Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 words. When’s it coming?!? I’m tired of still having to use external pitch shifting due to the helix not being poly. Polyphonic is in practically everything having to do with pitch. Why can’t L6 get their S together?! To be fair I absolutely love everything about the helix with the exception of said pitching capabilities. 

  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming in v3.0. Soon. We're ALL waiting with bated breath....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should check out the Digital and Modeling forum on The Gear Page. It's where the Line6 guys hang out (NOT here!), including DigitalIgloo, who's talked about this many times. There's a nearly 4000 page Helix thread, and a 58 page Helix 3.0 thread, as well as threads for HX Stomp, HXFX, PODGO and a couple of Powercab threads.

 

It's also been spoken about at length on this forum. Just search for "polyphonic"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, cwgettman said:

Why can’t L6 get their S together?

 

Seriously?
 

Really, I'm the first to criticize Line 6 for plenty of things (and for good reasons, IMO at least...), but in case you think that a company isn't getting their s*** together because they don''t come up with a proper polyphonic pitch shifting algorithm, you clearly bought the wrong product.

 

The Helix is mainly designed to be an amp modeler with the most common FX types you can hear in guitar oriented music thrown in. And while it has some drawbacks here and there (see above), in general it's doing an awsome job at that, there's really not much that is missing (well, if you asked me, a really decent TouchWah is, but that's another story and it's not the most commonly used effect, either).
 

Let's face it, while I would certainly like to have some better pitch shifting occasionally myself, it's a niche effect. More niche than pretty much anything else. Is it a great toy to have some fun with? Of course, at least for most of us, as it seems. But 99.99% of all "regular" guitar sounds (and that's a rather low estimation), including the most iconic ones, don't use anything like polyphonic pitch shifting.

Ah well - "but Owner Of A Lonely Heart..." - I already hear ya.  Now, with almost no exception, the units used for anything of that kind are highly sophisticated and dedicated devices, such as the Eventide H series and what not. Even within the realm of dedicated multi FX units (those without amp modeling, just delivering the most typical effects), proper polyphonic pitch shifting is a rare thing to find. Heck, even in the plugin world, they're not common at all.

Add to all this that up to this day, most units don't do a great job. Most pitch shifting is full of artefacts, this even includes the highly acclaimed Digitech Drop (play some smooth clean 4 part chords through it and you'll know what I'm talking about instantly). Applies to all those "shimmer" reverbs and what not. They're only getting away with that pitch shifting quality because things are usually drenched in reverb anyway, the shifiting itself still sounds horrible on most units.

Yeah, there's also some dedicated FX processors doing pitch related stuff, such as the EHX POG and HOG series (fwiw, I'd really love to have that kinda thing inside the Helix), but essentially, the "raw" pitch shifting quality within these is still miles away from studio grade pitch shifting quality.

Ok, I give you that in the modeling world there's two direct competitors doing things better, namely Kemper and Fractal Audio - but still, throw some complexed chords at those algorithms and be surprised.

 

To conclude: Proper polyphonic pitch shifting is a rather esoteric thing in the land of guitar sounds and it usually requires dedicated processors with huge amounts of CPU juice. Telling a company they wouldn't get their act together in what is a one-size-fits all unit tailored to deliver the most typical guitar tones, IMO is a pretty far stretch.

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And fwiw, if it was just after me (yeah, I know, it isn't), as much as I like things such as the EHX devices, there'd possibly be 20 things I'd like to see before polyphonic pitch shifting is added. But unfortunately, such an esoteric thing seems to be way higher on most people's wishlists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

And fwiw, if it was just after me (yeah, I know, it isn't), as much as I like things such as the EHX devices, there'd possibly be 20 things I'd like to see before polyphonic pitch shifting is added. But unfortunately, such an esoteric thing seems to be way higher on most people's wishlists.

Most other modellers offer poly pitch and it is very useful live for different tunings.

 

What are the top 5 from your list of 20?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, cwgettman said:

Where did you hear/see this????


