elektron: AK, AR, MnM, MD, OT
DSI: Evolver, MEK, P08, Pro2
Korg: Arp Odyssey
Waldorf: Blofeld Keyboard
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Moog Sub 37

Post by Aaron2 » Wed Feb 12, 2014 11:47 pm

calaverasgrande wrote:
CZ Rider wrote: I do like the 16 preset buttons on the Sub37. Always liked that on the Korg MS2000. Very usefull on a live stage and a feature that was left out on many later preset synthesizers. Ever try to get from preset #1 to #16 back to #8 on a Voyager? Requires a lot of button pushes and menu browsing. The 16 bank/preset button feature is fast on stage.
That is a very good point. When I think of the synths I no longer own, quite a few had really annoying patch access.
Such that if you don't hit enter it wont load the next patch (or if you don't hit enter soon enough!).
Honestly, patches are only starting points for me anyway so I'd rather 8 or 16 dedicated patches with buttons, over 256 patches three menus deep.
According to at least one interview I've heard, the 16 buttons will do double-duty as part of a built-in step sequencer, which is pretty cool, too.

User avatar
calaverasgrande
Expert Member
Expert Member
Posts: 1038
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 5:29 pm
Gear: MG1, MP201, MF101, MF102, Taurus 3, SH09, KPR-77, Streichfett, Dark Energy, X0Xb0x, Dronelab, Synsonics Drums, Machinedrum, Modular.
Band: N.S.V.
Location: New York
Contact:

Re: Moog Sub 37

Post by calaverasgrande » Thu Feb 13, 2014 2:19 am

Aaron2 wrote: According to at least one interview I've heard, the 16 buttons will do double-duty as part of a built-in step sequencer, which is pretty cool, too.
from what I read it is being held out as a firmware update wish list feature. Should be in the mix by the time of retail availability, but we know how that works out over at Moog HQ.
(says the owner of an MP201 and a T3)
It might happen, it might happen 6 months after the release, or it may never show up.
It appears to depend on how thinly their resources are spread. I get the impression that there is only one guy and possibly an intern who does all of the firmware revisions.
I wish Moog would at least open source the OS for pieces it no longer manufactures.
Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with all thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave

User avatar
Automatic Gainsay
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
Posts: 3962
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 12:22 am
Real name: Marc Doty
Gear: Minimoog, 2600, CS-15, CS-50, MiniBrute, MicroBrute, S2, Korg MS-20 Mini, 3 Volcas, Pro 2, Leipzig, Pianet T, Wurli 7300, Wurli 145-A, ASR-10, e6400.
Band: Godfrey's Cordial
Location: Tacoma
Contact:

Re: Moog Sub 37

Post by Automatic Gainsay » Thu Feb 13, 2014 2:50 am

CZ Rider wrote:I was able to find the original Roland brochure where they claim to have made up the term "Paraphonic" and what it means. Nothing to do with a single filter, but mulit layered tones, and perhaps the seperate outputs for each section.
Image

As I've said elsewhere, I endorse that CZ has found this information... it is certainly fascinating. And, I'm the sort of person who hates the evolution of language. Especially when it evolves towards simple, and when it evolves towards inaccurate.

But that being said, a strange evolution has happened in regard to the term "paraphonic." It has, within a short time and through ignorance, come to mean something different than Roland intended at the time of their coining it.

We can say "hey, this word is being used inaccurately!" and go back to what Roland meant. But sadly, what Roland meant is irrelevant to us, today. We have a word that covers what Roland meant... which is "multitimbral." (which also isn't an awesome word) We don't have a need for the distinction that is "has several different parts that play different noises all at once," because no one makes synths like that anymore... and the synths that people make now, and have made for a couple of decades, are "multitimbral."

What we DON'T have is a word that means "hey, this polyphonic synth forces all of its oscillators through a single VCA and VCF." There are a lot of synths which have this arrangement, and they are different from synths which have a VCA/VCF per voice. It is a valuable distinction, because these two types of polyphony have different sounds and different applications. Many people prefer what I want to call "articulated polyphony," which is polyphony that has a VCA/VCF per voice. Other people are cool with what is now called "paraphony," which are synthesizers which force all of their oscillators through a single VCA/VCF. Whether you like the weird transition that has taken place or not, it's what happened... and it serves a valuable purpose.

P.S. For the love of Our Lord Harald Bode will people STOP quoting Wikipedia as counter-proof? I can just as easily go in and change whatever anyone says on it to reflect whatever anyone thinks. It is not a conclusive site of proof, it's whatever anyone posts on it.
‎"I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." -Charles Babbage
"Unity and Mediocrity are forever in bed together." -Zane W.
http://www.youtube.com/automaticgainsay

User avatar
meatballfulton
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6127
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 9:29 pm
Gear: Logic Pro X

Re: Moog Sub 37

Post by meatballfulton » Thu Feb 13, 2014 2:58 am

Hey Marc, I got a Moogy question that's related to Sub37.

I heard recently that Minitaur, Sub Phatty and Taurus II have digital LFOs and EGs, not analog like Slim Phatty and Voyager. I was kind of surprised...know if it is true?
I listened to Hatfield and the North at Rainbow. They were very wonderful and they made my heart a prisoner.

User avatar
Stab Frenzy
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 9723
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 5:41 pm
Gear: Eurorack, RYTM, Ultranova, many FX
Location: monster island*
Contact:

Re: Moog Sub 37

Post by Stab Frenzy » Thu Feb 13, 2014 3:41 am

Automatic Gainsay wrote:What we DON'T have is a word that means "hey, this polyphonic synth forces all of its oscillators through a single VCA and VCF." There are a lot of synths which have this arrangement, and they are different from synths which have a VCA/VCF per voice. It is a valuable distinction, because these two types of polyphony have different sounds and different applications. Many people prefer what I want to call "articulated polyphony," which is polyphony that has a VCA/VCF per voice. Other people are cool with what is now called "paraphony," which are synthesizers which force all of their oscillators through a single VCA/VCF. Whether you like the weird transition that has taken place or not, it's what happened... and it serves a valuable purpose.
I think there's a step missing from this though. In a paraphonic synth like the Poly 800 for example there's a VCA per oscillator, you don't hear all 8 oscs droning when you only press one key down. The Sub 37 doesn't do that, you always hear both oscs no matter how many keys you press.

It's not paraphonic and Moog shouldn't have put that word on the synth. It's a monophonic synth with splittable osc tuning. I guess you could use the word duophonic (as opposed to having a polyphony of two) as that's what the Odyssey was described as. If it was paraphonic when you were in 'paraphonic' mode and pressed down one key you'd hear one osc, not two.

I guess all this stuff is open to reinterpretation to a certain extent and never set in stone, and for example if you play a chord on a guitar that's going through an auto-wah and a tremolo pedal it doesn't stop being a polyphonic instrument does it?

If you get right back to the idea of a synth 'voice' in a polyphonic instrument coming from the idea of a human voice in a choir, each voice should have a separate amplitude and tone control system. I always thought of paraphonic instruments has 'not fully polyphonic' instruments, in the same way that a paramedic isn't a full doctor or a paralegal isn't a full lawyer. But that might just be me.

Post Reply