From Brian Willoughby Sent Mon, Oct 8th 2018, 21:41
From Brian Willoughby Sent Mon, Oct 8th 2018, 21:41
There=E2=80=99s no difference between MPE and standard MIDI Mode 4, = except for a couple of details: 1) MPE only allows PolyAT on one channel, the Master Channel. It=E2=80=99s= disallowed on other channels, for =E2=80=9Cfuture redefinition.=E2=80=9D 2) When you play the 17th simultaneous note, and beyond, MPE differs = from Mode 4. But this is almost a moot point since nothing handles 17 or = more notes at once with full polyphonic expression in multiple = dimensions. This all stems from MIDI having 16 channels. MPE officially allows more than 16 simultaneous notes, but you lose = polyphonic expression on notes that end up on the same channel, because = PolyAT is disallowed and because no other messages exist for polyphonic = expression on a single channel. Mode 4 is technically supposed to be Mono, but manufacturers like = Ensoniq offer two variations of Mode 4, one which is Mono, and another = that is Poly. Of course, Mode 4 still suffers because there is no way to = distinguish expression for notes on the same channel except PolyAT, = which is a single dimension. With Mode 4, you can=E2=80=99t have more = than 16 independent pitch mods or more than 16 independent mods in a = third dimension. Only PolyAT allows unlimited polyphony (well, no more = than 2048 notes) within Mode 4. So, unless you need more than 16 notes of polyphony, there=E2=80=99s no = difference between MPE and Mode 4. The goal of MPE seems to be ease of setup, and to offer terminology that = allows vendors to say that they support something. MPE doesn=E2=80=99t = technically make anything new possible. Ensoniq were never exactly able = to put a logo on their synth saying that it could handle a special Mode = 4 with Poly capability, so at least MPE gives us something to talk = about. But, to get to your actual complaint, are you saying that the Moog One = doesn=E2=80=99t support 16 channels with separate pitch, pressure, and = controller expression? I mean, I was able to get the 1984 vintage = Oberheim Matrix-12 to respond to polyphonic expression coming from a = Soundplane on ten or even twelve touch/channels. In that example, I was = disappointed that the Matrix-12 didn=E2=80=99t support PolyAT, but at = least there=E2=80=99s a way to get it to work with MonoAT (which is what = MPE uses). I haven=E2=80=99t tried, but I believe it would be rather = straightforward to set up the Matrix-12 to respond to MPE, so I really = hope that the Moog One can at least match the capabilities of a poly = synth that=E2=80=99s 34 years older. I wouldn=E2=80=99t be terribly = surprised if it falls short, though. Brian Willoughby On Oct 8, 2018, at 8:41 AM, Scott Fox <xxxxxxxxx@xxxxx.xxx> wrote: > I wish it supported MPE. That said, I wish so many synths supported = MPE. <3 >=20 > Scott=20 >=20 > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018, 9:38 AM Marshall Craig, <xxxxxx@xx.xxx> wrote: >> I wouldn=E2=80=99t sell off the MIDIBoard so quickly, the One = responds to PolyAT over MIDI.=20 >>=20 >> Sent from my iPhone >>=20 >> > On Oct 8, 2018, at 08:07, Ryan L <xxxxxxxxxx@xxxxx.xxx> wrote: >> >=20 >> > Selling off a bunch to get a Moog one!: >> >=20 >> >=20 >> > Deckards dream rev 2 prebuilt : $3300!!! >> >=20 >> > Digitakt: $600 >> >=20 >> > Digitone: $600 >> >=20 >> > (both in box and mint) >> >=20 >> > Kurzweil Midiboard limited edition: $700 local pick up only = (Brooklyn, NY)