Where have you been?


Another planet?

 

You really should get your sh!t together and before coming in here to gripe, check the facts.

 

Quote: “To be fair I absolutely love everything about the helix with the exception of said pitching capabilities”.

Just wait until you find out how much DSP it will need to do this. Shock - horror!

 

Oh, yeah, using more than one question mark doesn’t add any more emphasis.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, karlic said:

Most other modellers offer poly pitch and it is very useful live for different tunings.

 

Which are the "most" you are talking about? I can only think of Fractal products and the Kemper. And I'm not sure they're doing to well for different tunings (let alone you can not use alternate tunings anyway, just complete drop tunings).

 

18 minutes ago, karlic said:

What are the top 5 from your list of 20?

 

1) Global blocks.

2) Global blocks.

3) Global blocks.

4) Global blocks.

5) Global blocks.

Now take a deep breath and guess what (6) to (20) look like.

 

No, seriously:

2) LFOs, envelopes and input level as modifiers (can serve plenty of purposes, not just esoteric ones).

3) Parameter control via MIDI de-coupled from Snapshot control (as is, it makes using external MIDI knob controllers almost pointless).

4) Inverted scribble strip displays when active. The LEDs are just invisible under certain lightning conditions.

5) A second page for switch assignments. I'm constantly running out of switches, it'd also make *huge* sense to quickly select blocks. Using external MIDI switches isn't an option because of the things mentioned under (3).

6) Better fuzz boxes. Their dynamics are just plain bad unless you decide to lower the input impedance so much the rest of the patch is getting messed up.

7) A decent Touch Wah.

8) A complexed delay with several modulation options, feedback paths and what not. Ideally with an option to insert another block into the feedback path.

9) An option to maintain their settings when you move from an amp/cab block to individual blocks.

10) An option to return to the last used state of an individual block after you may have selected something else. Zoom units do that and it's just excellent. Ex.: If you have a room reverb block but briefly check out a hall reverb instead, when you return to the room reverb, the previously used settings are recalled.

11) Better output routing options. Ex.: Once I decide to route an output block to USB 1/2 for recording but monitor through another path (my common recording scenario), the monitoring path must be set to one of the analog outs only (because "Multi" would result in my monitoring FX to run through USB 1/2 as well).
12) Better global input control settings. Yes, I know this can't be done in the analog domain anymore, but digital fine control of the two current settings (Input Pad On/Off) would be sufficient. The Input Pad setting is just too extreme to compensate for the output differences of most guitars.

13) Better modulation FX in general. They're not too shiny IMO (there might be a reason why L6 sold plenty of their Delay Modelers but not much of the Modulation ones...).

14) A kind of "freeform" amp, coming along with selectable basic drive characters and a dual fully parametric EQ, one pre, one post. You can get an incredibly large amount of textures out of such a scenario - and no, doing it with 3 different blocks quite obviously isn't the same.

 

I could easily fill up (15) to (20), these are just quick things from the top of my head. For my personal needs, every single one of them would be worth much more than polyphonic pitch shifting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't quote you and fill the page Sascha, but this list just shows how different we all are. The only point that interested me was 7) A decent touch wah. I know the reverbs don't stack well against Kemper or Fractal, but I am not that worried with good delays available.

 

I am amazed people complain about routing in the Helix, as it seems well implemented and comprehensive when compared to my Kemper.

 

In short, the tam must have looked at the numbers and decided polyphonic pitch was a priority, whatever our individual wishes are.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, karlic said:

must have looked at the numbers and decided polyphonic pitch was a priority


They might have done that, but Line 6 took on a team of pitch shift wizards quite a while back, so I guess they are being put to work in their specialty. 
 

Also, poly pitch-shifting comes at a cost in DSP power,  and I have said previously regarding this topic, be careful what you wish for.

 

Here ya go!

