PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

As stated in Noah instruments info on CW site, B-2003 has a fixed polyphony of 91 notes, corresponding to the real B-3 tone wheels (notes)number, of the pedals and the two Keyboards.

as i understand things, the NOAH will handle the DSP distribution quite differently from the way SFP does. even though the same SHARC chip-style will be used, this new DSP-allocation method should change things a fair bit from what you are experiencing from SFP's devices.

the polyphony you get on a PulsarII, etc, will not correspond directly to what you will get on NOAH... even with devices that are available for both platforms, like the Six-String and MiniMax, there will need to be NOAH-specific versions for the devices to function in NOAH... different from the SFP versions, I am guessing.

On 2003-03-16 23:31, Shayne White wrote:
...Now I know that CreamWare is a company made of lunatics.
....and I still don't have enough polyphony compared to CPU-based synths).
...Why isn't Noah using new chips? There is absolutely NO reason why it can't.

point 1: they are, SFP with Mod-3 and the whole bunch of synths and effects can't be the product of just regular workers

point2: you should have a look on the new Arturia Moog thingy.
According to a review '... automatically switched to mono on a 783 MHZ G4 at 60% CPU load...' Seems to demand twice the CPU amount of the usual stuff, but they justified it be ok for the sound quality.
But the best part of the review were the audio example on CD.
Right after the new Moog Voyager
Now I can tell you who's kidding...

point 3: there could be a lot. Some tech issues for example. Rumors mentioned something like heat.
Whatever it is, I bet that CW would have loved to introduce something more impressive than Asia...

cheers, Tom

Hey it's wasn't Messe where all the CW action was coming from. This is more like it

I *did* check out that Arturia Moog modular, and I thought it used way too much CPU. On my brother's iMac, with which he does complex Reason projects, he couldn't do polyphony at all -- it totally maxed out and blew up in his face. I wasn't terribly impressed by it.

I suppose it's good that the MiniMax is polyphonic at all, but I do think I ought to be able to get 16 voices from it if it is.

I thought the new Sharc chips provided 400% more power at the same price, and they're backwards compatible. Or am I wrong?

Shayne

geez..

Sorry I don't get it. Why would you want 16 voices of polyphony from a Minimoog?
Creamware wanted to model the sound as close to the original as possible, this takes a lot of power and probably can't even be done on any native system at this moment. If you need 16 voices of polyphony you shouldn't really be using the Minimax, but the Ligthwave instead. This is why the thing comes with different synths anyway.

On 2003-03-17 12:04, Shayne White wrote:
... he couldn't do polyphony at all -- it totally maxed out and blew up in his face. I wasn't terribly impressed by it.

well, it's considered one of the better sounding native devices, and all of a sudden CPU load rises
Maybe a better sound simply needs more processing power even on native CPUs and the supa-#of-voices-monsters are only a joke ?
btw I totally agree with King-of-Snake:
a Moog is a Moog and it's Mono

If the new Sharcs are getting a little hot it doesn't help that you can buy them.
Heat was already critical with the predecessors.

cheers, Tom

If heat is the issue, then I suppose there's nothing that can be done about it -- video cards were bare chips at one point, then heatsinks were put on them, and then fans. I certainly don't want fifteen new fans in my computer!

Well, Noah looks cool otherwise, so I guess we have to stick to a limited number of voices per instrument. Darn....

Shayne