 

A0F7EAA7-14DF-4F59-B8E5-622CF37AED1B.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, datacommando said:

Also, poly pitch-shifting comes at a cost in DSP power,

 

Just one more reason why global blocks would be tremendously useful. I suspect proper polyphonic pitch shifting (especially once you want to add more than just one intervall) to easily eat up one entire processor (or at least good portions of it), so the "sonic diversity processor load" needs to be spread throughout different patches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

Just one more reason why global blocks would be tremendously useful. I suspect proper polyphonic pitch shifting (especially once you want to add more than just one intervall) to easily eat up one entire processor (or at least good portions of it), so the "sonic diversity processor load" needs to be spread throughout different patches.

 

You are probably wrong with this speculation. On my AxeFx II the pitch shifter takes about 4% processing power in whammy mode regardless of mono or poly mode and 6% in intelligent harmony mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

 

Just one more reason why global blocks would be tremendously useful. I suspect proper polyphonic pitch shifting (especially once you want to add more than just one intervall) to easily eat up one entire processor (or at least good portions of it), so the "sonic diversity processor load" needs to be spread throughout different patches.


Not the whole processor, but it’s DSP intensive. It’s like in the 40-50% range of on one processor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SaschaFranck said:

1) Global blocks.

2) Global blocks.

3) Global blocks.

4) Global blocks.

5) Global blocks.

 

A month or so back DI suggested a "sleeper" feature in V3 that can/will only be available in the Helix, LT and Rack. I haven't seen the feature revealed yet... but may have missed it.

My guess was disqualified pretty quickly (DSP balancing)... but do you know if your wish for Global Blocks was ever disqualified? If not... there might be hope. 

 

When you first brought this up a while back I wasn't sold on it. But over the last year or so I've certainly had that "aha" moment several times.... I would definitely make use of that feature.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Schmalle said:

You are probably wrong with this speculation. On my AxeFx II the pitch shifter takes about 4% processing power in whammy mode regardless of mono or poly mode and 6% in intelligent harmony mode.

 

That would be fantastic, but then...

 

10 minutes ago, phil_m said:

Not the whole processor, but it’s DSP intensive. It’s like in the 40-50% range of on one processor.

 

Yeah, that's what I roughly suspected the CPU hit to be like.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, codamedia said:

but do you know if your wish for Global Blocks was ever disqualified? If not... there might be hope. 

 

Well, I brought this up years ago already on a wellknown forum, pretty much elaborated on the "hows" and "whys" - not much has happened since then.

Fwiw, as some sort of anecdote: I was almost slaughtered for requesting such a thing. Went kinda like "Why would you need to adjust patches throughout a soundcheck or a gig? You're not well prepared, you bl00dy amateur!" As if nobody had ever touched their amp controls back in the analog days. Yeah, right.
 

The lack of this very feature has also been why I was resisiting to get an all-in-one modeler for quite a while - my first 100% DI/FR setup was based on my trusty old pedalboard and an Amplifirebox as a clean pedal platform. And what could I possibly say? Globally adjusting things last minute was *way* more comfortable with that setup (obviously) and I used that "feature" quite a bit. I only started to re-consider the Helix when the snapshot bypass options were introduced, because that was what finally allowed me to at least halfway get close to my preferred way of dialing in things.

 

Fwiw, and that's actually why I think there's little interest at Line 6 to implement this: I can more or less easily "hack" a global block functionality (in fact, I alreasdy did). Goes like this:

Use a MIDI knob controller (in my case a Behringer BCR2000), assign all the parameters you want to access globally to knobs. Copy the patch and change whatever you feel like - outside of the things assigned to the knobs (as these are supposed to be global items). Now, when you change a parameter through a knob and then switch patches, the parameter change obviously isn't reflected, but a simple "send all values" message on the BCR takes care of that. Not exactly comfortable as it'd require an additional (manual) action after each patch change, but that wouldn't bother me too much as I would never switch patches within a song anyway, and it's not much of an issue to do it inbetween songs.
So, why am I not just going with that hack and stop annoying folks endlessly? Because it won't work anymore as soon as you're using snapshots. Each and every parameter assigned to MIDI controllers is automatically controlled by snapshots instantly and there's no way out of it (fwiw, I think this is a pretty bad design decision, there's no reason why it would be like that).

Anyhow, if some simpleton like me can hack this functionality (at least partially), it should be absolutely no big deal for Line 6. Just that they could realize it in a way more elegant way.

Because of all that, my hope to ever see something like that is dwindling. And I'm still considering a GT-1000 for next year, because it has that functionality (fwiw, the new Quad Cortex doesn't seem to offer anything like it, either).

 

31 minutes ago, codamedia said:

When you first brought this up a while back I wasn't sold on it. But over the last year or so I've certainly had that "aha" moment several times.... I would definitely make use of that feature.  

 

Yeah well, there's some sort of "hidden goodies" coming along with it for sure. For instance, instead of aquiring a brain twist by dialing in complexed routings, just so you can do as much as possible within a patch, you could as well split the "routing load" into two patches. And it'd obviously be great when dealing with CPU intensive patches, too. All without losing direct access to the core parameters of a patch (or - obviously - a group of patches).

Ah well, I'll better stop for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, datacommando said:


They might have done that, but Line 6 took on a team of pitch shift wizards quite a while back, so I guess they are being put to work in their specialty. 
 

 

Surely the commitment to adding polyphonic pitch came before hiring a team without a purpose. Also with Kemper and Fractal having that capability, they want to be considered equal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, SaschaFranck said:

 

 

  14 hours ago, phil_m said:

Not the whole processor, but it’s DSP intensive. It’s like in the 40-50% range of on one processor

Yeah, that's what I roughly suspected the CPU hit to be like.

 

 

But didn't you said it would eat and entire processor?

 

40-50-% is fine, even on an HX Stomp. Most live pitch shifting would be for a rhythm sound where an amp and IR would still work within limits. For lead sounds the simple pitch would still work in monophonic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, karlic said:

But didn't you said it would eat and entire processor?

 

15 hours ago, SaschaFranck said:

to easily eat up one entire processor (or at least good portions of it),

 

I would say that 40-50% sort of qualify for "good portions", no?
Regardless of how much it is exactly, it's still a lot - and I couldn't cram it into any of my live patches (</cue another of my very own rants about the usefulness of global blocks>).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I accept it may not fit your needs as an individual, but hopefully as they refine the algorithm more efficiency will be found. Surely the Digitech Drop processor is relatively modest?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, karlic said:

Surely the Digitech Drop processor is relatively modest?

 

No idea about the processor - but did you ever do something as trivial as playing a slightly complexed chord through it? Such as a maj7 chord with the minor second in the inner voices? Like this (for a Cmaj7):

---3---

---1---

---4---

---2---

---x---

---x---

Quite a typical chord in my musical universe - and it'll throw off pretty much any pitch shifter out there minus a few very expensive ones. So I can only hope for the L6 algorithm to be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

 

No idea about the processor - but did you ever do something as trivial as playing a slightly complexed chord through it? Such as a maj7 chord with the minor second in the inner voices? Like this (for a Cmaj7):

---3---

---1---

---4---

---2---

---x---

---x---

Quite a typical chord in my musical universe - and it'll throw off pretty much any pitch shifter out there minus a few very expensive ones. So I can only hope for the L6 algorithm to be better.

I generally don't use those kind of chords on songs using pitch drop, but the Kemper is best at this. It has a "smooth chords" setting on the transpose effect that does some kind of phase alignment. So it is possible.

 

The Drop wasn't much use for me because it doesn't go up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, karlic said:

I generally don't use those kind of chords on songs using pitch drop, but the Kemper is best at this. It has a "smooth chords" setting on the transpose effect that does some kind of phase alignment. So it is possible.

 

Any demo sounds/videos you could post? I know the Kemper is doing pitch shifting quite well, but I haven't heard any truly convicing pitch shifting that would make me think it's in fact a transposed/detuned guitar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fwiw, if the L6 algorithm would do a single interval shift of -5/-7 semitones properly, I'd be incredibly happy as I could possibly save the expense of a baritone, something I really love - but I can't exactly justify the cost because I wouldn't use it all that much. Oh, -12 for quick bass mockups would be great, too (the octaver really isn't too shiny).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

Any demo sounds/videos you could post? I know the Kemper is doing pitch shifting quite well, but I haven't heard any truly convicing pitch shifting that would make me think it's in fact a transposed/detuned guitar.

I think the AxeFx III is state of the art for this stuff atm.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

 

Any demo sounds/videos you could post? I know the Kemper is doing pitch shifting quite well, but I haven't heard any truly convicing pitch shifting that would make me think it's in fact a transposed/detuned guitar.

The only thing i could find doesn't demonstrate Maj7s, you would have to try that for yourself. It is the best I have tried though.

 

They all have drawbacks and there will be latency to get used to, but it definitely beats carrying extra guitars when travelling light.

 

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wz2CmYLZWWM

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

Any demo sounds/videos you could post?


This is Marco using the virtual capo effect on clean sounds.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Schmalle said:

I think the AxeFx III is state of the art for this stuff atm.

 

That's all fine, but no decent clean chords at all. But then...

 

44 minutes ago, datacommando said:

This is Marco using the virtual capo effect on clean sounds.

 

Ohhh - that's much more like it. Now, *that* is what I could certainly use! If they really get it done that good for the Helix, I would take at least parts of my comments back - that'd possibly become my most used fun effect for anything outside off plain stuff.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if it will as well allow for shifts as seamless as in Marco's video. In that case: Byebye, bottleneck!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The suggestions here that polyphonic pitch shifting is particularly processor intensive is anecdotal at best, so here's my own anecdotal contribution: my first multi-fx was a Digitech RP2000 and unlike everything else it did, it had a polyphonic pitch shifter that was fabulous.  Now, I imagine that Line6 would prefer to improve on a 20 year old algorithm so no doubt their shifter would be more intensive than the RP2000's, but 40%-50% of a modern processor seems, like...  I mean, where are you getting that number?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, zappazapper said:

I mean, where are you getting that number?

 

On 10/16/2020 at 9:21 PM, rd2rk said:

You should check out the Digital and Modeling forum on The Gear Page. It's where the Line6 guys hang out (NOT here!), including DigitalIgloo, who's talked about this many times. There's a nearly 4000 page Helix thread, and a 58 page Helix 3.0 thread, as well as threads for HX Stomp, HXFX, PODGO and a couple of Powercab threads.

 

It's also been spoken about at length on this forum. Just search for "polyphonic"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

K but you know what i'm saying though?  If a 20 year old guitar processor had a useable polyphonic pitch shifter (and it was, I used it all the time), maybe the issue is that Line6 is being too precious with its version.  It doesn't have to be the world's greatest shifter and eat up 50% of the processor.  It just has to work and (for lack of a better word) shut everybody up.  Right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, zappazapper said:

K but you know what i'm saying though?  If a 20 year old guitar processor had a useable polyphonic pitch shifter (and it was, I used it all the time), maybe the issue is that Line6 is being too precious with its version.  It doesn't have to be the world's greatest shifter and eat up 50% of the processor.  It just has to work and (for lack of a better word) shut everybody up.  Right?

 

Wrong.

If they're going to do it at all, it should be BETTER than the 20 year old shifter.

Better to ignore the "Half-a$$ed is good enough" crowd.

BETTER should be the minimum requirement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, zappazapper said:

If a 20 year old guitar processor had a useable polyphonic pitch shifter (and it was, I used it all the time)

 

Could you point us to any reasonable sound files? Because, in all seriousness, I have strong doubts it'd even hold the smallest candle against what you can listen to in Marco Fanton's Axe video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, zappazapper said:

The suggestions here that polyphonic pitch shifting is particularly processor intensive is anecdotal at best, so here's my own anecdotal contribution: my first multi-fx was a Digitech RP2000 and unlike everything else it did, it had a polyphonic pitch shifter that was fabulous.  Now, I imagine that Line6 would prefer to improve on a 20 year old algorithm so no doubt their shifter would be more intensive than the RP2000's, but 40%-50% of a modern processor seems, like...  I mean, where are you getting that number?


Well, 3.0 is in beta now, and some of us are involved in the beta...

 

I don’t believe the pitch shifting in the RP2000 was truly polyphonic , btw. The Digitech Whammy didn’t even do polyphonic shifting until 2011.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, rd2rk said:

 

Wrong.

If they're going to do it at all, it should be BETTER than the 20 year old shifter.

Better to ignore the "Half-a$$ed is good enough" crowd.

BETTER should be the minimum requirement.

Well, I agree in theory, except that I remember the same gripe (mine included) about the X3 not having a polyphonic pitch shifter 10+ years ago and the reason given was the same: processing power.  I'm all for Line6 developing the "world's greatest shifter" but in the meantime can't we just have one that works reasonably well?  The Helix comes with all kinds of legacy effects from the XT, X3 and HD era that are perfectly usable, so they're not above including algorithms that are less than cutting edge, and there's nothing that says a useable stop gap shifter means they can't make the "world's greatest shifter" also...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

 

Could you point us to any reasonable sound files? Because, in all seriousness, I have strong doubts it'd even hold the smallest candle against what you can listen to in Marco Fanton's Axe video.

Oh, I imagine it wouldn't. It was useable for me. It's entirely possible that my standards are far below Marco's or yours or everybody else's. All I know is that I used to use it all the time to shift down to Eb standard, and then put my guitar in dropped D and use the shifter to shift down to dropped C, dropped B, and even dropped A, although that's when you really started to notice it. But again, it was useable for me in my little grunge/metal cover band, certainly not something I would put up against the cutting edge. But as I said in my comment above, I think having a similar quality shifter would be an acceptable alternative to having NOTHING until Line6 finally puts out "the world's greatest shifter".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, zappazapper said:

40%-50% of a modern processor seems, like...  I mean, where are you getting that number?

 

If you check through this thread and others on TGP, Facebook etc. you will find that  information has been provided by a Line 6 Beta Tester.

 

That's were the number comes from. And if you check again, you may find that those polyphonic pitch shifting experts, that Eric Klein mentioned way back, are former Digitech staff. You know - the company who's Digitech RP2000 pitch shifting you are so impressed with. In fact when asked about this and if he could confirm that v3.0 firmware would include a model of the DT Drop, Digital Igloo(Eric Klein) said:-

 

"No it hasn't. All we've said is poly. Besides, you can't really model pitch effects;  you need to build a library of DSP algorithms from scratch. This is important, as we didn't acquire any DigiTech IP when we hired their Victoria team after they left. They've had to find a completely different method of poly, which is actually harder than if another company did it, because they could "accidentally" do things the same way DigiTech did it. We've had to purposely go in other directions, which is why it's taken so long."

 

There ya go a little more insight! This is a new thing and maybe that's why it takes more processing power that older type shifters. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, phil_m said:


Well, 3.0 is in beta now, and some of us are involved in the beta...

 

I don’t believe the pitch shifting in the RP2000 was truly polyphonic , btw.

Do I have to be an Uber Guru to get in on that beta?!

 

The RP2000 had 2 shifters, an intelligent harmonizer and a Whammy.

 

One of the shifters was "polyphonic" in the sense that you could play more than one note and it would shift all notes.  Maybe you guys mean something else by "polyphonic". Anyway you could play full chords and it would shift the full chord.

 

The other one couldn't handle more than one note but sounded slightly better and had slightly less latency.

 

I still have my RP2000 although it might be in pieces somewhere.  I'll try to dig it up and record a demo if I can get it working. It also had LFOs and dynamic parameter control, a few things I've seen being mentioned on this forum as desirable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...